How good is Blizzard?

@Dany said:

How is Diablo 3 new and re-inventive? Answer me that.

I could ask the same question about so many other games, like Mass Effect 3, Gears of War 3, God of War 3, Halo 4.

Edit: how the fuck could i leave out COD games.

They're ok. Those first Warcraft games were pretty good.

@Ben_H said:

@laserbolts said:

@Kaiserreich said:

@giyanks22: I said in my opinion. And I haven't played D3 because I refuse to support Blizzards shitty DRM.

Seems like a pretty dumb reason to miss out on a great game. So in say 5 years you are just going to be done with gaming?

Just what I was thinking when I read that, since always-connected DRM will be the future. Given that probably 75% of my game playing time is devoted to Blizzard games, I would say they seem pretty good. They support their games better than any other company, even if it sometimes can be a bit slow. They have fixed a huge number of complaints in SC2, and continue to almost 2 years into the game's life. HOTS basically fixes every major issue people have with the game.

I feel that's what's wrong with gaming and consumers. A large part of the consumer base accepts what's thrown at them by a beloved developer and bought by their own money, no matter how harmful the software might be (DRM), and ends up cherishing it, and attacking the people with a different opinion. That's what evolves gaming and takes it in a direction contrary to improving the quality of the experience, making it a little bit worse each time it happens.

Personally I stopped acquiring Blizzard games at Warcraft 3, and don't see myself buying anymore for now. There a lot of developers that stand above Blizzard for me, like Remedy, CD Projekt RED, Rockstar, Naughty Dog, Atlus, Visceral Games...

Their games don't do anything for me, but I can't dispute that they're one of the best in the business.  They're fantastic at keeping their fans happy.  It's pretty incredible that they manage to make commercial success with PC exclusives look so easy while everybody else makes it look so difficult.  Granted, the WoW money gives them the luxury of time that most others can't afford, but it's still impressive how they're bossing three different genres to the point that they have no significant competition in any of them.

It's pretty great that Activision didn't completely fuck them up. Take note, EA and Bioware!

My interest in their games have waned over the years. But I can't deny that they have been consitantly commercially and critically acclaimed.

@Kaiserreich said:

In my opinion, they make boring games(SC2/WOW) and shitty DRM(D3).

Definite flame bait right here.

They make polished games, but they seemingly don't take a lot of risks, which I guess is understandable when they make as much money doing what they are doing.

@Dany:

Try unlocking skills? I can't think of a more innovative rpg move in the last 10 years.

@Dagbiker said:

@Ben_H said:

@laserbolts said:

@Kaiserreich said:

@giyanks22: I said in my opinion. And I haven't played D3 because I refuse to support Blizzards shitty DRM.

Seems like a pretty dumb reason to miss out on a great game. So in say 5 years you are just going to be done with gaming?

Just what I was thinking when I read that, since always-connected DRM will be the future. Given that probably 75% of my game playing time is devoted to Blizzard games, I would say they seem pretty good. They support their games better than any other company, even if it sometimes can be a bit slow. They have fixed a huge number of complaints in SC2, and continue to almost 2 years into the game's life. HOTS basically fixes every major issue people have with the game.

I can only speak for my self, and I have no problem with DRM. And in some cases always on DRM. But this game isnt a good enough game to get me to buy into their system.

isn't a good enough game? Figures from someone who doesn't own it, you have been a TL2 fanboy since before the DL3 beta and before the TL2 beta. Best wishes on your bubble never popping.

They're one of those companies that seem isolated quality-wise, like Valve or Rockstar. Consistently making great games that are different but from a production standpoint still feels like a game from the same company. It's like they're not just running a business for a quick and easy buck, but actually care about the product they're putting out there, not just on the product-quality level, but from a overall brand perspective too. Like they actually want their name to be associated with quality vidjya gaming. Well that's the impression I get anyway.

@AndrewB said:

Tie between Blizzard and Valve for first.

This. There's really no one on the same tier as those two. It's a level all their own.

They aren't just the collective community has next to no standards when it comes to them. Seriously, other than multiplayer what does Diablo 3 do better than Torchlight.... .... .... I am having a hard time thinking of anything here.... Art? Blizzard is a company driven by the power of the fanboi and boring ass remakes of a game they made 10+ years ago. Their new mmo Titan will probably just be WoW with better graphics and even more dumbed down combat. That is the trend so far anyway with all their games save Starcraft which only left off the dumbed down combat part.

