March 30, 2010: In a "Activision Blizzard restructuring move", the above often quoted CFO (Chief Financial Officer) Thomas Tippl is, according to Massively and the L.A. Times put in charge as COO (Chief Operations Officer) of the "Blizzard business unit", with Mike Morhaime directly reporting to him, according to Joystiq Tippl basically gets paid more, the more revenue the company makes ...
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252 (May 30, 2010)
The full post has the sources of this information. I do not think Activision or Blizzard have made an official announcement. I think Mike Morhaime is still listed as CEO, but if he reports to Thomas Tippl the Chief Operations Officer, then he has been in effect demoted.
The implications are frightening. The whole post is frightening. There are a large number of comments that make interesting reading in themselves. You will need an Alka Seltzer after reading all this, perhaps a stiff drink.
Well, I wasn't all that interested in playing Cataclysm anyway. As for StarCraft 2 ... as an old SC player I'm not all that thrilled to tell you the honest truth. Diablo III ... what I'm thinking is that Diablo III is going to end up cross platform on the consoles with all the limitations that implies.
No skin off my nose I guess. The only game I'm waiting for this year is Elemental: War of Magic.
But they still are having the indy games thing, arent they?
Yeah, and how long do you think those indie games are going to be good before Kotick runs them into the ground in an attempt to exploit them on a yearly basis?
So. How many "I told you so" posts are appearing on the Warcraft forums to go with this news?
/t XeronX, DPS LF Bobby Kotick. Spec'd Asshole
And the games political party train keeps rolling. . .
Blizzard have been overrated since they begun to solely develop sequels, and the abomination to Mmo gaming that is WOW..... meh. They have been coasting along on their past successes for awhile now. I doubt anyone is really left who made those classic Blizzard games in the 90's
Your prediction regarding SC2 map packs being paid content scares me because I can easily imagine it happening. the $60x3 cost for sc2 is my biggest beef. I'm going to wait a year or 2 and buy them all 3 together for 40 or 50 or whatever. And if I have to wait 4 years, so be it. My money is just that. MINE.
These dunces have no idea that they're flicking the nose of a sleeping giant.
Yep. This Kotick tool box is going to flush the customer goodwill of the Blizzard brand like a foot-long deuce down a toilet.
EDIT: Thankfully, Stardock still exists unhindered by high level executives who know as much about gaming as my mother does about quantum chromodynamics.
You mean except Metzen and all the other top folks? Turnover at Blizzard is pretty low by industry standards. Not to mention that WoW is bigger then every other North American MMO combined. Clearly they have no idea what they're doing.
What is interesting is that they are looking at charging for extra character slots. That's something some other games are doing too, but it's not really Blizzard like. F you Activision.
I just feel like saying this (mostly because I think it's funny)- but the validity of the point you make in your edit depends on how much your mother knows about quantum chromodynamics.
Indeed and /signed. Blizzard is the Facebook of gaming. Or is that Steam?
I fail to see how the console can in any way limit a Diablo type game aside from memory footprint. Analog controls are perfect for a game like Diablo in fact even better than mouse keyboard when done right. I'm really tired of reading posts about Diablo and console. WTF are you afraid of. Looking at the Diablo footage currently available that can easily be done on a console WITH better gameplay then a mouse and keyboard. Christ you cant even face a direction without holding a modifier key on a keyboard mouse combo. If they had to dumb down what they already have then yes I agree don't make it for console. However if it can be built from the ground up and optimized for it then the PC version would only stand to benefit from improvements made to the technology.
D3 is the only game over at Camp Blizzard that I even care about. The PC version looks fantastic. Probably going to be 2 million or more slamming bnet on launch day and it will be Diablo 2 all over again. Now assuming Blizzard aren't idiots and we know for the most part they aren't There is no reason that game of that kind can't be on console. There is also no reason that the game in it's current form could not run as well or better on the current consoles with proper optimization. It's map size and memory limitations that scare me the most. All of which seem to be overcome with proper streaming technology. If it ran poorly or had sloppy controls then screw it. However if someone actually put some effort into it Diablo 3 on console could be the next biggest thing. I've been saying this for years and the only thing I have to show for it is Arkadian Warriors. Which if anything serves as a template or foundation for the analog control scheme.
KWAiRT, I am not "afraid" of cross platform per se in Diablo 3. However, there will be some limitations in the game itself that will arise from limited memory of the consoles, limitations in the CPU and the GPU, and a simplified control scheme.
Brad Wardell has written about this in the context of generic games somewhere on this forum. Perhaps someone can remember which thread. If I gave the impression I was bashing a platform, I apologize.
Borderlands is a good example of what can happen. Looking at the early developer presentations of the game design for the PC, it was higher resolution on much bigger maps. Going to the cross platform development of the final game, much had to be dropped. The bestiary was diminished to only a few types with some re-skinning. Textures were adapted to the console world. Well, it was still a good game no doubt of it. I played it for about 3 months, one of each class fully leveled. But it had an end for me because while it was great fun while it lasted, it was just too shallow to have lasting replay value.
