Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

massivelyop.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 557 posts

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

#521

Post by mbesto »

donio wrote: post #293
mbesto wrote: post #86

It's worth noting that this is specific to Blizzard . They have: - an MMO (not a growth area compared to other genres) - a FPS that tried to create a unique twist - a card game that essentially created a new genre (with a commercial ceiling) - remastered classics Compared to the rest of the market that is growing in the following areas: - large mobile presence - MOBA (HotS has been discontinued) - battle Royale

> - MOBA (HotS has been discontinued) Development has certainly slowed down but it's still alive with new content, Hero reworks and balance patches. https://heroespatchnotes.com/patch/summary.html

Good point. I thought they officially announced they were halting feature dev, but I guess it was just dev team cutbacks.

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

#522

Post by david422 »

Jetrel wrote: post #180
david422 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WC3 was my favorite game ever, so much so that I bought multiple copies. I calculated that I probably played so much that my price per hour was a couple of cents. But I didn't buy reforged after how bad it was - and still is. It should have been easy money for them, and instead it was just a half finished money grab.

Ironically, having been a huge WC3 fan; I felt like reforged was great. I bought it, loved it, and am still routinely playing it (in fact, I've picked it up as a semi-regular routine, whereas I'd kinda mostly stopped playing the original). I love the new graphics, the bugs were pretty minor and quickly fixed, and the stuff the community complained about was either irrelevant (complaining about the game being heavier…

I basically only ever played 4v4 RT. So my use case was fairly niche. But after reading about the network issues and watching people play on twitch that only used a custom ladder overlay and didn't even use the updated graphics ... why bother? I was hoping for resurgence in the game and player base, but at this point it's just the original game but worse.

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

#523

Post by dragontamer »

fighterpilot wrote: post #277
TheCapn wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always held that their patch/balance style is what ultimately killed SC2's scene compared to SC1. Just look at how many balance patches were required from SC2 vs. what they applied in SC1. While neither game is perfect IMO, letting the game mature without micromanaging it was a very important aspect of SCBW's success. Instead of mucking with units on a monthly basis they let things simmer and ultimately let bala…

I'm not sure I agree, the balance for pro level has almost no bearing on lower leagues who suck. I think the reason people stopped playing is that it's really really hard (tiring) and it's not a team based game and can get quite lonely.

Even in Starcraft:Brood War days, it was common to learn from stronger players by playing 2v2 (where Strong+Weak player goes up against Strong+Weak player).

Starcraft 2 added "Archon Mode", where you can 2vs1 (Weak+Weak player vs Strong player), controlling the same team. There were far more opportunities to play teams in Starcraft2 than Brood War.

And the 2v2 was always an option in Starcraft 2 anyway.

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

#524

Post by idrios »

nottorp wrote: post #489
bombcar wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The travel system in original WoW is beyond compare; the boats, the blimps and griffins, walking everywhere, finally getting a mount - it worked so well. After that long trek through the mountains to find a flight pint - so worth it. Even with a mount you’d still use the taxis (and the update letting you “travel through” was a good one) because it’d auto steer. Once the hub cities in expansions appeared it all was re…

You mean, the first 200 times you took a flight path? It gets old after a while you know. I remember flying from Darkshore to Gadgetzan took 40 real time minutes where you did absolutely nothing. Do you really have infinite time to play?

I rememeber doing that too, leaving to get dinner, coming back and being still in flight.

But still, if I compare that to hearthing to some location, hopping into a portal, flying to some objective, landing at the marker on my minimap to pick up some item, flying to some quest giver for the reward and then flying away, the latter feels so much more shallow.

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

#525

Post by bombcar »

nottorp wrote: post #489
bombcar wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The travel system in original WoW is beyond compare; the boats, the blimps and griffins, walking everywhere, finally getting a mount - it worked so well. After that long trek through the mountains to find a flight pint - so worth it. Even with a mount you’d still use the taxis (and the update letting you “travel through” was a good one) because it’d auto steer. Once the hub cities in expansions appeared it all was re…

You mean, the first 200 times you took a flight path? It gets old after a while you know. I remember flying from Darkshore to Gadgetzan took 40 real time minutes where you did absolutely nothing. Do you really have infinite time to play?

Yeah, there's a reason they removed it and why people used the shorter portals; but not having hard things with reasons to do them makes the game shallower.

And during those 40 minute hiatuses is when chat discussions would happen (and you'd also plan your questing/travels around that travel time). I'd made some decent money just taking things from the faction auction house to the neutral one and back.

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

#526

Post by bombcar »

idrios wrote: post #524
nottorp wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean, the first 200 times you took a flight path? It gets old after a while you know. I remember flying from Darkshore to Gadgetzan took 40 real time minutes where you did absolutely nothing. Do you really have infinite time to play?

