Live data from Hacker News

Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

massivelyop.com

381–390 of 557 posts

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#381

What I don't understand is the financial equation around AAA studios like Blizzard. Our software company is not even 10 people big and we are able to deliver extremely high quality software multiple times per day to many customers, while supporting a wide range of business contexts. The annual budget for our whole team is something like $750k. Our part of the AWS bill is less than $400/m, but we seem to make due and…

> Spin out tens or hundreds of smaller teams with their own independent creative direction to try out new ideas. My impression is that big game studios would rather put all their eggs in one basket where they're (fairly) certain they can make a decent return rather than spreading it around a bunch of smaller projects and hoping one of them turns out to be Minecraft. This is the same dynamic driving large movie studio…

On the flipside of that, Blumhouse is one of the highest ROI film production companies out there

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#382

I can't say what's driving all the playerbase losses but: They stopped development on Diablo 3 a long time ago. It doesn't have the staying power of more modern online games where new content is added continuously. They stopped development on HotS, which never achieved the same level of pull as League of Legends. Overwatch faces stiff competition from Valorant and other competitive small team FPSes, and also has over…

> The RTS genre writ large is definitely in a waning phase.

I've been longing for a good RTS for a long time. Give me something like Lords of the realm 2, C&C Generals, Future Cop: LAPD (ps1) plz.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#383

"Do you guys not have phones?" -Blizzard staff in 2018, in response to booing fans upset that Blizzard wouldn't make a PC version of a game those same fans obviously wanted to play. This company has been contemptuous of their players for years. They fell into that classic trap of "If we [do something that will alienate all our customers] we can get 10x as many customers from [untapped market]" As anybody should have…

I feel like it's relevant to mention how huge Hearthstone is, and that's a mobile first game (at its best on iPad which is rare) that I feel is totally Blizzard tier quality with expected polish and substance to it, and both satisfied a lot of Blizzard fans + successfully tapped into that 10x market. There's fair criticism to how it monetizes but it still dominates its category for a reason, they continue to own it l…

Both of those were fine in the beginning. HS became impossible to play without endless grinding or spending money. Overwatch became tedious and toxic, due to both the players and how the developers responded (spamming in-game voicelines is now "toxic").

I think people just got fed up with online trading card games and the grind/monetization that they have. At least with MTG I can resell the cards... In fact MTG online with cockatrice is way more fun than HS or any of the other clones.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#384

I can't say what's driving all the playerbase losses but: They stopped development on Diablo 3 a long time ago. It doesn't have the staying power of more modern online games where new content is added continuously. They stopped development on HotS, which never achieved the same level of pull as League of Legends. Overwatch faces stiff competition from Valorant and other competitive small team FPSes, and also has over…

add to that their foray into Mobile gaming (ignoring their main player base), as well as the controversy around Hong Kong.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#385
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the notable thing about the Starcraft 2 pro scene is the age of some of the new up-and-coming players. Reynor is 18, and Clem is 17. They're clearly not coming to the game for the nostalgia. I think the uptick in challenge youtube videos is also no coincidence. These are games where there's depth in terms of acquirable skills, and there's definitely interest in the community for displays of mastery in these t…

Yeah, definitely. A lot/most of the top pros and commentators have been playing since the start of SC2 and often since early SC1, so all these new, young players are a huge breath of fresh air. They're growing up on a metagame that's been forming for a decade and putting their own creative spin on things, in addition to probably having a bit of a speed and reflex advantage. Reynor's keyboard cam is often pretty insan…

SC1 and AOE2, have more streamers and events than 3-5 years ago from my Twitch browsing. Both games that are more than two decades old. Really shows the staying power of the RTS genre IMO, sure it's some nostalgia, but there have been remakes and an upcoming AOE4 sequel too.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#386
post #346
post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is missing from the title is that revenue is up. They are wringing more cash out of fewer players. This could be aggressive monetisation driving people away, either directly due to how it feels or indirectly due to dev resources pushed into fancy hats instead of core content. The article does say that Shadowlands and WoW Classic carried the torch for revenue. One is old-Blizzard quality I guess, the other pretty…

The monetization in WoW is pretty invisible. Many games have a core of players who love playing no matter what and don't mind buying whatever new thing pops up on the store. Everquest 2 is such a game. It is basically dead in terms of attracting new players, but people who love playing it have been keeping the parent company afloat for a while. IIRC, WoW and EQ2 came out at the same time. I can easily see Blizzard ha…

Well the monthly sub is quite clear, as well as paid expansions. Which I'm a fan of (I play FFXIV a bit). Otherwise, there's no clear price signal.

