How Much Did Blizzard Spend On StarCraft II?

[nisallik]

[citation][nom]donovands[/nom]Wish the Terran installment was last. Would be nice to see them win for a change.[/citation]

Yeah, I know right? Terrans always get the short end of the stick. =\

 

[Godfail]

[citation][nom]aaron92[/nom]Blizzard use to be a great company, ever since Activision partnered with them, their game marketing and design has been all about maximum profits at the cost of game quality.I'm not feeding the greed machine.[/citation]

Could you please point me to the games you are referring to ever since Activision partnered wth them? I'll give you a clue, there are none until SC2 releases. So, your statement could very well be based on only one game, in which case you'd just sound ridiculous with this statement...and you already do.

 

[kartu]

[citation][nom]prozium42[/nom]Why is there two more EXPANSIONS after it for the respective other races? So that each race gets a full story, a massive experience.[/citation]
Oh, I guess experience is so "massive" that you can't sell it unless you split it into 3 parts, right? Makes sense, bro, makes sense. Before I read that, I thought it was because Blizzard was a commercial company which was trying to maximize profits.

 

[vulmer]

I never played a Starcraft game till I got into the SCII beta, and I have to say I don't know what all the hype is about. The gameplay seems really bland... there is no strategy beyond finding the best way to blob the best mix of units the fastest, which consists of a very slow beginning of a match. I can't say much about the campaign because they didn't let us test that in the beta, but since it is Blizzard I am sure the story is pretty good. I'm not bashing on the game, I just prefer the gameplay of DoWII style RTS.

 

[simplec1]

[citation][nom]FATAL STR1K3[/nom]morons... lol.clearly this is going to be one of the best games in the genre and will be worth the money. I don't know why people complain that's it is 3 separate parts. It will be so much game content.[/citation]
uh... Battle.net. What are you gonna do if internet dies and wanna have a LAN party, I like being able play who I want however and where I want

 

[cknobman]

All I gotta say is if they find a way to split up Diablo III into multiple pieces Actiblizzard can go burn in h3ll.

Im not against expansion packs but busting up what should be 1 game into multiple just for some bs excuse when really your trying to line your pockets is just too much for me. Activision fudges everything they touch (look at the COD series and how thats turning out) and its a shame Blizzard has become part of that.

 

[prozium42]

[citation][nom]nekoangel[/nom]starcraft2 FAQYes what you are getting is potentially a much more fulfilled single player experience, yet as of this time if you are serious about multi player you will have to buy each expansion and because Blizzard now requires their permission first before a SC2 tournament is held and the lack of lan the user will have to use their own account which they have all expansion to be able to compete in the tournament.And there are three factions in Warcraft III so following your logic there would have to have been two expansions.[/citation]

If your serious about competitive gaming you probably also have a decently funded PC, so you should be able to buy expansions a year or so apart rather easily especially since you can start saving before the first game is even out.

There is also four factions in Warcraft III, just saying.

The tournament bit i'll agree with(although as people have said theres nothing stopping people from hosting general tournaments that don't involve money/rewards), and i'm on the fence about the LAN crap.

 

[MxM]

[citation][nom]kartu[/nom]Oh, I guess experience is so "massive" that you can't sell it unless you split it into 3 parts, right? Makes sense, bro, makes sense. Before I read that, I thought it was because Blizzard was a commercial company which was trying to maximize profits.[/citation]
I do not think those other two parts are ready, so how can they sell them now?

They will release SC2, which has about the same amount of playtime in SP as original SC. Then they will release another expansion which will have about the same amount of SP content as in Brood Wars, then they will have yet another similar expansion. So, what is your problem exactly?

 

[crockdaddy]

First ... some of you people need to get a grip. The fact is, in 2008 Blizzard announced SC2 would be broken up into a Trilogy. There is no first game and 2 expansions ... it WILL be three games. I can't believe gamers comment on games and don't know what they are talking about. People are complaining legitimately so about this. Many feel this is just another Activision ploy to milk the shit out of yet another franchise which is a stated goal of Bobby Kotick. Myself ... I believe in Blizzard but I am many of my friends whom buy 10 to 20 games each and every year for the last 20 years are considering taking a pass.

Many people are primarily pissed at the removal of the LAN party component because they are sick of the stupid "DRM" reasons. Nothing better than paying for a product and then being punished for piracy that at best has a questionable impact on a games bottom line.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3171279

 

[trnddwn33]

[citation][nom]Smochina[/nom]Bla bla bla bla bla, No LAN. Who the hell cares about lan, you lan parties fans make like 1% of the total player base. There's a thing called internet in case you haven't heard, you can play over it so you don't have to carry your computer to your friend's house every day.[/citation]

I agree. What kind of LAN nowadays doesn't have internet access? Get over it.

