It's been 426 days

Co-op Missions Discussion
41

This debate seemed to take a different tone almost? What line is crossed to be considered “greed”? Getting paid too much but what is that figure and how does that tie into a hypothetical pay for extra content scenario? (It’s not like we buy maps, the money goes into one executive’s bank account directly).

What’s it matter what their motives are? If you want maps and are willing to pay, why not? If you don’t want to buy then just don’t buy?

If I sell something for a certain price, when said thing has always been free. You are welcome to be suspicious of my motives but the decision to purchase is yours and yours alone.

Why so adamant on convincing others that Blizzard has this nefarious motive for “selling map bundles” that they aren’t even selling.

That’s like saying, “I don’t trust you because so and so (that I don’t personally know) said you are suspicious.”
“Okay…? Did you see him do something?”
“Well no, but we must make sure he isn’t suspicious before we can trust him!”

Now isn’t that kind of thinking weirdly suspicious instead? Just my opinion :roll_eyes:

2 Likes
42

^ This, the side saying Blizzard should sell map packs isn’t saying that they should open this game up to SW Battlefront 2 levels of dreck.

They are saying that if given a choice between not getting anything or having to pay for it, then there is a clear choice.

Put another way, everyone using this forum likes the game, and likes the mode, that’s fairly obvious. We’d all like it to keep expanding. If the status quo says it doesn’t then it will have to change for the mode to stay healthy. Even if, sadly, that means it gets more expensive.

And yeah, I’d be willing to pay more to keep playing new content. Frankly three or so commanders a year is only $20ish, adding $5-10 more is something I wouldn’t mind at all.

1 Like
43

And then you look at what they did to said maps.

44

I hate that map! The feeling of it is also kinda weird.

1 Like
45

I’m not worried about SC2 getting loot boxes. And that was never my point anyway.

Just to be clear about my point on loot boxes here, I was simply saying there are parallels between that and selling maps: Why would there be a price on maps at all? Why are there loot boxes at all? Both boil down to greed more than anything else.

Loot boxes may not happen in SC2 but it gives Blizzard (or anyone else) ideas on how to pursue this elsewhere and that is the bigger problem; that is the slippery slope.

Consider the general state of monetization of gaming at this time and the potential motive becomes clearer.

It’s bad enough that pay-to-win, loot boxes and other purchases are being shoved down players’ throats. Selling maps when they’ve always been free is not just bad optics; it further magnifies their greediness.

What justification does Blizzard have in adding a price to a new map, if that’s they want to do?

Is it because development costs have gone up?
Is there little to no funding for development of new maps?
Is it greed on part of the powers higher up?

Game companies would have you believe that costs have gone up so much that these purchases are necessary. Is that really the case?

When they said maps are free, they drew that line in the sand, that this is the standard going forward. Going with a “take it or leave it” approach to selling maps, it can make it look like you don’t care anymore and have little to no consideration for what the players think, that you have different priorities now. You basically crossed that line and are giving the players a reason to walk away.

When making these sorts of decisions, you must think about what implications this could do for your business. It can’t just be from a purely financial perspective.

46

They made them less interesting. But they can save time by implementing remaining maps without butchery.

47

If there’s no other alternative, sure. But the thing is this isn’t the only possible solution.

One other is that Blizzard could actually not play the bad guy for once and continue what they’ve always done i.e. release new co-op maps for free.

2 Likes
48

You still sound like you are coming from the wrong starting point.

There is no pay to play in sc2. Your entire attitude is based on other games. Nobody here sounds like they are saying, “PLEASE oh please give us stuff so we can pay”.

The whole sentiment is if it gets content out faster, people are open to the idea of paying. And you are not. And that’s fine.

2 Likes
49

No, that’s wrong. My position on this is be careful what you wish for especially in the current climate of gaming monetization.

But is it the right solution? There’s no guarantee that one paid map will lead to another.

You risk alienating or turning away certain players by selling maps when they’ve always been free. How many players are willing to pay as opposed to how many who are not? Will the number of players who pay make up for the cost of development or even turn a profit? How many people could leave if this is ever a thing?

It’s hardly a silver bullet. And there’s more to it than dollar amounts.

4 Likes
50

So it comes full circle doesn’t it.

You with the doom and gloom monetization warning. Meanwhile no practical solution and no new content.

Ultimately we just want to enjoy coop more is all. Nobody is doubting your hardline position on keeping the bling out of the equation. I’m just confused on why you are hard selling the “prophecy hath told thee mula is evil”. I mean you are selling this idea harder than Blizzard selling the map pack (which they are not…).

1 Like
51

Have you heard of the concept of “loss leader”?

