23 ms·

Blizzard Postpones World of Warcraft 15th Anniversary Event in Taiwan

387 points by ilamont 7y ago

LegitShady 7y ago
Hilarious. If rather these guys go out of business that have them enforce Chinese political censorship on the west. I have no use for companies that undermine basic freedoms for money. All while virtue signalling in the west. Get out of business blizzard. The freedoms that allow you to exist are more valuable than your existence.
- bilbo0s 7y ago
  They can go out of business tomorrow, you just need to stop buying their products. So telling Blizzard to go out of business is useless, you need to tell all the people buying Blizzard products to stop doing so. Directing messages at these companies is like speaking English to a Senegalese kid who only speaks Wolof and maybe a bit of French. The kid is just not even gonna make out what you're talking about. You affect their quarterly results, that's when you're speaking the language these companies understand.
  - asdfman123 7y ago
    The problem is that China is a country of a billion people, many of whom are rapidly entering the global middle class, so many companies depend on those new customers to hit their growth targets. Companies growing so that they can be worth more when their investors sell them is the whole point of businesses in general. It's the reason we all go to work every day.
    - solipsism 7y ago
      many companies depend on those new customers to hit their growth targets That's a choice. Companies growing so that they can be worth more when their investors sell them is the whole point of businesses Also a choice. Companies are accountable for their choices. Accountable to their shareholders and to their customers. When those groups aren't aligned, then you're in a tough spot. You might wind up with a new set of shareholders or a new set of customers.
      - freeopinion 7y ago
        Or no customers and no shareholders.
    - baq 7y ago
      greed is good until it isn't and some people, me included, think the line has been crossed here. or, in other words, if the chinese customers can only be serviced at the expense of following chinese laws everywhere in the world, perhaps they aren't worth servicing?
    - moate 7y ago
      >>Companies growing so that they can be worth more when their investors sell them is the whole point of businesses in general Eww. I thought it was about trading products and labor for currency and vice versa. The investor class is just a parasite on the whole endeavor.
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Yup. Our civilization already pulls a bait-and-switch on children by teaching them (us) that work is about the contribution to society, and not making money while incidentally providing some value; the investor mindset of treating companies as first-class objects to pump up and pass around is making things even worse. I for one, when I go to work, don't give a damn about resale value to investors. I'm there to build maximally useful products to the customers that use them.
        PavlovsCat 7y ago
        > The ways in which most men get their living, that is, live, are mere makeshifts, and a shirking of the real business of life, - chiefly because they do not know, but partly because they do not mean, any better. The rush to California, for instance, and the attitude, not merely of merchants, but of philosophers and prophets, so called, in relation to it, reflect the greatest disgrace on mankind. That so many are ready to live by luck, and so get the means of commanding the labor of others less lucky, without contributing any value to society! And that is called enterprise! I know of no more startling development of the immorality of trade, and all the common modes of getting a living. The philosophy and poetry and religion of such a mankind are not worth the dust of a puffball. The hog that gets his living by rooting, stirring up the soil so, would be ashamed of such company. If I could command the wealth of all the worlds by lifting my finger, I would not pay such a price for it. -- Henry David Thoreau, "Life Without Principle" http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER2/thoreau/life.html http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER2/thoreau/life.html
    - zentiggr 7y ago
      And here I thought reputation, value exchange, and being a good corporate citizen were what made a company worthwhile and respectable. Thanks for showing your position on the side of "money first people second, if at all".
      - munificent 7y ago
        This is an uncharitable interpretation of the parent comment. If I say that male lions kill the cubs of rival males when they take over a pride, I am stating an observation, not making a moral claim that I am "on the side" of lions killing cubs. It's a fair observation that the structural incentives of modern investment driven capital are that growth is absolutely rewarded and morality is often not. Good citizenship only rewards a company when there are enough consumers aware of that citizenship and who care enough to change their spending habits. At the scale of many corporations, it's very hard for enough people to care enough to affect the company's actions.
        okatsu 7y ago
        I think it's often underestimated just how many people don't care and are just focused on doing their job and feeding their kids. They might passively agree or disagree with something but acting on it is a whole different matter. Walmart's still bustling.
    - jothezero 7y ago
      I think China might be a great market for micro transaction based games. This is why Blizzard is acting like this.
      - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
        Right. Follow the money.
      - zamalek 7y ago
        Pedantry is important here, because it's important to point out that the Blizzard that people loved is long gone. It's really Activision Blizzard who are acting like this.
    - goatinaboat 7y ago
      many companies depend on those new customers to hit their growth targets They will never be your customers. You think they will, so you hand over your IP to a local partner, and then they don’t need you anymore and take those customers themselves. I am surprised any Western company still falls for this ruse.
    - zipwitch 7y ago
      Corporations are allowed to exist by the public (via the representatives of their collective will, i.e. government) under the belief that doing so will, overall, result in a net benefit to the public. Making a profit or increasing shareholder value are secondary considerations. They can be motivations for why a corporation exists, but don't have to be (there are plenty of non-profit corporations). They are not the sole raison d'être for the artificial constructs we call corporations.
      - asdfman123 7y ago
        > Corporations are allowed to exist by the public I would argue that in America, the public is allowed to exist by corporations. (Tongue in cheek cynicism, mixed with more truth than I'm comfortable with.)
    - nilkn 7y ago
