Did Blizzard focus on WoW too much?

[TheGoodSir]

Hey guys, I just wanted to post my opinion on this topic that and fellow memeber and myself discussed during a minecraft game, Did WoW kill Blizzard? This is all in my opinion so don't be hatin' :glare:. We dicussed that blizzard focus on World of Warcraft to much, and pushed away Diablo, Warcraft and Starcraft. The last Diablo game was released in 2000 thats 12 yeras ago in June 29 15 days away happy birthday D2 . Starcraft was released in 1998 13 years ago. Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne the latest W3 game released in 2003. So in 2004 WoW was release, a world masterpiece, blizzards getting high 90's and 9/10 on a lot of the worlds best gaming website IGN, 1up ect. This game was blizzards succesful son Profting 1.5 billion dollars a YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have had first hand experience with all of these games, with a new expansion roughly every 2 years. So there is a new world of warcarft every 2 years to make 5 of them by the end of the year. There has been 3 Diablo (since the release in 1996), two Starcraft games (since 1998), and 5 Waracraft 3's (the younger brother of WoW).

PS: WoW has more haters than subcribers.

So with these facts you tell me, Has WoW killed Blizzard?

 

[Mr. Lemming]

In a sense I think Battle.net killed Blizzard to an extent, and the merger with Activision just was basically selling their souls to Satan's boss (somehow).

World of Warcraft is a lucrative game yes, but that's why they're keeping at it for so long. I don't think any sane person would kill a cash cow that huge unless it was on its last legs with a broken neck, rabies, impacted colon, and probably zombified. Personally I quit WoW about a year ago and haven't really looked back with desire to play again since. I still read up on the patch notes and whatnot for MoP, but I cringe when I read about what they're doing to my good ol' Worgen Warrior (my Furry Fury)...

The reason I say it's more to do with Battle.net is simple to see for a lot of people: Always on DRM in the form of no offline play. It's what has kept Diablo 3 from being as big as it could be, not the gameplay some people have issues with like waypoints on the map being the only way to 'save' where you were (where the heck were you during Diablo 2? It's pretty much the exact same system to my knowledge!) or the real money AH (although that IS a disturbing thing to see IMO). Diablo was a game I could play on a LAN back in high school with other friends in computer electronics class, something simple and horribly easy to set up. Now you have to log in to Battle.net every single time you want to play, and if your internet connection or the authentication servers or the game servers themselves are down, your $60 game becomes a $60 coaster until it's back up.

The Activision merger thing should be obvious, they're the ones responsible for milking every last drop of blood from the stone that is CoD and other numerous franchises, and they're also one of the ones trying to keep Blizzard squeezing that WoW stone has hard as possible I guarantee. But thankfully, WoW programmers =/= Diablo programmers =/= Starcraft programmers, so there's always that to keep in mind...

 

[Cyprias]

With all the money WoW's bringing in, Blizzard's able to finance projects they may not have been able to prior. Sure for now they've been investing a lot more of their creative team into WoW than other projects, but as WoW dies out we'll probably see new IP with the same level of quality we've come to expect from Blizzard.

I'm not a big fan of Blizzard myself, I dislike the direction they're going with their realID system and everything needing an internet connection, but I'll give them credit for releasing high quality games onto the market, they definitely take their time to make sure games top notch before releasing them.

 

[Snipeye]

Obviously, everyone's opinions are biased. However, at the OP, since you're including expansion packs in your assessment of World of Warcraft, then the same should be applied to the other games.

Therefore, Warcraft has had (officially) six titles in the series; four titles for the Diablo series; three titles for Starcraft (with a definite 2 more in queue); and World of Warcraft will have its fifth title when Mists of Pandaria is released.

With all that said; did WoW kill Blizzard? No. However, that depends on what you define as killed. Obviously, Blizzard is still operating as a semi-autonomous company after its merger with Activision. The game itself DEFINED the MMORPG genre after it appeared the Sony Online Entertainment had a definite cash cow in it with its Everquest series. Speaking of which, SOE has released 18 expansions since its original game release in 1999, with its last one in November 2011 (case of too many releases). On one hand, a lot of titles that Blizzard has released has had EXTREME longevity comparatively speaking. Diablo 2 remained a popular RPG a decade after its original release, which speaks volumes to how well Blizzard created it in the first place (and released its lone expansion in 2001).

