Goldman Sachs analyst speculates Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2 release windows

filed under I'll believe when I see it

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/12/goldman-activision-shares-to-get-a-boost-from-overwatch-diablo-sequels.html

...Merwin predicts the company's next "Diablo" game will be released in 2019 and sell 15 million units. He also forecasts "Overwatch 2" will launch in 2020 and sell 20 million units in its first year. The analyst noted how the previous "Diablo" and "Overwatch" titles sold 30 million units in three years and more than 16 million units in its first year respectively, according to his estimates...

first off, it's pretty clear to me this guy is just speculating releases off of past history, not off any real evidence that these games are being actively worked on. Maybe he has some, but if so the article gives no clue as to what it would be as all his arguments were about Diablo 3 and Overwatch sales.

Now a Diablo 4 makes a lot of sense to me. Diablo 3's launch could have gone a lot better and was basically built a flawed foundation. Not to mention the game looks graphically dated and doesn't have a functioning one of the new fangled monetization schemes like loot boxes. Plus I've seen job postings suggesting Blizzard is working Diablo content. Maybe Blizzard gives another go at the Real Money Auction House and makes it work this time. And hey the base game would be 7 years old in 2019, seems like a typical blizzard release timeline. I'd think a Diablo 4 could make Blizzard a lot more money than Diablo 3 does currently.

But Overwatch 2? Why would blizzard do that so soon after Overwatch? Yes 2020 is 4 years after OW's initial release, but OW is a living breathing game that constantly adjusts, has a very profitable mtx scheme and perhaps most importantly is tied to an unproven but potentially very lucrative E-sports scene for Blizzard. I'd think any "Overwatch 2" would and should be more like DOTA 2 7.0, an substantive yet iterative change to the existing game. If they don't, they risk fracturing the playerbase which could severely negatively impact the nascent OWL which big money players like Robert kraft are heavily invested into. That's one of the factors that tripped up Starcraft 2 in the long run, some people just wouldn't give up Brood War.

Maybe Activision mgt wants those retail sales or thinks Overwatch will look incredibly graphically dated in 2020 and forces Blizz to do this (or maybe Blizz mgt does, I dunno) but I'd think that would be a mistake. This isn't like Destiny, where a rebrand could have potentially revived growth in the playerbase by fixing image problems (I'd argue that Destiny 2 as of yet has not successfully achieved that aim, but given how Destiny 1's launch I certainly see how it could have)

p.s. the analyst also speculated about a Blizzard iOS title coming soon. Now that, if it's in development would probably be the best reason to buy stock if it is in the works.

The company that was too big to fail is now speculating on video game releases? What a country!!!

@bartok: oh don't worry, They and their competitors have been doing this ever since Game companies went public in the 80's. Been a good while, but I remember a bunch of them seemed to be bullish on Midway when that went under. Oops.

Blizzard has mastered the art of making games that continue to be active and profitable long after their initial release date and they don't seem too keen on releasing sequels unless there's a really good reason to do so. I'll believe Diablo 4's coming before I believe Overwatch 2 is coming, but I really don't think we're getting either before the next decade starts.

Why would they ever make an Overwatch 2? That thing is going to live forever like Dota and CS GO. Making a sequel makes no sense.

Overwatch 2 will come out at roughly the same time as World of Warcraft 2 or Warcraft 4.

I don't see a diablo 4 unless they figure out a way to add microtransactions.....

I'll tell you, as a financial analyst, financial analysts who speculate on this kind of nonsense don't have know anything about anything. They're just speculating to get their clients interested in certain potential trades. Remember in 2007 when World of Starcraft and World of Diablo were released, just as a financial analyst predicted in 2005? No? Exactly.

I'm not saying the analyst is right, but the difference between Overwatch and TF2/World of Warcraft/regular Warcraft/Dota/CS:GO is that those latter games are primarily PC games, while Overwatch seems to have made a serious push to be a PC and console game (I know TF2 and CS:GO are technically multi platform also, but the console versions can't possibly be very active at this point).

I'm guessing that from a business standpoint, analysts assume that PC players are willing to buy into MMO-style expansions for years due to the tradition, but a lot more console players will play a game for 1-12 months and trade it in or they are almost forced to stop playing it when the new console generation comes out and they retire the console the game lives on. With the exception of literal MMOs like Final Fantasy 11, it is relatively unheard of for console games to receive years and years of support and updates, because it's much easier to just ship that new content as a follow up game. Maybe Street Fighter is the better example of a console game like OW that receives character updates years after release, but that has a different business model than the OW loot boxes so I wouldn't call it a great comparison.

I'm making a big assumption here, but I'd guess that analysts view the console audience as almost expecting frequent sequels as a clear indicator of a bunch of new content. It's probably part of the reason that we got a Destiny 2 instead of them just bolting more content onto Destiny 1; DLC attach rate on consoles can only go so high, but a brand new numbered sequel on a disc gets more people's attention. I'd guess that loot box buying revenue is lower on consoles now as the audience dwindles, and while PC loot box revenue probably keeps a steady pace, I'm sure Activision-Blizzard would like to see the big revenue spike they'd get as a result of releasing Overwatch 2 and getting everybody to pay $60 again.