      I think relying on China is about to become a very risky growth strategy. While China's population is much larger, the US is still large and very rich, and an American company is always going to understand how to develop and market products better for Americans than for China. China's political censorship abroad, enforced via sheer economic muscle, has received extremely strong bipartisan condemnation in the US during a time of unprecedented partisanship; even AOC and Ted Cruz have blasted Blizzard. What China's trying to do goes against everything Americans have been raised to believe, from the most conservative to the most liberal. Political outrage within the US about domestic US affairs is often ineffective because it's too partisan, and it tends to just energize the other side (e.g., the Chick-fil-A controversy in 2012/2013 actually increased their sales). This is different because everyone agrees and there is no "other side" to energize, not within the US.
  - gpm 7y ago
    The fact that they are cancelling these events is proof that you are wrong... Blizzard, a company, is reacting to statements made in English not dollars. In fact, I'd argue that they basically never react to statements made in dollars, one person can only control a small number of dollars by speaking in dollars, and can control a surprisingly large number of dollars by speaking in English.
    - madez 7y ago
      I deleted my account on their service over this, and I know so did others. There was more spoken than just English.
      - cm2012 7y ago
        Yeah, my wife and I used to spend $500* per year on Blizzard stuff. We cancelled everything when the news came out. *Two WoW subscriptions + me buying Hearthstone cards.
        madez 7y ago
        Deleting my account was a revealing relief. Not just your account as in some entry in a database gets deleted including the characters stored on their servers, but also every game you paid for and all the purchase you made inside the games. The shock from the revelation of the control the company had about what I thought I bought made me follow through and free myself from the sunken cost fallacy which was trying to stop me from deleting my account. That was a good lesson for me. I'll never again buy any product, be it a game, software, or hardware that any company can that easily take away from me.
        VRay 7y ago
        Amen, brother Unfortunately I think that pretty much limits us to TuxRacer so far as the gaming space goes
        madez 7y ago
  - wuliwong 7y ago
    I'm pretty sure that OP didn't actually think Blizzard was going to read the message and decide to go out of business.
    - LegitShady 7y ago
      I could only hope.
  - LegitShady 7y ago
    I deleted my account with most of their library. Message received I hope.
- asulnatao 7y ago
  They follow the laws of countries they operate in. I don't see any problem with companies refusing to judge what is good or bad and just following the law.
  - baq 7y ago
    i don't need them to follow chinese law in my country thank you very much
  - supercanuck 7y ago
    They are applying Chinese “laws” to Americans in America
    - castis 7y ago
      Just so we're all on the same page, they're applying their own pre-stated rules to people all over the world. I'm not advocating that what they're doing is right but lets not make things up.
      - supercanuck 7y ago
        Just so we’re clear, they are applying these “rules” at the behest of an authoritarian, antidemocratic government. Nobody is making anything up.
        discobot 7y ago
        Authoritarian ant antidemocratic government is just as legitimate as any other
        gbear605 7y ago
        A government is only legitimate when it truly represents the people who live there. The Beijing government is an illegitimate fascist mockery of a government. The only legitimate Chinese government is the democratic one in Taiwan.
- bovermyer 7y ago
  Boycotts do nothing. Ranting at companies trying to do business in the world's biggest market does nothing. A multilateral embargo and military action against China would do something useful. If you destroy the world's biggest market, foreign companies won't be tempted to do business there.
  - landryraccoon 7y ago
    > military action against China What rational scenario would involve taking direct military action against a nuclear armed superpower?
    - bovermyer 7y ago
      Military action does not necessarily mean direct conflict. It can include such things as military projection, like placing additional forces in neighboring friendly countries. The threat of nuclear armaments is another question entirely, one that needs careful evaluation. It's still possible to have a cold war - or even a hot war- with purely conventional weapons.
      - cwkoss 7y ago
        Now would be a great time for the US to antagonize the Chinese navy - their military is being stretched by being deployed into Kazakhstan and as reinforcements for Hong Kong police. They are weakened already, great opportunity to reassert their lack of sovereignty over some of the south pacific islands they've been gradually calling their own.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - rosybox 7y ago
    > military action against China What? For what? In case you didn't know "military action" means people die. A lot of countries aren't democracies. You want to bomb them all?
not_a_cop75 7y ago
Why don't they simply celebrate the anniversaries of communism and other authoritarian dictatorships instead? Seems to me there isn't much difference anymore.
- not_a_cop75 7y ago
  Thanks for the downvote, Chinese sympathizers.
  - dang 7y ago
    This breaks more than one of the site guidelines. You've done this so many times that I've banned your current accounts until we get some indication that you want to use HN as intended. The rules are at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Please review them. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
itronitron 7y ago
i guess this is what it's like when someone you know is in an abusive relationship
sreque 7y ago
Am I the only one that thinks Blizzard is in the right here and they are being made into a scapegoat due to the political climate? Blizzard says "don't talk about divisive things using our tournaments and communication channels." Why can't they be allowed to do so? What would happen to someone if they protested similarly at the Olympics? If you are really upset about what's happening in Hong Kong, why don't you boycott, I don't know, all of China? But that would take too much effort for most airmchair activists. Edit: several good responses from people, including links to actual olympics protests, and links to blizzard pushing political agendas.
- hart_russell 7y ago
  The way Blizzard handled the situation was absolutely tone deaf and seemingly malicious. Of course they are going to be a lightning rod for a greater outrage.
  - deminature 7y ago
    Their PR handling was disastrous (though perhaps forced by the Chinese government [1]), but they're absolutely entitled to not have people hijack their events to spread political messages, regardless of how valid the message may be. [1] https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352 https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352
    - bcrosby95 7y ago
      Blizzard is perfectly fine with politics if they think it won't hurt their bottom line. They've been fairly supportive of the LTGB movement in their western markets. It's why the statement about China having no influence over their decision is such obvious bullshit.
      - arvinsim 7y ago
        > Blizzard is perfectly fine with politics if they think it won't hurt their bottom line. This applies to most business unfortunately.
ReptileMan 7y ago