In f2p or bolted on cash shops like FFXIV I'm always wondering, should I buy some mtx? I don't really want to encourage them too much. I don't know what is reasonable to spend to keep the game afloat, I don't want to feel like a leech, but I really have no interest in cosmetics. I don't know if buying or not buying sends a stronger signal to them to spend more effort on mtx rather than the game - sometimes it just seems like all roads lead that way.

FFXI is in a similar state to EQ2 I'd guess, it only has the monthly sub but a really hardcore base who's still there (or dips their toes back in like I did for a bit) after all these years. It still gets minor monthly updates and probably has a nice ROI for the effort.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#387

I can't say what's driving all the playerbase losses but: They stopped development on Diablo 3 a long time ago. It doesn't have the staying power of more modern online games where new content is added continuously. They stopped development on HotS, which never achieved the same level of pull as League of Legends. Overwatch faces stiff competition from Valorant and other competitive small team FPSes, and also has over…

> don’t you have phones? Blizzard isn’t the same company it once was. It used to be known for deep gameplay and creative stories but now it’s focused entirely on the free to play skinners boxes of card games, a mmo, and loot boxes to monetize the other games. Almost the entire early-days staff has moved on to other companies. Blizzard doesn’t exist any more, just a big corporation with the same name

Ain't this the truth. Most of the OG Blizzard team members have left; it is nowhere near the company that made Warcraft, Diablo, Blackthorne, Starcraft et al.

The writing was on the wall with Diablo 3's item market. D3 itself is just... Forgettable?

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Power spikes are moments in the design of the game where one player/character is really powerful relative to another player / character. Sometimes in League of Legends heroes are designed to be kind of weak at the start or strong at the end. Sometimes a character is just really strong relative to others for a period of time because you unlock a power before the counters are unlocked, or you purchase a powerful item.…

Surely that's exactly what overwatch ultimates are?

They aren't optional power spikes, so the strategy/engagements are predictable from the moment the team composition is revealed.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#389
post #73

I can't say what's driving all the playerbase losses but: They stopped development on Diablo 3 a long time ago. It doesn't have the staying power of more modern online games where new content is added continuously. They stopped development on HotS, which never achieved the same level of pull as League of Legends. Overwatch faces stiff competition from Valorant and other competitive small team FPSes, and also has over…

Diablo 3 was pretty bad imo, clearly targeting consoles. Path of Exile is a much more faithful sequel to Diablo 2 and has a very active player base. It’s almost like if Valve gave it the same treatment they gave dota2.

I prefer Grim Dawn, myself.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you have a warped view of how the MMR/SR systems function essentially all that matters is your win-rate, if you can win more than 50% of your games over a reasonable stretch of time your MMR will increase and your SR will follow it performance based SR is only a very small bonus (up-to diamond) initial placement is essentially a guess: over 25 or so games your MMR will converge to where you're supposed to be (4200 su…

I don’t think I have a warped view of SR. Yes the idea that you win more than 50%, you’ll eventually get there is flawed. Especially in lower ranks where there’s an overcrowding of salty folks who leave, throw, smurf, pick heroes not based on need and just straight up don’t play the objective. I agree that the logic works at higher ranks, but it simply doesn’t at lower ranks. Performance based SR is important for low…

Even in lower ELOs each team should have, on average, the same amount of trolls, leavers, etc. Actually, if you can guarantee that you aren't one of those people, then there are X slots on the enemy team that might be a joker and X-1 slots on your team, so the odds should favor you.
Post reply on HN