This isn't your average stock - no debt, tons of cash, and execs heavily motivated by options that don't really care if they report a pro forma loss, because it just means they can shovel that cash into buybacks.
That's why Kotick sold out with a big smile on his face. He knew he could redirect all those WoW billions into supporting his options packages, even if Guitar Hero etc faded and his military shooter studios faded or blew up.
In the big picture, D3 is a sideshow with a max revenue of 300 mil, and, as I've said before, one that could be really damaging to a WoW sub base which is already weakening. The more interesting question is whether or not sledgehammer can step up, and whether or not IW can be returned to something resembling its former glory. Down the road, watch for tension as console D3 goes nowhere due to Bliz's control freak nature that can't handle working with SNE or MSFT.
- Dolaiim
- Registered User
-
Member for 13 years, 10 months, and 16 days
Last active Wed, Feb, 8 2012 14:31:09
- 8 Followers
- 932 Total Posts
- 101 Thanks
-
1
Gheed2010 posted a message on They are aiming for a 2011 releasePosted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
1
Kiserai posted a message on May 9th Conference CallThat's fair enough I think.Posted in: News & Announcements
What's hard is that it's essentially impossible to find middle ground here; either people are seen as fanboys who think Blizzard can do no wrong and accept anything they're told without any skepticism, or as overly skeptical Blizz-haters that think Blizzard will never do anything right by the players, will always be months/years late, etc. I've obviously been open to being accused of falling into the former camp, and I realize I've been guilty tonight of leveling the latter accusation at you and others. Neither is fair.
All I'm really ever getting at here is that the people who really know what's going on with D3, as best as anyone really does (i.e., anything can happen, something game-breaking appears last minute and they have to postpone, or internal testing goings unbelievably well and we see beta ahead of schedule, etc.) are still saying they think can do this timetable. I think it's unreasonable to think they'd set even a caveat-laden goal this prominently if they didn't think they had a better-than-not chance of hitting it (i.e., 51%+, even slightly better than even odds).
Blizzard has had one sketchy history, we all know that. But I think we're seeing a new era of sorts, and SC2 was pretty pristine as far as living up to their timetable. D3 is a different beast (literally!) but I still believe it bodes well. They've been hyper cautious, as always, at every turn, so now that they've given us even this admittedly preliminary 'date', I'm confident.
/steps off the soapbox -
1
Winged posted a message on May 9th Conference CallKiserai, while there are a few "are-chair game developers" around, some of us (few of us) also do indeed have general insight, and game development experience. As you said in another thread, you know little of the development process, so before forming a strong opinion you should do research to better educate yourself. Instantly latching onto official quotes of loose time frames and convoluted development details hardly warrants such dedication.Posted in: News & Announcements
I'm not attacking you, I just would like to shed some light on why I in particular don't believe 2011 is reasonable, no matter what Blizzard may say to understandably cover themselves. -
1
Zarando posted a message on They are aiming for a 2011 releaseIf anyone thinks the game is still coming out after finding out that an open beta is not starting until at least July, then that's pretty delusional. Their comments saying they are aiming for 2011 is just a morale boost as someone said above, it's much easier to say we are aiming for 2011 and then when its obvious it won't happen, they'll come out and say it won't be ready until Q1 2012. Besides, if they say Q3, that doesn't even mean July, it means August. Expect a good 3-4 months of testing, plus a nice period between end of beta and release, and you're probably looking at Feb-March 2012. Just in time for me to finish my degree =DPosted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
1
Mazuli posted a message on They are aiming for a 2011 releaseIs 2011 possible? Yes of course. Is it likely? No. Before the conference call people were all betting the beta would start this month or June 1st. Then when they said Q3 people were all saying they meant fiscal Q3 until it was confirmed to be calendar Q3. People are grasping at anything at all to convince themselves the game will come out sooner. It's better to expect the worst and then be pleasantly surprised than to expect the best and be disappointed.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
1
Shatterer posted a message on Fourteenth Batch of Screenshots and ArtDamn, that guy should drop some fat loot!Posted in: News & Announcements
Also, federal regulations require me to warn you that the firebats skill... is looking pretty good. -
5
Lydeck posted a message on T-Minus 30 minutes and CountingThey'll bring said investors into a conference room with a large display screen, they'll press play, and RickRoll the investors.Posted in: Trash Can -
1
Magistrate posted a message on The Diablo 3 that never was...Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from Dolaiim
Quote from Magistrate
I find that in life, definitions are there to guide us, not define us. There are very few things that are perfectly encapsulated by their definitions.
Methinks my chocolate muffin is now a grapefruit. Done.