Well since Europe started requiring to have "hate" speech, the american progressive "fake news", "harassment" and "abuse" removed it seems that a lot of other factions seem to seized the opportunity to use the existing framework to their own gain. Who could have guessed ... It is rarely only the "good" guys that get to censor in the end ...
- mcphage 7y ago
  > It is rarely only the "good" guys that get to censor in the end ... It’s rarely only the good guys that start with censoring, either.
- Supermancho 7y ago
  Blizzard is not censoring based on an SJW framework. Blizzard is trying to satisfy an authoritarian regime that they have gotten financially DEPENDENT on. These are not related.
  - ReptileMan 7y ago
    A rose by any other name ... Blizzard appeases the SJW when twitter makes a shitstorm not to lose money. Blizzard appeases China when Beijing makes a sting not to lose money. Both the SJW and CCP sincerely believe that history is on their side and they are the future. Both think of due process (as in some title IX cases) as an inconvenience. Both think that ideological conformity is paramount. I think I can see a vague overlap between the two.
    - Supermancho 7y ago
      There is overlap between a lot of systems, but meta-relationships (insofar as HN comment votes look like Reddit comment votes) aren't relevant to the topic. That being said, I see the overlap. Blizzard is using the "we know what's best for others". This is not a framework, intrinsically. > a lot of other factions seem to seized the opportunity to use the existing framework to their own gain Blizzard is not one of those factions and I'll leave it at that.
Iv 7y ago
I wanted to delete my SC2 account then realize that boycotting a free to play game makes little sense. Instead I changed my name for "FreedomForHK". I saw another player with a similar name on Asian servers (FreeHongKong). Received several praises for the name, even got someone give me a free victory because of it. Did not receive a single criticism. Blizzard totally alienated its player base with this decision.
- stevehawk 7y ago
  You're still contributing to their success by playing. By playing a free to play game you are increasing the enjoyment of the game by serving as a competitor to those who are paying. Which in turn encourages them to pay. That said, I requested a refund for my War3 pre-purchase (they are updating/re-releasing it) and they refunded it with no questions asked. I think they know why people are asking for refunds and don't want to make a stink about it.
  - Miner49er 7y ago
    On the other hand, more players means more bandwidth and more server usage for Blizzard, which means higher costs. If everyone plays and doesn't buy anything, then they'll lose money on server costs.
    - bhouston 7y ago
      Blizzard loves engagement numbers and makes them feel they are robust against boycotts. You need to leave if you want to make a point.
    - foresto 7y ago
      Bandwidth costs dropped steeply around 10-15 years ago, making video streaming services much more viable. I would be astonished if game bandwidth was more than a drop in the bucket compared to that, or if a F2P gamer cost Activision Blizzard anything significant compared to what they make from the paying gamers who benefit from populated servers.
    - 7y ago
ahbyb 7y ago
I value WoW more than I value human rights.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- chance_state 7y ago
  You and millions of others in the West, sadly.
  - ahbyb 7y ago
    It's good that you say this because most people see my comment and just flag it. I'm simply saying the obvious, and probably the majority of people in the West feel the way I do. I think it's appropriate to have a contrarian point of view posted here from time to time, instead of the echo chamber this website usually is.
    - vocatus_gate 7y ago
      Couldn't be more wrong. I deleted my account the moment they did that. Human rights are more important than a video game. There's plenty of other games to play from companies that don't actively support oppressive regimes.
      - okatsu 7y ago
        I agree with you but your individual account deletion doesn't really prove him wrong that he and others value their convenience over other people's rights. I've actually yet to even meet another gamer in person who cares at all.
    - chance_state 7y ago
      >It's good that you say this because most people see my comment and just flag it. I'm simply saying the obvious, and probably the majority of people in the West feel the way I do. Right, I agree. Can I ask though: do you seriously value the pleasure you get from playing WoW more than sending a (tiny) message that you support human rights? That idea is actually pretty disgusting to me, and I'd have a hard time carrying on a conversation with someone face-to-face if we went down that road, but I am genuinely curious if you can expand on that more.
driverdan 7y ago
This is blogspam for this article: https://www.polygon.com/2019/10/17/20919539/blizzard-entertainment-world-of-warcraft-event-taiwan-hong-kong-protests https://www.polygon.com/2019/10/17/20919539/blizzard-enterta...
- arielserafini 7y ago
  Thank you for the link! also I've never seen "blogspam" used before. So fitting.
- dang 7y ago
  Changed to that from https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/blizzard-postpones-world-of-warcraft-15th-anniversary-event-in-taiwan https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/blizzard-postpones-world-.... Thanks!
kingkawn 7y ago
Blizzard Activision execs likely looked at video gaming market growth potential and decided to make their bed where they see the future of their industry. If the current execs hadn’t made this choice they’d be replaced with ones who would. This is the cool rationality of the market turning against western institutions, and everyone is shocked, shocked, that such a thing could happen after so many centuries of dominance.
proc0 7y ago
Diablo 4 was the only "maybe" and that was a long shot, it will probably suck balls like D3 because they will bend backwards to censor it. I don't get how they can justify censoring a game that depends on its dark content, it's quite obviously going to alienate the original player base that made it big. Why not just create a different IP just for china? So many questions, I really think they just lack technical innovation to solve this properly.
- RandomTisk 7y ago
  I still can't get over the Cartoon-like art style of Diablo 3. It's not a bad game, but the graphic style is such a massive contradiction with the subject matter, it could have been a much better game. The story was similarly butchered, having a degree of good execution but just full of demon-cliches, if that makes sense, without really ever being interesting.
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    Diablo 3 was a bad game. They destroyed the fun of the trading economy by making the auction house the most efficient way to obtain things - even allowing real-money purchases for a while to make it literally pay-to-win until they walked that back. They entirely removed the concept of "builds" as everything about your character was changeable at whim, so you just had to max out a class and you had access to every build within that class. Made choosing builds feel unimportant. Then, they didn't add enough interesting unique item effects, so item grinding largely just became "look for the item with a slightly bigger number"
    - beart 7y ago
