4 ms·

Their games just don't feel like labors of love anymore. They feel like icky skinner boxes through and through. Every aspect of their games are a/b tested up

Their games just don't feel like labors of love anymore. They feel like icky skinner boxes through and through. Every aspect of their games are a/b tested up the ass to convert as many MTX as possible and personally it's a total turn off. I downloaded Warzone and tried it out this weekend and uninstalled after 2 matches, it just felt off. Hard to describe. Like a AAA graphics Candy Crush. yuck!

Rooster61 6y ago
Blizzard didn't develop Warzone. Yes, they are both published/owned by Activision, and they share a launcher, but they are from very different developers.
- disgruntledphd2 6y ago
  It's odd how often people put studios and publishers together, when the relations are (often) a lot less close than people on the outside realise.
  - lovelyviking 6y ago
    For me being outside of thess relations are indeed it is not so clear. Can you describe it more ?
    - icegreentea2 6y ago
      In the original terms, game studios/developers made games, game publishers provided financing and support (such as distribution and marketing) to game studios. You can have hybrid entities, and you can have game studios/developers chose to self-publish, or whatever. The relationship between a publisher and studio can also vary. You can have one offs, where an independent game studio pitches a single game to a publisher, and they sign a deal for just that one game. Or you can have longer term relationships. For example, after Bungie re-spun out from Microsoft, they signed a 10 year deal with Activision (but they weren't owned by Activision). Or sometimes, publishers can straight up own game studios (they'll usually own a whole bunch of them). For example, Microsoft owns a whole pile of game studios (like recently acquired Bethesda). Activision-Blizzard is the parent holding company. Activision is the game publisher arm, and Blizzard is a separate game studio arm. Call of Duty for example is developed by a family of studios (for example: Infinity Ward) that all (well, at least IW) operate as parts of Activision. Like any creative-ish field, the exact relationship between the creative types, and the money types is... always contentious? Blizzard's relationship with Activision (the publisher) is different from say Activision's relationship with Infinity Ward in that Activision the publisher actually owns IW, while Blizzard is technically an equal business unit with Activision the publisher.
  - nightski 6y ago
    In this case though I can sort of understand it. Activision has invaded the battle.net launcher which was long reserved only for blizzard games. CoD is now right next to WoW in their launcher.
    - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
      Yet another reason to hate the proliferation of launchers ;)
tsimionescu 6y ago
Also, the once famous Blizzard polish is all but reversed - Warcraft 3 Reforged speaks for itself, but also looking into World of Warcraft commentary, it has become common to expect systems present in the game at launch to require major fixes or overhauls over the coming patches. The very fact that players and commentators alike have grown to expect this speaks volumes to me about the changing perception.
- mschuster91 6y ago
  This is something that's common across the entire industry (e.g. Cyberpunk 2077, Fallout 76 as the worst offenders). Testing costs a lot of money, automated testing isn't widely spread / feasible, and the cost of distributing patches is low - so many studios opt for the economic advantage of using their players as guinea pigs.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    Sure, and it's always been a part of the industry. However, Blizzard used to be an exception - they were known for taking a long time and for doing tried-and-true game formulas, but for delivering extremely polished experiences, especially on the gameplay side. Basically, they were never the first to try out a game idea, but their game would always be what ended up defining that idea through sheer polish and mass market appeal (Warcraft II&III, Diablo II and WoW perhaps being the most enduring examples of how they defined a genre even while being far from the first).
  - bcrosby95 6y ago
    It's a huge problem in WoW because they're so damn slow to fix anything. By the time it is fixed it's about time for the next expansion where they throw out most of that work so you get to ride that same shitty cycle all over again. The last 6-8 years of WoW have basically been 1 long paid, subscription based beta test.
- derekdahmer 6y ago
  Overwatch still feels highly polished to me (few bugs, great lore, good performance, character design, responsive dev team communication) though new content have been seriously lagging due to OW2.
taneq 6y ago
The Blizzard we knew and loved is long dead. What you see is the logo with its head held up and arms being waved around by the moneybugs in suits. Maybe somewhere inside the carcass is a new Blizzard with fresh ideas and a passion for games. I hope so, but I don't hold out much hope.
nawgz 6y ago
Haha, Warzone is a great game with one of the worst UI/UX designs I've ever seen. As a player who got it 5 months ago or so, I fully disagree with your assessment. It has a horrible and confusing store, no pay-to-win aspects, and solid gameplay with some actual decent depth. I am in no way condoning Activision, and I think their approach to Warzone maintenance has been pretty horrible (they are just turning a corner on that it seems), but Warzone is a good game without any gameplay-obtrusive MTX
- de_keyboard 6y ago
  I was disappointed with Warzone. * Best load-outs are faster to unlock with the paid game, so it is semi play-to-win * Warzone client is MASSIVE (seriously, like fill your entire SSD massive) because it installs other games alongside * Servers are awful, with extremely low tick-rates, so movement and shooting feels pretty ropey * A general sense of sameyness crept in after a few hours. I have a hunch that this is due to a low skill ceiling to the mechanics. Whilst I'm sure this makes the game more accessible to a wider audience, I found it left me with no sense of progression. Like eating a Big Mac rather than a nourishing meal.
  - nawgz 6y ago
    * Plunder provides a similar ability to progress loadouts as either paid game * it’s the biggest game I’ve ever seen and updates way too much. Feels like it ate my entire 1.2TB soft cap last month. Sadly the other games are also coming with +60-80gb on top of wz itself * agreed * in solos, it is a pretty terrible game, but the other modes require good team play and utility usage. I think there is a big skill gap, but the game is very slow paced, and it’s hard to objectively describe success. Is it frags? Placement? I suppose it depends on your goals. I can say watching streamers get 25 frags against top quality players shows you that aggression and mechanical skill are still rewarded in my opinion
meristohm 6y ago
I used to be trapped in those icky Skinner boxes, and feel so much better to have moved on. While I have some good memories of my time in WoW, especially the early “wonder days” of shared social space and learning how to communicate with people online, and fewer good memories relative to time spent in Diablo 3, Heroes of the Storm, and Hearthstone, I feel like there are large chunks of time missing from my past. From what I’ve read about alcoholism it feels similar. Thanks to The Blindboy Podcast and his sharing the mental-health tools (CBT, TA & others) that helped him crawl through crippling anxiety I feel much more in control of my time and actions. Very rarely now do I feel like hours slipped by with no lasting benefit. Escaping responsibilities with games I wasn’t refreshed, but drained. Multitasking will elicit this drained feeling still. Reading or listening to a good book (and I’m more and more willing to not finish books that aren’t “good” for me), going for a walk in the woods, gardening, making music, and making useful things are how I’ve replaced the videogame Skinner box.

