loremazd said:
I like good games, I buy good games. That's it, and i'm getting tired of being told I can't like them because they're popular. I don't play CoD, i've played guitar hero, and I have loved and still love Blizzard games. They've taken fun new directions in their franchises and look to to be continuing to do so.
I, too, like good games, and buy them. But buying crap like CoD only encourages people like Kotick in their crusade against innovation. I too, have loved Blizzard games, back when there was a Blizzard to love. I still own Diablo 1+2, SC+BW, and CEs of WoW, BC and WotLK. Thing is, what you're saying sounds a LOT like the usual PR crap we get when they mean "we don't want the risk of developing a new IP, and so our last original IP was Starcraft in 1998".
Your summary is this: "Hey Mike, looks like you have this finished game, lets chop it up into three parts and sell it." rather than "Hey Bobby, we've decided that we'd like to take a lot of development time into polishing the three different scenarios distinct and polished. We've talked a lot with our marketing team, and we have an expansion strategy that should make this profitable."
No, my summary is this: "Hey Mike, looks like you are doing well with that SC2 project,but...I see a lot of potential in social networking integration." "Bobby, are you insane? Players don't want to be FORCED to use their real names and link everything they do to publicly available sites like Facebook!" "Well, I'm the boss here, and I say we FORCE THEM TO."
At this point I think #1 is less likely than 2, even If I don't dismisses it. As a consumer I got my money's worth and that is completely the bottom line to me. I've made up my mind that I wont let rage over poorly drawn conclusions color my idea of what is and is not a product worthy of my money.
I don't, but that's beside the point.
As a consumer, I also got my money's worth. Of course, an RTS with 1 campaign, no matter how long, horrible balancing issues in MP, no LAN, buggy voice com and terrible support is worth exactly nothing, so that's how much I paid for my copy.
Bobby Kotick makes some bad decisions, but not buying a good product as "the principle of the thing" is very silly in my eyes. Buying a well made blizzard game does nothing but encourage more money being invested in their products.
Bobby Kotick makes some bad decisions. PERIOD. ActiBlizz occasionally releases a not-so-horrible game not because of him and his ilk, but despite them.
Do I consider not playing a few of those price worth paying for getting rid of Bobby and company eventually? Yes. Yes, I do.
Buying anything from ActiBlizz does nothing but validate Bobby in his crusade against innovation in games, no matter how well it's made.
Blizzard is a company owned by activision blizzard. It makes products, and makes money. Mike Morhime is about as untouchable, as is most of the dev team, as Kotick in the sense that their branch of Activision-Blizzard has made the bulk of the companies profits since the merger, and stockholders know this, and stockholders are Bobbys boss. So the inner working are a bit more unique.
No...Mike is most definitely not untouchable. Unlike Bobby, he didn't buy his way in to the company, and as such, is pretty easy to fire if Kotick or Tippl ever feel like it.
Stockholders DON'T CARE about which part of the company is making them money, the only guy they get to talk to it ol' Bob, and you can make sure he takes all the credit(I would, and so would anyone who ever worked in big business).
Funny thing is, no one's stopping you from buying ActiBlizz products. Just don't be a hypocrite about WHY you're buying them. You're not doing it to support the company, you're doing it to play games you like. There's nothing wrong with that, just don't pretend otherwise.