It’s where you sell a product at a loss (or give away for free) in the hopes that it attracts new customers and that leads them into buying other products which then could make up for the shortfall created by the first.

Releasing maps for free follows this concept. Free maps show the players that co-op has ongoing support, they have reason to play and if they like what they see, there’s every possibility they could follow this up by spending on paid commanders.

Similar thing with SC2 going free to play. Ladder is made free in the hopes that players spend up on skins, warchest, announcers etc. Dropping the upfront cost makes it more palatable instead of looking like a high entry barrier.

Selling maps can potentially undo that good will.

Because it could backfire badly. And I don’t think those who think selling maps is a good idea have fully thought this through.

And just as well, there hasn’t been an argument as to why it’s a good idea.

4 Likes
52

I get your point, and I (and many others) have gotten your point long long long time ago. Like I said, nobody is particularly disagreeing but it doesn’t change the fact we want new content.

You can recall by scrolling back up to the earlier portion of your discussion. You convincing everyone on the forum means nothing simply due to the limited active members. (Again, 100 at best out of thousands more that play.)

Anyway, this is getting old because you and many others (myself included) are discussing different things. Everyone is correct though. You with your disdain for paying but remain solely focused on potential dangers (but without actual solution). And everyone else wanting content are focused on wanting new content (and again without solutions).

Put it simply, let’s say we ended this discussion by saying “you convinced me, paying for new content is bad”. What then? No new content…

1 Like
53

I did put one solution forward:

Restart what they’ve been doing the whole time. Change whatever mindset they have, pull their fingers out and get back to work.

Is that not a solution?

54

Well no, isn’t that obvious? Your “solution” is just sit tight and wait.

They are already releasing for free. So your “solution” isn’t a solution at all, it’s just no change.

Would you call a solution to Karax’s slow ramp is “he’s good enough no change” as a solution? Imma drop out of this discussion man lol.

There is no “bad guy” btw. If there was one, no offence but you’d be it. Casting Blizzard in a bad light for no reason. (It’d be different if they had map packs to sell, then all your claims would be more valid. As it is, they are free and you are calling them “the bad guys”?)

1 Like
55

My solution isn’t to hope for something to happen.

There’s been no new map for 14 months so either they put the development of new maps on ice or stopped it altogether.

If that’s the case, my solution is to basically redirect resources back towards that. It may take some time but it isn’t sitting tight and waiting hoping for something that may not happen at all.

Poor analogy. My solution is about getting work done not ignoring it.

This is broadly off-topic but are you not aware of some of the shenanigans Blizzard has gotten up to in recent times?

56

In case I’m getting my threads confused, I’ll post again that we have indeed gotten support and updates… updates to COs, updates to maps, Twitch Prime offerings (“free” COs, consoles, skins, decals, emoticons, etc. to go with those), new COs, Warchests with Coop related material.

For somebody starting off: if the next Mission weren’t free, instead of having 3 COs fully available + 14 COs free-to-play until lv5, and 16 Missions. We’ have the same situation for COs, but 15 Missions available, with one additional to purchase. That’s a lot of content to work with from the get-go. Your “doom and gloom” scenario? Let’s say there are now 18 Missions. Players still have 15 to choose from, and the option for 3 more if they pay, one-time for each of them.

Otherwise, I suspect the Coop team getting fewer and fewer is to blame, but they also don’t need as much new content as when we first started out. 6 COs and 6 Missions is far cry from the 17 COs and 15 Missions we have now.

We have… 426 days without a new Mission

I don’t think you’ve thought this through. Your solution is for the Coop dev team to “just do it”. I mean, I guess that could work. Even if it’s another 500 days. TBH, I’m patient. I don’t really have a horse in the race per say, as I still have 4 COs left to level up, and I can easily get another year out of the game replaying all the COs I’ve leveled up last year.

Money is a HUGE incentive for people to do stuff…

There’s also no guarantee that playing the “hurry up and wait” game would lead us anywhere either.

I’ll finish with again… 426+ days

1 Like
57

I just hate the maps which require co-op.

Yes, it is co-op game and I like it, but it is not fun when your teammate is stupid.

For example, they fail to move the truck to neutralize the colossus.

So I never play the mutation when enemy is either immune to your damage or your ally.

58

I should agree. Moreover, that’s why i never play mutations - randoms are pretty strange.
But i hate Raynor. It’s really bad commander. I played him some times, but now i get it - it’s a strange commander…

59

I think CoD is a great map when you want a root canal without anesthesia. Those waves descending from all directions on base while you can’t get back to it are like that drill destroying the nerves of your teeth in the name of fun.

1 Like
60

I do hate the map. You have to pay way more attention compared to most missions, and you get the same amount of experience. Not worth it tbh.

1 Like