 

[Guest]

Stop trying to tell Blizzard that you know better than them whether Lanning over Battle.net will work adequately, like if they have no idea how you play the game and you are all industry experts.

Beyond concerns of possible online performance issues, and you have to reasonably assume Blizzard gave that consideration (geez), I see no other valid and legal concern for insisting on the inclusion of straight Lan play.

 

[Maxor127]

Not that I care, but from a business standpoint there's no excuse for wasting $100 million. Someone should get fired. What I do care about is Call of Duty-esque BS $60 price point. And apparently each "expansion" will be another $60. I'm sure Activision will find a way to squeeze more money out too.

 

[Mirth]

[citation][nom]crockdaddy[/nom]The fact is, in 2008 Blizzard announced SC2 would be broken up into a Trilogy. There is no first game and 2 expansions ... it WILL be three games. I can't believe gamers comment on games and don't know what they are talking about.[/citation]
I can't believe how people get stuck on one idea and stop listening. In Blizzard's own words "We effectively look at it internally as expansions"

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60020

 

[bigpoppastuke]

Everyone acts like they won't add anything to the game with the other parts. They will add new units, maps, storylines, and all the makings of an expansion with each chapter in the story. Sure, they could have done a shorter campaign with smaller story lines, but they obviously have a grandiouse story line that needs to be focused on one at a time. Quit thinking that the 2nd and 3rd installments are just single player missions and start thinking they're no different than when Brood War was released. I, for one, will be buying the entire collection. No when complains when they release installments for WoW 😛

 

[Mirth]

[citation][nom]Maxor127[/nom]Not that I care, but from a business standpoint there's no excuse for wasting $100 million. Someone should get fired. What I do care about is Call of Duty-esque BS $60 price point. And apparently each "expansion" will be another $60. I'm sure Activision will find a way to squeeze more money out too.[/citation]
1. If that $100 million nets them a large enough profit it's not a waste, it's an investment. Toy Story 3 had an estimated budget of $190 million and no one calls that money wasted. And in case anyone claims apples-to-oranges, as far as I'm concerned both products are competing for my "entertainment" dollars.

2. Blizzard has not announced pricing for any SC2 "expansions." But please don't let that stop you from making a wild *** guess.

 

[pharge]

hmmm... so the $100M is for the all 3 parts or just the start up and the part one?

I know SC2 come w/ a new engine, a "3D", and much bigger story line... but still.... I am wondering where that $100M goes...

Maybe quite a few of them are the cost of new servers and all hardware/software upgrade... in that case... does the development of Diablo 3 got benifited from this $100M pie?

Think about how long does it take for Blizzard to produce a new game... I wondering how many hardware upgrade Blizzard have to make during the development..... 😉

.

 

[lauxenburg]

$100 million! I don't understand how it could possible cost that much. I could buy like 5 private islands with that..

 

[prince_david]

Let's not forget this game is not all mutliplayer e-Sports. There is going to be a fantastic single player campaign, and Blizzard always packs in a great story.

 

[falchard]

A couple NCSoft titles have also topped $100 million, but mmos are usually excluded from most calculations on anything with the game industry.

 

[mav1178]

[citation][nom]dark_lord69[/nom]If they sell 10 million copies at $60 each.that's10,000,000 X $60 = $600,000,000Take the profit and subtract the cost of making it:$600,000,000 - $100,000,000 = $500,000,000If the sell ten million copies thier NET profit will be 1/2 a billion dollars but this game will sell world wide and likely more than 10 million. [/citation]

And who is selling this? Blizzard themselves?

What about costs of printing the CD and packaging? Profit for channel partners?

When all is said and done, profit will be great, just don't assume it's sold directly from Blizzard to the end-user. Even a digital distribution channel (such as Steam) takes profits from every game sold.

 

[ap3x]

[citation][nom]aaron92[/nom]Blizzard use to be a great company, ever since Activision partnered with them, their game marketing and design has been all about maximum profits at the cost of game quality.I'm not feeding the greed machine.[/citation]

How did you come to that conclusion? the last game before World Warcraft was..... Warcraft III and Diablo 2 and we all know how well those did. Blizzard is still kicking 30k cheaters at a time on Diablo 2 to this day and that game is over 10 years old now. Seems like solid dev work to me. Having said that, I hardly think SC2 or SC for that matter are as good as some of the newer titles. Sure, they are uber polished but the strategic options leave a bit to be desired. It is mostly a tactical game.

 

[Regulas]

No LAN no sell to me.

 

[Regulas]

I saw a TV advert, besides the fact that the SC universe could make a great movie, as long as Hollywood didn't screw it up, I would love to see them make a FPS in the SC universe. Use the Crisis engine or Fallout 3 engine to save time.

 

[dEAne]

As long as it is entertaining people will buy it.

 

[toolinthemist]

ahhhhh, no budget, how real games are made