Is Blizzard focusing too much on WoW? I again say no. I agree with Mr Lemming that the Battle.net system is having a greater negative effect in the short-term. However, illegal downloads and hacking has become a continuous, if not growing, concern for gaming companies, with loss of revenue, disenfranchised players, and negative publicity (Sony again remains the example of how to NOT handle a hacking event and deal with the publicity after-effects). I don't blame Blizzard for them instituting Battle.net 100 percent, because its their best response in how to deal with cyber attacks and ensure they receive payment for what they created.

One thing I will say is that I think the merger with Activision will have, if not already had, negative effects, especially in the long-term as employees and leadership will be adjusting to a new corporate dynamic and environment. Whether or not Blizzard's method of creating and producing games will trump Activision's methodology remains to be seen, even though its' been almost 4 years since that merger (July 9, 2008).

P.S. I actually did a financial analysis of ATVI for my MBA if you're interested in reading it.

 

[a pet rock]

The always-on DRM did not stop piracy of Diablo 3. Period.

What that "feature" does is prevent legitimate buyers from playing the game offline. DRM only inconveniences paying customers because pirates never actually deal with it. In fact, I don't even think the always-on was intended to stop piracy. It was intended to keep every character in a position to spend money on the in-game cash cow. Sales aren't their primary income in WoW and they wanted to carry that same kind of financial staying power into D3.

Oh, sure, you could argue that allowing people to play offline increases hacks and will destroy economy and their golden cash cow. Except that they could just keep offline and online characters completely separate at all times. The obvious problem with this solution is that offline characters wouldn't have any interest in buying more items off the cash cow.

So yeah. I'd say WoW had some influence there. I'd rather shake my fist at Activision for being stone-squeezers like Lemming said.

P.S. Snipeye, how long is that financial analysis? I don't think I have the attention span for a full-length essay but it'd be interesting to see what someone with financial education has to say about them. The only angle I can see them from is my education background and the motivational research I've read.

 

[LostSerenity]

is it just me or is diablo 3 art style remind you of Wow's engine. I mean its 2012 and look at how good games can get. Just my thoughts but I don't think Diablo 3 looks as cool as it should.

 

[Snipeye]

APR: It's a good 22 pages with bibliography, and appendices. There was a lot of calculations and such I had to include in the paper. It's like 8 pages of writing, plus another 13 pages of backup.

 

[Garlick Brad]

is it just me or is diablo 3 art style remind you of Wow's engine. I mean its 2012 and look at how good games can get. Just my thoughts but I don't think Diablo 3 looks as cool as it should.

YES. Both gameplay-wise and graphics-wise (especially graphics) Diablo III just seems like dark WoW with less stuff. I'd rather DIII have been 2D than look as cartoony as it is, it just doesn't look grim and gritty enough.

 

[Raul Tha Monk]

Because that was blizzard only successful game

 

[runo]

Because that was blizzard only successful game

This is so far from accurate... lol

I'm not even a huge fan of Blizzard's after their gigantic screw-ups, their merger and the fiasco that is Diablo 3, but even I have to admit that they have a pretty hefty catalogue of successful games. Diablo 2 (and Diablo, the success of which LEAD to Diablo 2), on top of pretty much every RTS they ever made (Orcs & Humans, WC2 & 3, Starcraft, Starcraft 2--depending on who you ask).

And, love it or hate it, WoW is crawling close to a decade of being on top of the MMO food chain. Basically every one of their franchise titles with the exception of one or two has done well in the eyes of most every consumer and a majority of critics.

 

[fps]

Blizzard has created a game that has rewarded them handsomely. Why stop focusing on it? I remember being huge into WC3 before WoW came out. That game offered so much story and control that it was fun to sit and play for a few hours. I even tried my hand at map editing and creating. Their creativity has paved the way for many more successful games like LoL and DD. Then when WoW game out, it offered the same features of WC3, but even more control. I think Bliz took the best possible approach in creating and releasing that game than anyone trying to mimic them today has. It seems every MMO that's being released has utilized WoW's talent tree system and dungeon instancing. They have really created such a blueprint that they really ought to keep their attention towards maintaining it.

I just hope that one day they remove the subscription crap because it would draw a lot more users back and attract a whole new target of players. Perhaps utilizing micro-transactions instead would help their cause. I just can't justify paying monthly anymore for a game that has come so far.