Is that a joke? Are you trolling? Obviously this would be a very misguided idea. I'm not saying things have no definition, but that definitions are never absolute. For instance, a chocolate muffin is almost identical to a cupcake, which is just a small cake. So is a chocolate muffin actually cake? Well, the answer is, kind of. All depends on a loosely defined pastry. Do you get the point now?
You're so post-modern it's amusing. That was last generation, though.
Yeah, I was just joking. I was going to say that, but I figured you'd get it, anyway. I happened to be eating my regular chocolate muffin at the time.
However, I do try to troll frequently. I'm told I do it quite well at times.
Quote from Magistrate
If saying any game that has stats and buttons and upgrading and skill allotment is an RPG, there's scarcely a game out there that isn't one, therefore making the term pointless, the genre meaningless, and redefining the original intention of the term to something wholly useless.
This I completely agree with. The interesting point here is, in the context of modern gaming, what has the RPG actually become?
It's because of this ambiguity that I believe it needs redefining based on its roots, or else it needs to be removed entirely and a new term needs to replace it, one that adequately describes the content and focus of the game(s) in question. That's why I prefer to use western RPG (WRPG) and JRPG when referring to games most describe as RPG's.
The east and west both have powerful and polar definitions of what RPG's are, so I think it's logical to refer to RPG's as being in one camp or the other, or somewhere in between. Then any game that lacks requirements of either is either an ARPG or not an RPG, at all. Of course, this would be largely based on opinion, like you noted very succinctly, but it is a step closer to more useful definitions of terms.
One of these days, when we have college courses on game history, someone should attempt to write definitions and theories for these things that are actually useful.
Quote from Magistrate
It's a definitive ARPG, but it's a terrible RPG. It's just hack'n'slash with encyclopedic lore entries thrown in. No character depth or development and no choice.
That's an opinion. This is a semantic argument, one that is open to interpretation. You choose a particular definition of RPG (one I happen to agree with), but you're not the merriam-webster of computer game definitions, and neither am I.
I'm not saying my opinion is definitive, but I do believe it's logical, and therefore I believe in it. Else I wouldn't bother trying to persuade anyone to the contrary.
As a side-note, you're forming your opinion of the quality of D3 as an RPG based largely on what you know about D2. Talk to me about it when you actually play through D3, you might be pleasantly surprised if you keep an open mind.
If I was ambiguous, I am very sorry about that. My *intention* was to focus on Diablo II and I. I never bothered reiterating that after my initial post on page...two? Three?
Diablo III is much closer to what I would deem an RPG. When I played the demo, the NPC's involved with the quests that they gave us were actually involved and had interesting histories that were actually explored and developed. I still think there's some want for more, but it was an improvement, in my opinion (which I shouldn't have to say- obviously anything that I post without citing a source is my opinion), from Diablo II. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
But the actual visualization of the bell itself is goofy. I would rather the Monk enter a meditative state, and hear a very clear bell tone (meditation bells are absolutely beautiful, clear, and the tone lasts a shockingly long time). The visualization could be a representation of focused sound waves, so ripples bending light in the path of the energy wave, or cast.
But yeah. Big sliding bell is pretty goof ball, fix it.
1
Gandalf: No, Frodo. The spirit of Sauron endured.
etc.
3
I find it's the best way to keep the game fresh and engaging. If done right, they help keep story/lore relevant to we the to-be level-capped. In keeping with the Diablo universe, I would imagine these events to be random.. Either realm-wide on some time interval (on a weekly rotation, for example), or server-specific (generated randomly with each game).
To stoke the idea fire, here are two obvious and general events I could imagine:
1. "Siege" style events: you'll get some kind of in-game announcement about <area> being overrun. So gladiators mount up, fight your way through the area, and suddenly find yourself in an unusual "event" zone, and have to fight your way to some artifact or loot.
2. Event bosses: random non-standard bosses (hopefully tied to story or lore) appear in a side-zone, in-game notification
Thoughts? Ideas? The more detail the better, if you have specific lore-based events in mind, I'd love to hear em.
1
Face it: You don't have more than just sparse information. And the bottom line is, what the OP is so "worried" about are hardly issues, they're misinformed neuroses. This game has more than a year's worth of development ahead of it. Now I'm no Bliz cheerleader, and you won't hear me say "trust Blizzard.." I do think they rely on our mindful feedback. But when some emokid shows up and starts "sharing" his/her "worries" about character classes looking like Disney characters, or starts complaining about an isometric camera when he/she clearly has little grasp on the essential elements of the Diablo franchise, that person is gonna get a snarky reply or two.
Oh and thanks for pseudo moderating, we all need people like you to come "represent" on behalf of the poor helpless community that can't handle a couple of pointed replies. If you have a problem with me dissenting these issues, then like, get lost?