      Removing the auction house was one of the first big changes they made to the game. I also get the feeling that it was the same moment where they massively dropped their expectations for how much money they would make off it and cut development way back. Still, Diablo 3 now is light years ahead of what it was at release and is actually a lot of fun. However, it is quite different from Diablo 2 (just like that was quite different from Diablo 1).
SirensOfTitan 7y ago
I don't really know what I'd do in a leadership role at Blizzard or the NBA. On one hand, both companies have acted with bounded rationality: China is a huge market that can drive major growth. On the other: the more companies develop market share in China, the more the Chinese government can dictate how they act. In some sense, non-Chinese companies become de-facto arms of the Chinese government.
- ivalm 7y ago
  NBA acted fine. They did not punish or discipline the Rocket's manager.
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    On the other hand, Lebron James' statement last week sounded he was reading directly from something written by a CCP propaganda minister. "When you're misinformed or not educated about something, you never know the ramifications of what can happen." https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/1183932275072720896 https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/11839322750727208...
    - yourbandsucks 7y ago
      Is it within the realm of possibility that the vast majority of Americans are in fact uneducated and misinformed about what daily life in China is like? Or even the broad strokes of history there? What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties?
      - kickopotomus 7y ago
        > What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties? What percent of Chinese could name the first 3 American Presidents? Who cares and how does that have anything to do with the modern political climate? The average American does not need to be aware of the country's history to disagree with the actions and posturing of the current government.
colmvp 7y ago
Isn’t it kind of weird that this isn’t news on the WoW subreddit?
- plorkyeran 7y ago
  It was on /r/wow several days ago when it was first announced.
kryogen1c 7y ago
I uninstalled HS, which was the last blizzard game i had. The real pain point for me is that i stopped supporting blizzard content creators. Omnislash, Kripp, winter, serral, and others. Streaming is their livelihood and/or competing. Such is the colatteral damage.
- valgor 7y ago
  You make is sound like they are struggling. Some of those dudes are rich. I wouldn't worry about them. And they have enough fans they could stream other games and still be okay.
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    "Streaming is their livelihood" is such a weird argument for supporting something. Maybe I'm an old man, but I really feel like the best thing for the streamers would be for them to get a real job. Streaming is a fragile source of income, and many streamers 'work' 16+ hours a day trying to make enough money to support themselves - with majority of them falling short.
    - dylz 7y ago
      Can I ask what you consider a "real job"? Trust me, it becomes progressively less fun to "play" a game because you have to, not because you want to, to keep up your income.
      - cwkoss 7y ago
        It just makes me sad to see thousands of young people putting in 12+ hour days making less than minimum wage on the hopes they'll someday 'make it big' and will be able to support themselves playing video games. Very few streamers make a good living from just playing games - many of the profitable channels grew through deceptive marketing dark patterns, allowing their audience to gamble, or being porn-lite. Streaming does have some value, but it seems like there is disproportionately large amount of wasted productivity being put towards it in the last decade.
jammygit 7y ago
It makes sense. In their new Chinese outlook, Taiwan does not exist
- tasogare 7y ago
  I'm surprised they have Taiwan written on their anniversary page (https://goblizzard.tw/wow/2019/15thanniversary/#collection https://goblizzard.tw/wow/2019/15thanniversary/#collection). Maybe they didn't have the time to change it to Chinese Taipei yet.
mikorym 7y ago
Shouldn't we say "Activision-Blizzard"? At least that would make Starcraft 1 look like it was coded by a separate entity...
- Skunkleton 7y ago
  Starcraft benefits Activision-Blizzard. IMO the full name is better, if only to remind people of the non-classic-Blizzard titles that should be avoided.
  - raihansaputra 7y ago
    Yep. This is a sticking point for me too. I'm excited for the rebooted Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, but it's released by Activision (and not mentioning Blizzard in any of their trailers).
overgard 7y ago
I like Blizzard, but fundamentally your business is its values. People come and go, markets change, etc., so who you are as a company -- at least in the long run -- is your core set of values. I think their leadership has to realize they can't have it both ways. They either need to choose their values, or China. There's no middle ground.
Guthur 7y ago
It's amazing how many people completely misunderstand blizzards decision. Blizzards decision is completely in line with other international sporting events, football body FIFA also disallow political statements and I'm sure the Olympics are the same. If you allow this for Hong Kong can someone else call out support for other political activities even ones you don't agree with.
- sodosopa 7y ago
  > If you allow this for Hong Kong can someone else call out support for other political activities even ones you don't agree with. That’s the beauty of freedom of speech but also shows rightfully that it is not freedom from speech.
- idlewords 7y ago
  Blizzard could have issued the player a warning about its policy and no one would have batted an eye. Instead it stripped him of prize money, barred him from competition, and fired the two people interviewing him.
- goatinaboat 7y ago
  Blizzards decision is completely in line with other international sporting events Except that Blizzard does make political statements when it thinks it will be profitable.
- towelrod 7y ago
  FIFA hasn't done anything like this, have they? Only thing I can remember recently is when Shaqiri and Xhaka had political celebrations after a World Cup game, and they both escaped punishment: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/25/swiss-xhaka-shaqiri-escape-ban-celebration-serbia https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/25/swiss-xhaka... Even then, the potential punishment was a 2-match ban. They wouldn't have stripped Switzerland of the victory,banned them for a year, and taken away all the money they earned throughout the entire season (all things that Blizzard did)
- alasdair_ 7y ago
  >Blizzards decision is completely in line with other international sporting events, football body FIFA also disallow political statements and I'm sure the Olympics are the same. Blizzard has had plenty of people make political statements about, say, LGBT issues and has NEVER invoked this "rule" before. They even had a US-based team do exactly the same thing and failed to issue any ban until the hypocrisy was repeatedly pointed out to them. It is the selective enforcement that is the issue, as well as the heavy-handed punishment.
jgalt212 7y ago
There are so many ways that an NLP model would mis-interpret this headline.