Tridus, it seems to me that character slots make no sense in StarCraft 2. Now in a game like Guild Wars, they do make sense. Over a period of more than 5 years, I have purchased 3 additional skills slots for a total cost of $27. Many other items and services are available in the store, but none of them were required for just playing the game. Rename your character or change your character's hair style; that sort of thing.
Sola_III wrote "Luckily I was never much of a fan of the Diablo series ... Single player felt too shallow for me and MP had too many assholes so It's not like I care If they "ruin" it." Well, the reputation of online Diablo 2 stinks so much I have never even tried it.
As for single player, if you want more challenge and still have your old disks then consider the Median XL Mod by Brother Laz, which you can Google. Median XL is a total rewrite of Diablo 2 LoD with all new skill trees for characters and hirelings ... and monsters. Yes (shudder) the monsters are more numerous, more powerful, and have new skills. There are new kinds of monsters, new areas in which to fight monsters, revisions of the game lighting, wonderful new visual effects, great new sound effects ... and the list goes on.
Very easy to install, just replace Patch_d2.mpq in the main game directory with the identically named mod version. Be sure to make a copy of the original file first. Start D2 LoD and you are in. Patch_d2.mpq for the vanilla game is 2.7 Meg and the Median XL version is 130 Meg. This is not merely a "mod" it is a new game really. Median XL was selected as #6 for the best game mods of the year. It is currently maintained, works with the latest patch from Battle Net, and new features are coming soon.
Median XL Trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-V86An7juY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQelDvx4iY4 is low level game play by a level 13-14 Lightning and Fire Sorceress in the Cold Plains, the first real combat area beyond the "intro tutorial" area.
Big Question About Diablo III for Me Is: Can they possibly do better from a game play perspective than Median XL? Clearly, the graphics of Diablo III will be better by a couple of orders of magnitude. But will the magic still be there?
Explain to me why exactly WoW is an abomination to MMO gaming.
'Endless grinding', clearly you haven't played any mmog's pre WoW.
'All games try to mimic WoW because of its succes', most games fail trying to copy WoW anyway. WoW is a good example on how to create a MMORPG of that type. I do agree that companies should try to look outside the box. Ah well, perhaps in a few years, after I'm done with my studies and started my own company, I might actually fill in that gap
'MMO players only want to play WoW', this one does bother me a bit. Warhammer Online for example was great fun, it's just that there aren't enough players to populate the leveling areas. Finding people for PQ's was a chore. Still, Blizzard 'took inspiriation' from Warhammer Online and now it seems that WoW has a lot of functions Warhammer Online has as well (queing for Battlegrounds for example at any time, quest helper).
What more?
True enough and at this point it's probably much to late in development to address the issues of limited memory when trying to port it over as the engine needs to be designed with this in mind. The CPU and GPU in the XBOX though are more than up for the challenge of Diablo 3.
I remember seeing the early alpha screenshots when Borderlands wasn't even a cell shaded game. While your probably right about things being dropped and limited bestiary I can't help but wonder if the overall design of the game was changed to reflect performance on console and PC. Drawing huge open worlds, then populating them, and then having 4 players run through in co-op with vehicles is a pretty daunting task. I don't think their early technology was up for that challenge and thus we ended up with the cell shaded approach which takes much less overhead and delivers better fps on average.
I mean look at Red Dead Redemption. That engine is designed from the ground up to do everything it does with such little memory yet it pushes an insane amount of detail and a huge variety of models and textures that stream in and out in realtime. There are only a few trouble spots in the entire game where the fps drops. If Diablo 3 had a proper engine for the console I think it could be done very well. Controls are not an issue in my mind. I do not see the mouse and keyboard as the holy grail anymore. In fact I use my XBOX wired controller to play Borderlands on my PC because the movement is so much smoother and natural. The only issue you really have is not being able to slam 1 to 0 on a hotbar.
It's funny because I remember reading a blog from Blizzard a few years back about how it would be impossible to do a Diablo control scheme on an analog controller like the XBOX or PS3. I kind of laughed as they talked about how a ranged AOE would be impossible which is totually not true. When Diablo 3 comes out it would sure be nice to at least play in on a high end PC with an analog controller like I do with Borderlands but I know that will not happen. With the way the WoW engine streams data so smoothly I often wonder why Blizzard hasn't already done something on console with it. Diablo 3 would be a perfect introduction for Blizzard on console. The current ARPG on the consoles are a mix of bad PC ports and crappy games in general.