@gamefreak9 said:

@Dagbiker said:

@Ben_H said:

@laserbolts said:

@Kaiserreich said:

@giyanks22: I said in my opinion. And I haven't played D3 because I refuse to support Blizzards shitty DRM.

Seems like a pretty dumb reason to miss out on a great game. So in say 5 years you are just going to be done with gaming?

Just what I was thinking when I read that, since always-connected DRM will be the future. Given that probably 75% of my game playing time is devoted to Blizzard games, I would say they seem pretty good. They support their games better than any other company, even if it sometimes can be a bit slow. They have fixed a huge number of complaints in SC2, and continue to almost 2 years into the game's life. HOTS basically fixes every major issue people have with the game.

I can only speak for my self, and I have no problem with DRM. And in some cases always on DRM. But this game isnt a good enough game to get me to buy into their system.

isn't a good enough game? Figures from someone who doesn't own it, you have been a TL2 fanboy since before the DL3 beta and before the TL2 beta. Best wishes on your bubble never popping.

Thats not true at all. Why did you feel the need to attack me, as opposed to my argument?

@Dany said:

How is Diablo 3 new and re-inventive? Answer me that.

I could ask the same question about so many other games, like Mass Effect 3, Gears of War 3, God of War 3, Halo 4.

Edit: how the fuck could i leave out COD games.

From what I can tell, you can always expect a Blizzard game to have exceptional gameplay supported by a consistent art direction and a great level of polish/presentation.

They are one of the best.

But they are starting to push it with the no LAN on starcraft 2 and constant online on Diablo 3.

I was going to say give any team a decade to make a fairly simple game and they'll shine you up a real gem, but it's obviously not that easy. There's some smart and strong leaders at Blizzard, and this shows in their products, particularly SCII and D3. They don't really do anything new, but they do what they do really well. Everything they do seems to be really tightly designed and tends to work (for the most part) flawlessly. That's as far as I'd go with praise for them though; I've gotten more enjoyment from less polished games.

Personally I'd rank Blizzard as my number one game company.

You shouldn't go there expecting innovation, but all of Blizzards games (since Warcraft: Orcs and Humans at least) have always been of high quality.

@Dany said:

@pornstorestiffi

@Dany said:

How is Diablo 3 new and re-inventive? Answer me that.

I could ask the same question about so many other games, like Mass Effect 3, Gears of War 3, God of War 3, Halo 4.

Edit: how the fuck could i leave out COD games.

Those are iterative with short dev times of only 2 years or a little more. Having by played a diablo game before this I'm just curious as to why people are giving blizzard a free pass

A free pass to what? taking 11 years go make? they don't need a free pass for that, that is totally legit. If they feel like they want to polish the game that much, they have the right to do so. People can bitch and moan about that as they see fit. Blizzard knows that people will buy it regardless of how long its been in development. Sort of like any COD fan will buy a sequel that has taken a year to make, adding nothing to the mix.

Or maybe i don't get what your saying.

@Lagaroth said:

Decent games, awful everything else. Edit: Oh, on the games. Chris Metzen really needs to stop writing or find someone who can to help him. (Not Knaak.)

I love Metzen's ideas, but his writing really is terrible.

@Kaiserreich said:

@laserbolts: Ok how about this, I'm not going support a company that makes moves I see as bad for the industry. The fact that you can lag out of a single-player game is unacceptable and seeing so many people blindly support it because the game is good is sad. They haven't stopped the pirates and they aren't gonna.

They may not have stopped the pirates but they've stopped the exploiters, bots, and spammers from impacting legitimate customers. I realize that DRM in any form is a deal-breaker for some people, and I can respect that. But requiring an internet connection wasn't just Blizzard screwing people over to deter pirates for awhile. It has a positive benefit for those who are willing to put up with it.

@Rolyatkcinmai said:

@AndrewB said:

Tie between Blizzard and Valve for first.

This. There's really no one on the same tier as those two. It's a level all their own.

That's because they're the only two large devs who aren't bound by the bullshit sequel-a-year industry. Activision has thankfully given Blizzard free reign to do whatever because the WoW-cow still keeps producing delicious money-milk and Valve is beholden to nobody but Valve (though recent interviews make it seem like everyone there has a crippling DOTA2 addiction). It's telling that the two giants who are essentially outside the rat race continue to make games that dominate the top of the pile.

They eliminate the room for failure by only releasing a new iteration of their three franchises every 10-ish years. If all studios had that much time and money to spend, we'd see a lot better portfolios overall.