387 points by ilamont 7y ago

Hilarious. If rather these guys go out of business that have them enforce Chinese political censorship on the west. I have no use for companies that undermine basic freedoms for money. All while virtue signalling in the west. Get out of business blizzard. The freedoms that allow you to exist are more valuable than your existence.

bilbo0s 7y ago
They can go out of business tomorrow, you just need to stop buying their products. So telling Blizzard to go out of business is useless, you need to tell all the people buying Blizzard products to stop doing so. Directing messages at these companies is like speaking English to a Senegalese kid who only speaks Wolof and maybe a bit of French. The kid is just not even gonna make out what you're talking about. You affect their quarterly results, that's when you're speaking the language these companies understand.
- asdfman123 7y ago
  The problem is that China is a country of a billion people, many of whom are rapidly entering the global middle class, so many companies depend on those new customers to hit their growth targets. Companies growing so that they can be worth more when their investors sell them is the whole point of businesses in general. It's the reason we all go to work every day.
  - solipsism 7y ago
    many companies depend on those new customers to hit their growth targets That's a choice. Companies growing so that they can be worth more when their investors sell them is the whole point of businesses Also a choice. Companies are accountable for their choices. Accountable to their shareholders and to their customers. When those groups aren't aligned, then you're in a tough spot. You might wind up with a new set of shareholders or a new set of customers.
    - freeopinion 7y ago
      Or no customers and no shareholders.
  - baq 7y ago
    greed is good until it isn't and some people, me included, think the line has been crossed here. or, in other words, if the chinese customers can only be serviced at the expense of following chinese laws everywhere in the world, perhaps they aren't worth servicing?
  - moate 7y ago
    >>Companies growing so that they can be worth more when their investors sell them is the whole point of businesses in general Eww. I thought it was about trading products and labor for currency and vice versa. The investor class is just a parasite on the whole endeavor.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Yup. Our civilization already pulls a bait-and-switch on children by teaching them (us) that work is about the contribution to society, and not making money while incidentally providing some value; the investor mindset of treating companies as first-class objects to pump up and pass around is making things even worse. I for one, when I go to work, don't give a damn about resale value to investors. I'm there to build maximally useful products to the customers that use them.
      - PavlovsCat 7y ago
        > The ways in which most men get their living, that is, live, are mere makeshifts, and a shirking of the real business of life, - chiefly because they do not know, but partly because they do not mean, any better. The rush to California, for instance, and the attitude, not merely of merchants, but of philosophers and prophets, so called, in relation to it, reflect the greatest disgrace on mankind. That so many are ready to live by luck, and so get the means of commanding the labor of others less lucky, without contributing any value to society! And that is called enterprise! I know of no more startling development of the immorality of trade, and all the common modes of getting a living. The philosophy and poetry and religion of such a mankind are not worth the dust of a puffball. The hog that gets his living by rooting, stirring up the soil so, would be ashamed of such company. If I could command the wealth of all the worlds by lifting my finger, I would not pay such a price for it. -- Henry David Thoreau, "Life Without Principle" http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER2/thoreau/life.html http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER2/thoreau/life.html
  - zentiggr 7y ago
    And here I thought reputation, value exchange, and being a good corporate citizen were what made a company worthwhile and respectable. Thanks for showing your position on the side of "money first people second, if at all".
    - munificent 7y ago
      This is an uncharitable interpretation of the parent comment. If I say that male lions kill the cubs of rival males when they take over a pride, I am stating an observation, not making a moral claim that I am "on the side" of lions killing cubs. It's a fair observation that the structural incentives of modern investment driven capital are that growth is absolutely rewarded and morality is often not. Good citizenship only rewards a company when there are enough consumers aware of that citizenship and who care enough to change their spending habits. At the scale of many corporations, it's very hard for enough people to care enough to affect the company's actions.
      - okatsu 7y ago
        I think it's often underestimated just how many people don't care and are just focused on doing their job and feeding their kids. They might passively agree or disagree with something but acting on it is a whole different matter. Walmart's still bustling.
  - jothezero 7y ago
    I think China might be a great market for micro transaction based games. This is why Blizzard is acting like this.
    - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
      Right. Follow the money.
    - zamalek 7y ago
      Pedantry is important here, because it's important to point out that the Blizzard that people loved is long gone. It's really Activision Blizzard who are acting like this.
  - goatinaboat 7y ago
    many companies depend on those new customers to hit their growth targets They will never be your customers. You think they will, so you hand over your IP to a local partner, and then they don’t need you anymore and take those customers themselves. I am surprised any Western company still falls for this ruse.
  - zipwitch 7y ago
    Corporations are allowed to exist by the public (via the representatives of their collective will, i.e. government) under the belief that doing so will, overall, result in a net benefit to the public. Making a profit or increasing shareholder value are secondary considerations. They can be motivations for why a corporation exists, but don't have to be (there are plenty of non-profit corporations). They are not the sole raison d'être for the artificial constructs we call corporations.
    - asdfman123 7y ago
      > Corporations are allowed to exist by the public I would argue that in America, the public is allowed to exist by corporations. (Tongue in cheek cynicism, mixed with more truth than I'm comfortable with.)
  - nilkn 7y ago
    I think relying on China is about to become a very risky growth strategy. While China's population is much larger, the US is still large and very rich, and an American company is always going to understand how to develop and market products better for Americans than for China. China's political censorship abroad, enforced via sheer economic muscle, has received extremely strong bipartisan condemnation in the US during a time of unprecedented partisanship; even AOC and Ted Cruz have blasted Blizzard. What China's trying to do goes against everything Americans have been raised to believe, from the most conservative to the most liberal. Political outrage within the US about domestic US affairs is often ineffective because it's too partisan, and it tends to just energize the other side (e.g., the Chick-fil-A controversy in 2012/2013 actually increased their sales). This is different because everyone agrees and there is no "other side" to energize, not within the US.
- gpm 7y ago
  The fact that they are cancelling these events is proof that you are wrong... Blizzard, a company, is reacting to statements made in English not dollars. In fact, I'd argue that they basically never react to statements made in dollars, one person can only control a small number of dollars by speaking in dollars, and can control a surprisingly large number of dollars by speaking in English.
  - madez 7y ago
    I deleted my account on their service over this, and I know so did others. There was more spoken than just English.
    - cm2012 7y ago
      Yeah, my wife and I used to spend $500* per year on Blizzard stuff. We cancelled everything when the news came out. *Two WoW subscriptions + me buying Hearthstone cards.
      - madez 7y ago
        Deleting my account was a revealing relief. Not just your account as in some entry in a database gets deleted including the characters stored on their servers, but also every game you paid for and all the purchase you made inside the games. The shock from the revelation of the control the company had about what I thought I bought made me follow through and free myself from the sunken cost fallacy which was trying to stop me from deleting my account. That was a good lesson for me. I'll never again buy any product, be it a game, software, or hardware that any company can that easily take away from me.
        VRay 7y ago
        Amen, brother Unfortunately I think that pretty much limits us to TuxRacer so far as the gaming space goes
        madez 7y ago
- wuliwong 7y ago
  I'm pretty sure that OP didn't actually think Blizzard was going to read the message and decide to go out of business.
  - LegitShady 7y ago
    I could only hope.
- LegitShady 7y ago
  I deleted my account with most of their library. Message received I hope.
asulnatao 7y ago
They follow the laws of countries they operate in. I don't see any problem with companies refusing to judge what is good or bad and just following the law.
- baq 7y ago
  i don't need them to follow chinese law in my country thank you very much
- supercanuck 7y ago
  They are applying Chinese “laws” to Americans in America
  - castis 7y ago
    Just so we're all on the same page, they're applying their own pre-stated rules to people all over the world. I'm not advocating that what they're doing is right but lets not make things up.
    - supercanuck 7y ago
      Just so we’re clear, they are applying these “rules” at the behest of an authoritarian, antidemocratic government. Nobody is making anything up.
      - discobot 7y ago
        Authoritarian ant antidemocratic government is just as legitimate as any other
        gbear605 7y ago
        A government is only legitimate when it truly represents the people who live there. The Beijing government is an illegitimate fascist mockery of a government. The only legitimate Chinese government is the democratic one in Taiwan.
bovermyer 7y ago
Boycotts do nothing. Ranting at companies trying to do business in the world's biggest market does nothing. A multilateral embargo and military action against China would do something useful. If you destroy the world's biggest market, foreign companies won't be tempted to do business there.
- landryraccoon 7y ago
  > military action against China What rational scenario would involve taking direct military action against a nuclear armed superpower?
  - bovermyer 7y ago
    Military action does not necessarily mean direct conflict. It can include such things as military projection, like placing additional forces in neighboring friendly countries. The threat of nuclear armaments is another question entirely, one that needs careful evaluation. It's still possible to have a cold war - or even a hot war- with purely conventional weapons.
    - cwkoss 7y ago
      Now would be a great time for the US to antagonize the Chinese navy - their military is being stretched by being deployed into Kazakhstan and as reinforcements for Hong Kong police. They are weakened already, great opportunity to reassert their lack of sovereignty over some of the south pacific islands they've been gradually calling their own.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- rosybox 7y ago
  > military action against China What? For what? In case you didn't know "military action" means people die. A lot of countries aren't democracies. You want to bomb them all?

