Wasn’t referring to your history quote, sorry that you misunderstood that kid. Perhaps I should’ve quoted your first paragraph, so that you could understand what your point was. Which was essentially that corporations should not try to make as much money as possible. And is a somewhat communist point of view bucko. lol.
Im america, we believe that everyone should try to make as much money as they possibly can, because that perpetuates society. It makes people strive to achieve better things.
Bud I know what my point was, you clearly didn’t though.
If you don’t know what it was, how would I, lol. It’s okay buddy.
Was your point that corporations are not people? Even though, they are quite literally a group of people?
I’m trying to figure it out lol
I’m pretty sure you’re trolling me at this point but here’s what I was saying JUST in case you’re being truthful and just… didn’t… get it.
Corporations were originally ILLEGAL in America.
Our founding fathers and people in the 1800’s believed that corporations would be bad, and would hurt people and society at large, and to form a company that large and all encompassing was a detriment to society and business competitionl; it creates monopolies and reduces the health of industries by making everything too monolithic.
‘New York was the first state to enact a corporate statute in 1811 . The Act Relative to Incorporations for Manufacturing Purposes of 1811, allowed for free incorporation with limited liability, but only for manufacturing businesses. New Jersey followed New York’s lead in 1816, when it enacted its first corporate law.’ https ://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/History_of_corporate_law_in_the_United_States
Corporations were seen as bad and they had to make public campaigns so that they could be allowed to form; they had to convince the American Public that they would do things like put money back into the towns in which they existed and counteract the harm they would cause by existing; that’s why corporate charity is such a big deal, it was originally put in place to convince people that they should be allowed to exist.
If you think unfettered capitalism with no restrictions or regulations is ‘the way to go’ for a society, then I hope you enjoy eating radioactive bread with chunks of sawdust in it because that’s what unfettered capitalism gets you.
You should probably look more into what you are talking about before replying because you just made yourself look like a fool.
Overwatch is a subset of Blizzard. Overwatch is not all of Blizzard. You know what was launching in that timeline you cited: Hearthstone’s renewed popularity generating more revenue and WoW somehow having record revenue (I have no idea how this is the case but considering lying in a shareholder meeting is a crime I can just accept it for now and I know WoW has some creative ways for Blizzard to make money), and then you add in the smaller profit centers like OW and HotS and the comp leagues and you have Blizzard’s userbase.
So yes you are arguing from a point of silliness.
When it is trivial for your average player to get everything they want without spending money, then money does not get spent. Overwatch WAS successful monetarily for the first year to 18 months while fresh game sales existed and the loot box model was not exactly player friendly. Now neither of those is true anymore. For context of how bad the dropoff was: in the first 7 months of release Overwatch generated almost 600 million in revenue. 3 years after release it crossed the 1 billion mar and that last 400 million almost assuredly continued in the same downward trend.
I don’t understand how this is a point.
Do you know how many things in history were originally considered bad, then accepted and have turned out to be fantastic things?
I mean, you’re almost making my point that corporations are great, since they have since become accepted and the basis of society in todays world.
… Yeah, good job Sherlock, that’s why I said
Because the info that I saw in all the business news from Yong Yeah and other gaming news sources a while back when they were talking about this was literally breaking down how much each BLIZZARD GAME brings in; and while I do remember Hearthstone being at the top of the heap, I also remember Overwatch squarely beating out World of Warcraft and Starcraft. And this was after OW was at least 3 if not 4 years old.
So Overwatch was making more money than WoW and Starcraft by a large margin at least 3-4 years after launch; clearly it’s not the bleeding horse you’re trying to paint it out to be.
And I’m not sure where I ever said there should be no regulations? Could you point that part out
That’s not the point I’m making; I’m not saying ‘it was bad once so it’s bad forever’, jesus where are they teaching you kids.
I’m saying; corporations were seen as potentially dangerous, and now that we are living in a constant corporate quagmire where they are trying to get infinitely more profits to the point where we have Amazon workers dying and being ignored in warehouses because it’d hurt profits, then maybe we, as humans, should reassess if we think that’s acceptable?