If Blizzard had the same idea and adapted their technology to build Diablo 3 from the ground up for console it would have meant even more optimizations for the PC version that would naturally carry over. Then they could have made both versions somewhat different if there were still limitations for bestiary and number of players, monsters on screen etc. I really see no harm in console development. If anything it forces developers to optimize their bulky PC code. A good example of this is Supreme Commander 1. The work it took to get that onto console was nothing short of amazing. Granted the console version was still bad but the results carried over into the next PC game where memory requirements were cut in half allowing for much more room to add stuff and better performance overall.
I dont see the controller an any innovation in gaming input over the keyboard and mouse. The keyboard and mouse aren't the "holygrail" either, they are just convenient and open. The controller wasn't made an an innovation, it was something shoehorned into gaming, forced by console companies since it's their interest to sell more 360s and ps3s.
I disagree. Dual analog sticks was an innovation that also changed the way we play certain games such as sports games. Dual analog gamepads are also better for games like racing, fighting, sports, flying, or space sims. Personally I love them in shooters now more than my mouse keyboard. Analog movement is far more precise movement wise then wasd however I understand that in a competative shooter environment you want speed and precision which a mouse gives however it's not any more natural it's just faster. Obviously in games like rts or tbs the mouse and keyboard is superior but like the mouse can be adapted for simulations etc so can the analogs for strategy. Overall though I love the feel of the XBOX gamepad and if your running one wireless on your PC all the better. To me it is an innovation in control. So much that I would not give it up for any of the motion controllers or a good mouse or keyboard when given a choice.
I have used an S controller quite a bit. It works really great for certain types of games and the best part is it simply becomes an extension of your desires. Yes, I like controllers where they work with a game designed for them.
And yet ... way back there I played Halo 1 on an XBox, and then later on got the PC version. For some reason, I found that game much easier to play on PC with a mouse and the keyboard.
Borderlands ... watched a lot of videos of the game also and the only short coming of the controller with that game seemed to be driving the vehicle, perversely enough. Maybe those players did not adjust the sensitivity or something.
Pulled this off the official forums, in regards to the Real ID fiasco. Usual grain of salt applies, but it fits the situation very well.
The best thing we could hope for is that all the talent that made Blizzard great will leave to form their own studio and Give Activision the finger. Assivision seems to be doing all they can to forever tarnish a once great company.
It's more or less Kotick's plan to start his own gaming social network.
Thanks Tridus. Doesn't need much salt because it is about what I would expect. Activision will continue to extend their control over Blizzard and morale will decline even further. And I think DethAdder is 100 percent correct.
The only good news I've heard about StarCraft 2 is the Brother Laz of Median XL fame is thinking about doing a big mod for SC2. This would be single player only, but Brother Laz is a creative genius whom I respect a lot.
SC2 prices for the basic game should fall rapidly, so a good deal on the game plus a free mod from Brother Laz might turn out well.
Break my heart, ZehDon!
The following ties in to what Ravenstrike said above about Blizzard coasting along on past successes, in a left hand sort of way. And Diablo 3 is at stake in all this too. Plus I've written about Median XL above as well.
Median is popular and technically proficient enough that it was commented on by some of the Diablo 3 designers during an interview at Blizzcon 2009. [2]
There is no issue at all driving with a 360 controller. The only problem is the driving mechanics work like Halo. So wether your using mouse + keyboard or a controller you still can't look left or right while you drive forward or backwards.
1. The following comment is by Brother Laz on StarCraft 2 Beta, but taking into account currently announced changes for the retail release. Custom maps are a big part of StarCraft competitive gaming. Apparently you still need 3 copies of the game, 3 CD keys to have worldwide coverage for maps, mods, or to play in international competition.
2. Blizzard has apparently given up on their requirement that people post on their forums with their real world, legal, first and last name. The BBC, MSNBC, and I think CNN among others hung them out to dry on that violation of privacy!
Brother Laz:
After a few months of wasted time, I came to a conclusion: Starcraft 2's custom map interface is complete and total trash!
It is impossible to find maps or make yours popular.
- In Warcraft 3, the list showed only the maps with people waiting for a game. Here it shows all maps, potentially thousands of them. - Sort is by popularity and there is no way to change this. - You cannot see how many people are waiting in a given map. - There is no map search. - You need to click click click to scroll down the list. - Newly created maps have 0 popularity and end up in dead last place.
Conclusion: the vast majority of maps will never, ever, ever be played by anyone. If you do want to play an unpopular map you'll be alone, drowned in a sea of empty lobbies.
And if you don't publish your map very soon after release day, it will appear so far back that you might as well not have bothered.
You do not have freedom of distribution.
- Maps are region locked: to publish your map worldwide you need 3 CD keys. - It is however trivial to pirate maps due to poor protection. - It is possible to name squat or create maps with a similar name.
Conclusion: if you even want to participate in the above madness you need to pay €180 for 3 copies of the game, otherwise your map will be published to only a third of the world. And if it actually succeeds, someone could easily steal it and upload it elsewhere.
Unless major changes take place, Starcraft 2 is not viable for map creators.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