not_a_cop75 7y ago

Why don't they simply celebrate the anniversaries of communism and other authoritarian dictatorships instead? Seems to me there isn't much difference anymore.

not_a_cop75 7y ago
Thanks for the downvote, Chinese sympathizers.
- dang 7y ago
  This breaks more than one of the site guidelines. You've done this so many times that I've banned your current accounts until we get some indication that you want to use HN as intended. The rules are at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Please review them. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

itronitron 7y ago

i guess this is what it's like when someone you know is in an abusive relationship

sreque 7y ago

Am I the only one that thinks Blizzard is in the right here and they are being made into a scapegoat due to the political climate? Blizzard says "don't talk about divisive things using our tournaments and communication channels." Why can't they be allowed to do so? What would happen to someone if they protested similarly at the Olympics? If you are really upset about what's happening in Hong Kong, why don't you boycott, I don't know, all of China? But that would take too much effort for most airmchair activists. Edit: several good responses from people, including links to actual olympics protests, and links to blizzard pushing political agendas.

hart_russell 7y ago
The way Blizzard handled the situation was absolutely tone deaf and seemingly malicious. Of course they are going to be a lightning rod for a greater outrage.
- deminature 7y ago
  Their PR handling was disastrous (though perhaps forced by the Chinese government [1]), but they're absolutely entitled to not have people hijack their events to spread political messages, regardless of how valid the message may be. [1] https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352 https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352
  - bcrosby95 7y ago
    Blizzard is perfectly fine with politics if they think it won't hurt their bottom line. They've been fairly supportive of the LTGB movement in their western markets. It's why the statement about China having no influence over their decision is such obvious bullshit.
    - arvinsim 7y ago
      > Blizzard is perfectly fine with politics if they think it won't hurt their bottom line. This applies to most business unfortunately.