I'm making a big assumption here, but I'd guess that analysts view the console audience as almost expecting frequent sequels as a clear indicator of a bunch of new content. It's probably part of the reason that we got a Destiny 2 instead of them just bolting more content onto Destiny 1

I think thats a great point. Also looking at the analyst's Linkedin, it appears that he has been focusing on media and video games since at least 2010, so I don't think we can outright discount him as some ignorant bank dude.

Diablo, maybe.

Definitely not Overwatch. I could see a spinoff single player game, perhaps, but I can't imagine an "Overwatch 2" any more than I can imagine a "WoW 2" or a "Half Life 3" (I can't even type that last one without laughing. The very idea of a third Half Life! Ha!).

But hey, maybe I'm wrong, and they'll find themselves physically unable to nerf Mercy any further by then, leading to them needing to make a new Overwatch from the ground up.

@deckard:The life of a sell side analyst eh? I remember seeing once that no Sell Side guy had a "sell" rating on Enron when it collapsed. (almost) Always a great time to buy stocks eh? Just like realtors.

I kinda wish World of Starcraft was a thing.

That's a really good point about the next console gen and Destiny. However I could also see Blizzard just making a PS5 disc for the existing game and basically get people to rebuy the game. I could see that doing really well, especially if it's a launch title. People will need games to play whenever nextgen launches.

That way everybody wins.

I feel like the core of Overwatch is on PC, especially the Pro scene unlike Destiny which never had a PC release. So I'd think catering to the needs of the PC playerbase probably will take top priority. And probably should to be honest.

@dudeglove: If you can't trust Gamebomb.ru, who can you trust?

Pay X number of dollars for an item that increases the drop rate of legendary gear and XP/Gold gains.

Pay X number of dollars to boost to the max level.

Maybe Diablo 4 but the keyword from the thread title is "speculates".

@oursin_360: They already have. Others already have. That would be the easiest part to figure out. Just look at what Path of Exile charges for. They could easily make a Diablo where you pay for cosmetic goods.

Diablo I will agree with. If they were sticking with doing another expansion we would of heard something by now (it has been 3 years since Reaper of Souls). Plus the patch/content updates have progressively slowed over the last year. If they aren't working on a D4, I don't know what they are doing.

@mezza: I mean they could do that, but then wouldn't it just be a step back from diablo 3 where all that stuff is free? Like i just don't think it would sit well with fans, definitely wouldn't with me. I feel like getting the look of the armor you grind for is part of the fun, or using the illusionist to make your own look. I just don't think it's going to happen, but i could be wrong.

@oursin_360: I'm not talking transmogs and and armor dyes like D3. Those would still be free. I mean full on cosmetic dlc and character modifications similar to heroes, poe, overwatch, etc. Things that involve extra work because it isn't already built into the game's armor sets. They have wings and wearable flags in D3, yes, but they are few and far between. Most were pre order bonuses or digital deluxe bonuses aside from a few rewards and a rare drops, so technically a good chunk of them weren't free at all. Wings, pets, banners, partical effects, new armor models, etc. With Activision behind them pushing for sustainable games this is a very easy route for them to take, and one that they've already taken in every other current game of theirs.

Anyone predicting Overwatch 2 has no idea what they are talking about. I could see them making a single player Overwatch story game but the multiplayer is going to keep going for years.

Now, I try not to play backseat analyst to anyone whose job it is to understand money. And take this with a grain of salt since I'm such a Blizz fanboy:

This dude is full of shit.

diablo 4 i want. overwatch can eat a dick

I predict the mutual destruction of the great super powers in 2111.

Yep, nailed it. There is basically no reason for OW2 to exist in the foreseeable future.

Diablo 4 is an open secret but it got rebooted last year its awhile away yet. Overwatch 2 could happen at some point but I doubt their making it atm, more likely they'll create something else with the IP.

An analyst job is to predict if the stock will rise or fall, Blizzard will likely announce something new in the next 12-18 months as they've been fairly quite the analyst is just guessing at what it could be.

I even have a hard time seeing Diablo 4 happening. Blizzard is all about those steady revenue streams these days, and while Diablo somewhat has that, it is no where near the stream of money coming from Hearthstone, Overwatch, and World of Warcraft (still). If Blizzard is going to take a crack at anything again, it would be either Starcraft or relaunching Hearthstone as the player base slowly leaves.

But, hey, I could be wrong.

@mezza: as long as it doesn't take away from the aesthetics of the armor you earn i think that is a pretty good idea. But if all the stuff you earn looks basic and they take out the transmog stuff then that would suck.

I juat wish we could just get regular ass games again without the need for f2p revenue systems but those days are over.

Add another 3 to 4 years on that 2020 date and I think we could see another Overwatch.

Warcraft 4 or GTFO