It’s called having basic ethics and morals…
Well, literally your argument is founded on, “because a long time ago corporations had to prove that they would be okay, they are bad.”
Learn how to make a point.
IF THIS IS YOUR POINT, SAY IT.
Your ability to express an opinion is amazingly bad. But yes, I can understand and agree with the point you’ve finally made after 18 posts.
Also, lol. I thought it was just assumed that corporations shouldn’t be whipping employees in warehouses. However, charging a little extra for skins on a video game I find to be perfectly acceptable and even encouraged, if it means developers will keep updating.
I would check your source on that because your source is almost certainly wrong. Blizzard rarely gives out specific game information unless milestones are hit which is how I was able to tell you that it took 3 years for OW to hit 1 billion and 7 months to hit almost 600 million because both of those were milestones (year end and 3 year gross). This would also imply, somehow, that somehow WoW is generating under 200 million a year in revenue which is kind of impossible considering their known sub count and the cost of a sub and that is BEFORE looking at the extra purchases.
I just hope they won’t start locking PVE talents behind paywalls like Borderlands 3 does.
OW1 lootboxes are super consumer friendly so I think we can kiss easy to obtain skins goodbye the moment OW2 launches.
Man all of this f2p is the solution to content posts. Some f2p games have generated more content to get ppl to come back, with them spending money to get said content but there is also a large number of games that don’t add real content and are f2p making tons of revenue. cosmetics are not what I’d call real content. New missions, new modes, new chars. That’s content.
OW paid for itself, it’s been highly profitable for the cost to make it. Some of these arguments are a fallacy in that it is comparing a very much traditional game (a one purchase to get everything.) vs the multiple transaction game where $120 is needed to access the same content I paid for the $60 game (as in the whole thing upfront). The biggest argument I hear is people want more heroes. okay Is more heroes necessarily good? This isn’t league. We honestly want a huge influx of more heroes when the balance team is working of what we have to get right. Heroes will get left in the dust.
To each their own but I personally hope Blizz sticks with the traditional game model.
If I’m to believe to complaints about smurfing everyday on here…plenty still 
You’ll also make 10x as well if it launches with a pay up front model….new games make money……
but I’m not arguing that you won’t make more money with f2p models….the whole reason they exist is because they make more money….
I’m just saying people are being taken for suckers if they really believe it’s done that way because it HAS to be done that way or that we will be better off because of it
It’s not done in the interest of the consumers
New games do make money but you also have ZERO reason to add content to a pay up front model because the money is already taken. Sure you can add content for about a year but at that point what you asking for for is the yearly CoD model where a new barely different game comes out every year and that is how you play OW which I am sure could work but they went with the model that gets more active users.
The suckers, as you put it, are the people who think that this is not a much better approach when it comes to getting content. Right now there is again zero reason for Blizzard to make content. Nobody really buys lootboxes and without the buying of lootboxes the content they make is just throwing money away. With a F2P BP model suddenly the content you make has a direct financial incentive to succeed. They make content because making content creates income and we play the game because it gets more content.
This also incentivizes maximizing the player count which again OW currently has zero incentive to do.
So can you tell me about the computer game business you run?
I don’t, it’s getting out of hand. Valorant did something similar, the prices are ridiculous.
Developers didn’t need to do that before in order to be successful. Personally I dislike this “new” way of doing things. When I played LoL at first I didn’t have much of an issue, but after some time and when I realized how much money I had payed for skins I started to have better conscience of it, they made this system in order to exploit players as much as possible.
I understand that it makes a lot of money but I’m not sure that is a good thing in the long run. I think this system is eventually going to collapse because it has no balance, it’s the companies trying to milk players as much as possible and that is not going to end well for both parties. It may take a while but I do think that’s where this is all heading and it’s not going to be pretty.
I dont agree or like these systems, im just saying that games that adopted these system are far more successful than OW currently is.
And im not just talking about money. Successful as in massive amounts of players playing those games.
And the reason for that is they have free to play modes. And with F2P comes some type of microtransactions.
Like I said i prefer the old way but i doubt Activision/Blizzard hasnt taken notice to these new methods and wants in on the action.