ReptileMan 7y ago

Well since Europe started requiring to have "hate" speech, the american progressive "fake news", "harassment" and "abuse" removed it seems that a lot of other factions seem to seized the opportunity to use the existing framework to their own gain. Who could have guessed ... It is rarely only the "good" guys that get to censor in the end ...

mcphage 7y ago
> It is rarely only the "good" guys that get to censor in the end ... It’s rarely only the good guys that start with censoring, either.
Supermancho 7y ago
Blizzard is not censoring based on an SJW framework. Blizzard is trying to satisfy an authoritarian regime that they have gotten financially DEPENDENT on. These are not related.
- ReptileMan 7y ago
  A rose by any other name ... Blizzard appeases the SJW when twitter makes a shitstorm not to lose money. Blizzard appeases China when Beijing makes a sting not to lose money. Both the SJW and CCP sincerely believe that history is on their side and they are the future. Both think of due process (as in some title IX cases) as an inconvenience. Both think that ideological conformity is paramount. I think I can see a vague overlap between the two.
  - Supermancho 7y ago
    There is overlap between a lot of systems, but meta-relationships (insofar as HN comment votes look like Reddit comment votes) aren't relevant to the topic. That being said, I see the overlap. Blizzard is using the "we know what's best for others". This is not a framework, intrinsically. > a lot of other factions seem to seized the opportunity to use the existing framework to their own gain Blizzard is not one of those factions and I'll leave it at that.

Iv 7y ago

I wanted to delete my SC2 account then realize that boycotting a free to play game makes little sense. Instead I changed my name for "FreedomForHK". I saw another player with a similar name on Asian servers (FreeHongKong). Received several praises for the name, even got someone give me a free victory because of it. Did not receive a single criticism. Blizzard totally alienated its player base with this decision.

stevehawk 7y ago
You're still contributing to their success by playing. By playing a free to play game you are increasing the enjoyment of the game by serving as a competitor to those who are paying. Which in turn encourages them to pay. That said, I requested a refund for my War3 pre-purchase (they are updating/re-releasing it) and they refunded it with no questions asked. I think they know why people are asking for refunds and don't want to make a stink about it.
- Miner49er 7y ago
  On the other hand, more players means more bandwidth and more server usage for Blizzard, which means higher costs. If everyone plays and doesn't buy anything, then they'll lose money on server costs.
  - bhouston 7y ago
    Blizzard loves engagement numbers and makes them feel they are robust against boycotts. You need to leave if you want to make a point.
  - foresto 7y ago
    Bandwidth costs dropped steeply around 10-15 years ago, making video streaming services much more viable. I would be astonished if game bandwidth was more than a drop in the bucket compared to that, or if a F2P gamer cost Activision Blizzard anything significant compared to what they make from the paying gamers who benefit from populated servers.
  - 7y ago

ahbyb 7y ago

I value WoW more than I value human rights.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
chance_state 7y ago
You and millions of others in the West, sadly.
- ahbyb 7y ago
  It's good that you say this because most people see my comment and just flag it. I'm simply saying the obvious, and probably the majority of people in the West feel the way I do. I think it's appropriate to have a contrarian point of view posted here from time to time, instead of the echo chamber this website usually is.
  - vocatus_gate 7y ago
    Couldn't be more wrong. I deleted my account the moment they did that. Human rights are more important than a video game. There's plenty of other games to play from companies that don't actively support oppressive regimes.
    - okatsu 7y ago
      I agree with you but your individual account deletion doesn't really prove him wrong that he and others value their convenience over other people's rights. I've actually yet to even meet another gamer in person who cares at all.
  - chance_state 7y ago
    >It's good that you say this because most people see my comment and just flag it. I'm simply saying the obvious, and probably the majority of people in the West feel the way I do. Right, I agree. Can I ask though: do you seriously value the pleasure you get from playing WoW more than sending a (tiny) message that you support human rights? That idea is actually pretty disgusting to me, and I'd have a hard time carrying on a conversation with someone face-to-face if we went down that road, but I am genuinely curious if you can expand on that more.

driverdan 7y ago

This is blogspam for this article: https://www.polygon.com/2019/10/17/20919539/blizzard-entertainment-world-of-warcraft-event-taiwan-hong-kong-protests https://www.polygon.com/2019/10/17/20919539/blizzard-enterta...

arielserafini 7y ago
Thank you for the link! also I've never seen "blogspam" used before. So fitting.
dang 7y ago
Changed to that from https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/blizzard-postpones-world-of-warcraft-15th-anniversary-event-in-taiwan https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/blizzard-postpones-world-.... Thanks!

kingkawn 7y ago

Blizzard Activision execs likely looked at video gaming market growth potential and decided to make their bed where they see the future of their industry. If the current execs hadn’t made this choice they’d be replaced with ones who would. This is the cool rationality of the market turning against western institutions, and everyone is shocked, shocked, that such a thing could happen after so many centuries of dominance.

proc0 7y ago

Diablo 4 was the only "maybe" and that was a long shot, it will probably suck balls like D3 because they will bend backwards to censor it. I don't get how they can justify censoring a game that depends on its dark content, it's quite obviously going to alienate the original player base that made it big. Why not just create a different IP just for china? So many questions, I really think they just lack technical innovation to solve this properly.

RandomTisk 7y ago
I still can't get over the Cartoon-like art style of Diablo 3. It's not a bad game, but the graphic style is such a massive contradiction with the subject matter, it could have been a much better game. The story was similarly butchered, having a degree of good execution but just full of demon-cliches, if that makes sense, without really ever being interesting.
- cwkoss 7y ago
  Diablo 3 was a bad game. They destroyed the fun of the trading economy by making the auction house the most efficient way to obtain things - even allowing real-money purchases for a while to make it literally pay-to-win until they walked that back. They entirely removed the concept of "builds" as everything about your character was changeable at whim, so you just had to max out a class and you had access to every build within that class. Made choosing builds feel unimportant. Then, they didn't add enough interesting unique item effects, so item grinding largely just became "look for the item with a slightly bigger number"
  - beart 7y ago
    Removing the auction house was one of the first big changes they made to the game. I also get the feeling that it was the same moment where they massively dropped their expectations for how much money they would make off it and cut development way back. Still, Diablo 3 now is light years ahead of what it was at release and is actually a lot of fun. However, it is quite different from Diablo 2 (just like that was quite different from Diablo 1).