They don't really do anything drastically inventive with their games. The things they make are obviously very polished and are refined or slightly retooled versions of their previous games, keeping nostalgia intact and integrating modern features almost seamlessly. While they're very skillful craftspeople, I don't expect any revolutionary ideas to appear in their games.

Blizzard and Valve are basically the best PC developers. Blizzard's recent games has been plagued with some problems (especially their writing team seems to have gone to shit), but they're games are still exceptional.

You know what the two have in common? Taking a long ass time to make games. WHERE'S MAH EPISODE THREE VALVE.

No company makes games with hooks as nefariously powerful as Blizzard. And while they may not appear to be particularly innovative on the surface, anyone who has a deeper appreciation for game systems and mechanics will notice the myriad small ways they are moving their chosen genres and the industry forward.

I don't feel like I am member of their targeted audience any more. Other than that, even though games they create are really polished, but I do not believe they deserve praise they get. 

@gamefreak9 said:

@Dany:

Try unlocking skills? I can't think of a more innovative rpg move in the last 10 years.

I don't know about most innovative rpg move in general but I know that no dungeon crawling game has had half as much innovation as DIablo 3. At least not since D2.

@TentPole: Whats so special about diablo 3 that makes all the games that been released between diablo 2 and diablo 3 bad?

@Dany: Honestly? I wouldn't say it has much innovation at all to be frank. And all the games released in between diablo 2 and 3 are not bad either. Diablo 3 has simply learnt from these games and has spent a long time making an extremely well polished game.

I think they're in the top two with Valve. Probably first.

@Dany said:

@TentPole: Whats so special about diablo 3 that makes all the games that been released between diablo 2 and diablo 3 bad?

They are not bad. Diablo just does far more with the formula than these other games:

• Torchlight
• Titan Quest
• Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance (and the other Snowblind games)
• Dungeon Siege
• X-men Legends/Marvel Alliance
• Shining Soul 1 & 2 (1 is mediocre but 2 is fantastic)
• Divine Divinity (in my opinion the game that comes closest to giving Diablo the run fot it's money)
• Dungeon Siege
• Sacred 1/2 (I think 2 is kind of a bad game)

For the most part these games are genuinely great.

And it is easy to say Diablo 3 does nothing new without taking into account how stagnant the genre has been since Diablo 2. Can you name a game in the genre that does more new things to mix up the genre than Diablo 3 has?

So, I guess it's Blizzard this week, huh? At least it's a change from the EA / Activision / Capcom / Ubisoft threads.

Anyway, they're good, I guess. I say this as seemingly one of the 1% of the developed world who has a decent internet connection. Then again:

• A decade between games in a franchise;
• Working on a deadline seems to be completely alien to them;

But, no one's perfect. And for all their polish, the voice work in the game goes from passable to absolutely atrocious.

@laserbolts said:

@Kaiserreich said:

@giyanks22: I said in my opinion. And I haven't played D3 because I refuse to support Blizzards shitty DRM.

Seems like a pretty dumb reason to miss out on a great game. So in say 5 years you are just going to be done with gaming?

Consumer power is all we got in this day and age (especially in the gaming industry), so I don't think you can invalidate his reasons for not playing the game. In fact you should support his reason.

Always online is not somewhere lot of people want gaming to go. So I hope that there could be more people like him out there.

With that said, The game is kinda fun, but I like D2 more. (I played the D3 beta and have been playing on a friends account).

Blizzard is just very meticulous about what they release, nothing new but very well researched, kinda like Apple.

@Majkiboy said:

@laserbolts said:

@Kaiserreich said:

@giyanks22: I said in my opinion. And I haven't played D3 because I refuse to support Blizzards shitty DRM.

Seems like a pretty dumb reason to miss out on a great game. So in say 5 years you are just going to be done with gaming?

Consumer power is all we got in this day and age (especially in the gaming industry), so I don't think you can invalidate his reasons for not playing the game. In fact you should support his reason.

Always online is not somewhere lot of people want gaming to go. So I hope that there could be more people like giyanks22 out there.

With that said, The game is kinda fun, but I like D2 more. (I played the D3 beta and have been playing on a friends account).

Blizzard is just very meticulous about what they release, nothing new but very well researched, kinda like Apple.

Fear of change seems like a pretty dumb reason to miss out on a great game. So in 5 years is he just going to be done with gaming?