I rememeber doing that too, leaving to get dinner, coming back and being still in flight. But still, if I compare that to hearthing to some location, hopping into a portal, flying to some objective, landing at the marker on my minimap to pick up some item, flying to some quest giver for the reward and then flying away, the latter feels so much more shallow.

Exactly! Would it be nice if I could step outside my door and be in Paris or New York or Mumbai? Sure! But entirely reducing all those aspects "of the grind" strangely makes the grind much more obvious. Dailies dragged on my soul much more than flying between cities.

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

#527

Post by Jackpillar »

void_mint wrote: post #449
jrockway wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Jeff had much involvement in the esports aspect. He seems like he wanted to make a game for casual gamers just having fun with friends, but Activision wanted the sponsorship revenue from an esports league. Despite all odds, they did make something that the best professionals in the world can play, while still being fun for people that have no idea what's going on. I tried to get into Overwatch League, b…

My post wasn't really about esports, but I'm happy to chat about it. Overwatch was built intentionally to be a game that fostered an esports community. Jeff had a big part in the esports aspect of Overwatch in that the game was meant to be their gateway into LoL-esque esports. They wouldn't have made Overwatch at all had they not been interested in getting involved in esports seriously. > I tried to get into Overwatc…

Agree wholeheartedly on the viewing experience. I'm curious as to how the largely unenjoyable viewing experience for an average gamer has to do with OW's dying popularity. I know Twitch isn't the best canary in a coal mine for the popularity of a game but it definitely is one of many signs. OW has had lower viewership than like Rainbow Six and Dead by Daylight and other games who haven't put a billion $$ in funding behind their pro scenes for better part of a year now. Getting absolutely blown out of the water by Fortnite/Valorant/COD/Apex Legends and other games you would consider in their competitive space.

I consider myself to be a pretty heavy gamer, played OW casually in the past but mainly Apex now. I used to go to Blizzard Studios in Burbank to watch OWL with my wife as she was a huge fan (funk pops and all that) and holy shit, even being a causal player of OW, trying to understand what is going on at all times and trying to glean any semblance of "exciting plays" or "clutch moments" from the pro gameplay is virtually impossible. The gameplay is essentially an unintelligible explosion of colors, sounds, and strategies that brings you to the brink of a seizure before ending for indiscernible reasons because it's impossible for the camera to view the important elements of the match at once.

This is in comparison to the popular competitors currently beating them in Twitch viewership above. I watched competitive Apex before playing it and it just made sense. Teams of 3, battle royale, they have different powers, now go survive. Done, easy. Same with COD, Valorant falls inline more with CS:GO which is equally understandable. All of which are proving to have more staying power than OW.

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

#529

Post by confidantlake »

nosianu wrote: post #209
confidantlake wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watch probably 10 hours a week between SC1 and SC2. I have to agree, BW is a much better spectator sport imo. Battles take longer, there are things happening on more on the map ect. But SC2 is still a lot of fun to watch.

I watch both too and I disagree. After a while I have to stop watching SC1 games, I can continue watching SC2 for much much longer. SC1 just gets way too boring. It really is like watching chess, slow and methodical (assuming the perfect control only the top players can achieve in this game, I could not stand watching any less skilled players, other than with SC2). I appreciate the much faster games in SC2. I think S…

Both are great :). I especially like TvT in Sc2. I find it is more interesting than the the SC1 counterpart.

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

#530

Post by void_mint »

Jackpillar wrote: post #527
void_mint wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My post wasn't really about esports, but I'm happy to chat about it. Overwatch was built intentionally to be a game that fostered an esports community. Jeff had a big part in the esports aspect of Overwatch in that the game was meant to be their gateway into LoL-esque esports. They wouldn't have made Overwatch at all had they not been interested in getting involved in esports seriously. > I tried to get into Overwatc…

Agree wholeheartedly on the viewing experience. I'm curious as to how the largely unenjoyable viewing experience for an average gamer has to do with OW's dying popularity. I know Twitch isn't the best canary in a coal mine for the popularity of a game but it definitely is one of many signs. OW has had lower viewership than like Rainbow Six and Dead by Daylight and other games who haven't put a billion $$ in funding b…

Yep. It doesn't help that Overwatch at the pro level looks nothing like ladder play, so even casual players won't see something they understand when watching an OWL match.

I think esports are best suited for games that are slower paced (LoL, DOTA, CS:GO) or easier to understand (CoD, Rocket League). Overwatch is a game that is very fast paced (Dive fights took like, 2 seconds from start to finish), and doesn't really have analogues in real life, so it's harder to connect with or intuit.

Post reply on HN