SirensOfTitan 7y ago

I don't really know what I'd do in a leadership role at Blizzard or the NBA. On one hand, both companies have acted with bounded rationality: China is a huge market that can drive major growth. On the other: the more companies develop market share in China, the more the Chinese government can dictate how they act. In some sense, non-Chinese companies become de-facto arms of the Chinese government.

ivalm 7y ago
NBA acted fine. They did not punish or discipline the Rocket's manager.
- cwkoss 7y ago
  On the other hand, Lebron James' statement last week sounded he was reading directly from something written by a CCP propaganda minister. "When you're misinformed or not educated about something, you never know the ramifications of what can happen." https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/1183932275072720896 https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/11839322750727208...
  - yourbandsucks 7y ago
    Is it within the realm of possibility that the vast majority of Americans are in fact uneducated and misinformed about what daily life in China is like? Or even the broad strokes of history there? What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties?
    - kickopotomus 7y ago
      > What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties? What percent of Chinese could name the first 3 American Presidents? Who cares and how does that have anything to do with the modern political climate? The average American does not need to be aware of the country's history to disagree with the actions and posturing of the current government.

colmvp 7y ago

Isn’t it kind of weird that this isn’t news on the WoW subreddit?

plorkyeran 7y ago
It was on /r/wow several days ago when it was first announced.

kryogen1c 7y ago

I uninstalled HS, which was the last blizzard game i had. The real pain point for me is that i stopped supporting blizzard content creators. Omnislash, Kripp, winter, serral, and others. Streaming is their livelihood and/or competing. Such is the colatteral damage.

valgor 7y ago
You make is sound like they are struggling. Some of those dudes are rich. I wouldn't worry about them. And they have enough fans they could stream other games and still be okay.
- cwkoss 7y ago
  "Streaming is their livelihood" is such a weird argument for supporting something. Maybe I'm an old man, but I really feel like the best thing for the streamers would be for them to get a real job. Streaming is a fragile source of income, and many streamers 'work' 16+ hours a day trying to make enough money to support themselves - with majority of them falling short.
  - dylz 7y ago
    Can I ask what you consider a "real job"? Trust me, it becomes progressively less fun to "play" a game because you have to, not because you want to, to keep up your income.
    - cwkoss 7y ago
      It just makes me sad to see thousands of young people putting in 12+ hour days making less than minimum wage on the hopes they'll someday 'make it big' and will be able to support themselves playing video games. Very few streamers make a good living from just playing games - many of the profitable channels grew through deceptive marketing dark patterns, allowing their audience to gamble, or being porn-lite. Streaming does have some value, but it seems like there is disproportionately large amount of wasted productivity being put towards it in the last decade.

jammygit 7y ago

It makes sense. In their new Chinese outlook, Taiwan does not exist

tasogare 7y ago
I'm surprised they have Taiwan written on their anniversary page (https://goblizzard.tw/wow/2019/15thanniversary/#collection https://goblizzard.tw/wow/2019/15thanniversary/#collection). Maybe they didn't have the time to change it to Chinese Taipei yet.

mikorym 7y ago

Shouldn't we say "Activision-Blizzard"? At least that would make Starcraft 1 look like it was coded by a separate entity...

Skunkleton 7y ago
Starcraft benefits Activision-Blizzard. IMO the full name is better, if only to remind people of the non-classic-Blizzard titles that should be avoided.
- raihansaputra 7y ago
  Yep. This is a sticking point for me too. I'm excited for the rebooted Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, but it's released by Activision (and not mentioning Blizzard in any of their trailers).

overgard 7y ago

I like Blizzard, but fundamentally your business is its values. People come and go, markets change, etc., so who you are as a company -- at least in the long run -- is your core set of values. I think their leadership has to realize they can't have it both ways. They either need to choose their values, or China. There's no middle ground.

Guthur 7y ago

It's amazing how many people completely misunderstand blizzards decision. Blizzards decision is completely in line with other international sporting events, football body FIFA also disallow political statements and I'm sure the Olympics are the same. If you allow this for Hong Kong can someone else call out support for other political activities even ones you don't agree with.

sodosopa 7y ago
> If you allow this for Hong Kong can someone else call out support for other political activities even ones you don't agree with. That’s the beauty of freedom of speech but also shows rightfully that it is not freedom from speech.
idlewords 7y ago
Blizzard could have issued the player a warning about its policy and no one would have batted an eye. Instead it stripped him of prize money, barred him from competition, and fired the two people interviewing him.
goatinaboat 7y ago
Blizzards decision is completely in line with other international sporting events Except that Blizzard does make political statements when it thinks it will be profitable.
towelrod 7y ago
FIFA hasn't done anything like this, have they? Only thing I can remember recently is when Shaqiri and Xhaka had political celebrations after a World Cup game, and they both escaped punishment: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/25/swiss-xhaka-shaqiri-escape-ban-celebration-serbia https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/25/swiss-xhaka... Even then, the potential punishment was a 2-match ban. They wouldn't have stripped Switzerland of the victory,banned them for a year, and taken away all the money they earned throughout the entire season (all things that Blizzard did)
alasdair_ 7y ago
>Blizzards decision is completely in line with other international sporting events, football body FIFA also disallow political statements and I'm sure the Olympics are the same. Blizzard has had plenty of people make political statements about, say, LGBT issues and has NEVER invoked this "rule" before. They even had a US-based team do exactly the same thing and failed to issue any ban until the hypocrisy was repeatedly pointed out to them. It is the selective enforcement that is the issue, as well as the heavy-handed punishment.

jgalt212 7y ago

There are so many ways that an NLP model would mis-interpret this headline.