They're pretty high up there, not a fan of wow personally, but I understand what they're doing and that they're doing it well.

they are pretty good developers, but i have only played wow. i don't like RTS games, i find them boring.

@TentPole: Not buying into one companies shitty DRM is fear of change? What a stupid assumption.

I don't really like blizzard games, I feel as if they lack soul. For example Wow was dull and uninspired even for its time. But their games as pure product are objectively "great".

Its like the guys there are scientists working on achieving maximum addictive game play loops and they really don't seem to give a shit about anything else. It's cool if you dig playing a game for the the probability of getting a virtual pellet every 6 to ten clicks on a mouse button, but that's really not for me.

That being said the lost vikings was dope, as was WC2 and to a lesser degree SC.

Still one of the best, but not as good as they used to be.

Blizzard are a consistently high quality developer, but seriously they need to learn from their lessons. The launch of Diablo 3 as yet again proven to me that they need to be better prepared if they want to implement online components into their games. I'm not their biggest fan, but appreciate their qualities. 

They are the stable and boring Volvo to the exciting and janky Ferrari of, for example, Obsidian.

@Vodun: I am not sure I would call a Ferrari janky

I've always enjoyed Blizzard's games. There's so much polish on their games and they're always fun to play. I'm still playing SC2 years later and having a blast. Need to pick up D3 when I have some more time and some more money.

I have played quite a few blizzard games over my live Rock n Roll Racing and Lost Vikings were a staple of my childhood gaming, Warcraft 3 and Diablo 2 in my early adult life and a crippling addiction to wow in my 20s and all of these games have been of the highest quality, not only that but they are genuinely classics in there respective genres in my eyes, every game i play now i still compare to these games.

I see alot of people calling world of warcraft dumbed down, sure they reduced the amount of different stats and made changes to the system but back in burnign crusade before they made these changes i could play as my mage and cast two spells over and over again and be at the top of the dps chart or heal a raid without ever worrying about mana on my druid. In cata playing the mage is much more about managing cooldowns and consistent use of several abilities and as a healer its much more difficult to manage my mana.

It's kind of funny, when I was a kid I though Blizzard was amazing. I was always a pc gamer first, and in the span of like 3 years Blizzard released Warcraft, Diablo and Starcraft. It really just seemed like they churned out great new games non stop. 15 years later though, and they haven't come out with a single new IP. I don't mind sequels that build on series, lord knows I played a bunch of Ultima games. But those all evolved in leaps and bounds. I couldn't even put up with Starcraft 2 because it was so primitive feeling, I will say though I enjoyed the new Diablo, but I just can't agree that Blizzard is one of the best in the business (unless you are into MMO's). If you had asked me in like 1998 though, sure.

They consistently produce games that are good quality. So yeah, they are pretty good.

Yeah, I'm with the majority of people here that would say Blizzard and Valve are tops. I think Nintendo used to be on that level as well, but they definitely hit that less consistently these days.

Not to discount the quality of their games, or their tremendous experience, but I think that everybody gives them too much credit. They throw ridiculous amounts of money at every game they make and then playtest it and iterate it for far longer than almost any other studio has the means to do. Of course their games are polished. I'd like to see what other studios could do if they had the resources and freedom that someone like Blizzard has.

They can polish games to a mirror sheen that's for sure. Innovation isn't their strong point though. While their games do get streamlined they are incredibly archaic gameplay wise (Diablo 3 being the biggest offender.) They used to be great but they've kind of of fallen from that point. They're a good company but certainly not the best. Far from it.

While I think Blizzard are phenomenal, and I own and love all of their games, they are getting into a bit of a rut, in terms of their creative output. A little like Valve, their games feel (and I know it's a peculiar complaint) a little too play-tested. They are extremely polished pieces of entertainment, but they don't feel like the raw, relentless games that they used to make (Starcraft 1, Lost Vikings, Diablo 2). Even with Warcraft 3, the art, music, and core gameplay was so honed (and only became more so over the years) that there was almost no room for them to fail. But It was also slightly too comfortable.

Hell, I don't know.

I've put hours and hours (and hours) into Starcraft 2, am just getting into Diablo 3, and I'll agree that they are some of the best games on the market... BUT,

...

Maybe a new IP will give them an opportunity to take more risks. They are in a great position to try out new ideas, because they have a ridiculous fan-base that will absorb whatever they release. On the other side of the coin - as revealed with Diablo 3 - that community will tear them to pieces if what they release is anything less than pristine. So I guess... Blizzard are kinda trapped.