By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JaggedSac on 13 October 2009
Edit Thread
shio said:
Ail said:
shio said:
vlad321 said:
ph4nt said:
vlad321 said:
Maybe one day BLizzard will ditch the idiots that are Activision and join up with Valve for a super independent studio that is the bet in all major genres, FPS, RTS, RPG.

While legally Blizzard and Activision are one company. Activision has absolutely no effect on what Blizzard does / wants to do.

Activision's boss is still over BLizzard's, also Blizzard has started doing some really bullshit things ever since the merger.

So far I haven't seen anything out of the ordinary from Blizzard. The only thing that is arguable is the fact that there's 2 expansions, but reason will easily tell you that it's better to have each campaign seperate and complete, than butchered into pieces. I really don't see what's wrong about that.

This is the best time to be a Blizzard fan (Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, Cataclysm, Battle.net 2.0).

Untamoi said:
vlad321 said:
ph4nt said:
vlad321 said:
Maybe one day BLizzard will ditch the idiots that are Activision and join up with Valve for a super independent studio that is the bet in all major genres, FPS, RTS, RPG.

While legally Blizzard and Activision are one company. Activision has absolutely no effect on what Blizzard does / wants to do.

Activision's boss is still over BLizzard's, also Blizzard has started doing some really bullshit things ever since the merger.

They start doing them before the merger. For example splitting Starcraft II to a trilogy was announced before the merger. Blizzard can do bullshit things without  Activision.

I absolutely approve the trilogy. Starcraft 2 will be a game that will be played for atleast 10 years before Starcraft 3 comes.

i don't understand why you're outraged about the expansions - Blizzard has always released their expansions one year after the release of the main game. Starcraft got Brood War a year after. Same with Diablo 2 getting Lord of Destruction. Same with Warcraft 3 getting Frozen Throne. The only difference between SC2 and the rest is that SC2 has 2 expansions instread of 1.

Blizzard not being independent didn't stop them from making amazing games and keeping independent management-wise.

Games for Windows is the bumhole of Online Services. It has the worst reputation and Microsoft tried to rip off PC gamers with a subscription that gives you nothing in trade. Steam is completely free and CRUSHES Games For Windows in almost everything.

"Steam and Battlenet and just attempts to copy XboxLive and PSN"

HOLY F#*KING S#*T!!!! You really believe that?! Steam RAPES both Xbox Live and PSN at the same time!! How the hell can you even say something like that?!

Dude, Steam has over 20 million costumers! I myself have like 40 games bought on Steam. Valve is cruising past everyone, and rapes both Xbox Live and PSN in terms of profit.


There's more than 20 millions customers on either  XBoxLive or PSN.

Both offer things like achievements and trophies and Steam have no equivalent.

You're deluding yourself, On January of this year there were only 17 millions Xbox Live accounts, and probably only half of those are gold subascription. Steam already had 20 millions costumers in January.  So at that time, it was 20 millions on Steam vs 8-9 millions with XBLG. Yeah...

As for PSN, I'm sure it has alot accounts, since people can easily make tons of accounts from their PS3, PSP or PC. The thing is, I'm sure Sony makes nowhere near what Valve makes on Steam. Hell, Sony probably makes even less than MS does with XBL.

Steam has achievements, and other far better gaming related stuff.

What does being a Gold member have to do with anything?  Based on your comments, digital distribution sales determine what is better, and Silver members have access to download anything that Gold members do.  And if we are basing it on total number of people playing online, I would hate to post some stats on those things, because it would not turn out good for Steam.