Rooster61 6y ago

Blizzard didn't develop Warzone. Yes, they are both published/owned by Activision, and they share a launcher, but they are from very different developers.

disgruntledphd2 6y ago
It's odd how often people put studios and publishers together, when the relations are (often) a lot less close than people on the outside realise.
- lovelyviking 6y ago
  For me being outside of thess relations are indeed it is not so clear. Can you describe it more ?
  - icegreentea2 6y ago
    In the original terms, game studios/developers made games, game publishers provided financing and support (such as distribution and marketing) to game studios. You can have hybrid entities, and you can have game studios/developers chose to self-publish, or whatever. The relationship between a publisher and studio can also vary. You can have one offs, where an independent game studio pitches a single game to a publisher, and they sign a deal for just that one game. Or you can have longer term relationships. For example, after Bungie re-spun out from Microsoft, they signed a 10 year deal with Activision (but they weren't owned by Activision). Or sometimes, publishers can straight up own game studios (they'll usually own a whole bunch of them). For example, Microsoft owns a whole pile of game studios (like recently acquired Bethesda). Activision-Blizzard is the parent holding company. Activision is the game publisher arm, and Blizzard is a separate game studio arm. Call of Duty for example is developed by a family of studios (for example: Infinity Ward) that all (well, at least IW) operate as parts of Activision. Like any creative-ish field, the exact relationship between the creative types, and the money types is... always contentious? Blizzard's relationship with Activision (the publisher) is different from say Activision's relationship with Infinity Ward in that Activision the publisher actually owns IW, while Blizzard is technically an equal business unit with Activision the publisher.
- nightski 6y ago
  In this case though I can sort of understand it. Activision has invaded the battle.net launcher which was long reserved only for blizzard games. CoD is now right next to WoW in their launcher.
  - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
    Yet another reason to hate the proliferation of launchers ;)

tsimionescu 6y ago

Also, the once famous Blizzard polish is all but reversed - Warcraft 3 Reforged speaks for itself, but also looking into World of Warcraft commentary, it has become common to expect systems present in the game at launch to require major fixes or overhauls over the coming patches. The very fact that players and commentators alike have grown to expect this speaks volumes to me about the changing perception.

mschuster91 6y ago
This is something that's common across the entire industry (e.g. Cyberpunk 2077, Fallout 76 as the worst offenders). Testing costs a lot of money, automated testing isn't widely spread / feasible, and the cost of distributing patches is low - so many studios opt for the economic advantage of using their players as guinea pigs.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  Sure, and it's always been a part of the industry. However, Blizzard used to be an exception - they were known for taking a long time and for doing tried-and-true game formulas, but for delivering extremely polished experiences, especially on the gameplay side. Basically, they were never the first to try out a game idea, but their game would always be what ended up defining that idea through sheer polish and mass market appeal (Warcraft II&III, Diablo II and WoW perhaps being the most enduring examples of how they defined a genre even while being far from the first).
- bcrosby95 6y ago
  It's a huge problem in WoW because they're so damn slow to fix anything. By the time it is fixed it's about time for the next expansion where they throw out most of that work so you get to ride that same shitty cycle all over again. The last 6-8 years of WoW have basically been 1 long paid, subscription based beta test.
derekdahmer 6y ago
Overwatch still feels highly polished to me (few bugs, great lore, good performance, character design, responsive dev team communication) though new content have been seriously lagging due to OW2.

taneq 6y ago

The Blizzard we knew and loved is long dead. What you see is the logo with its head held up and arms being waved around by the moneybugs in suits. Maybe somewhere inside the carcass is a new Blizzard with fresh ideas and a passion for games. I hope so, but I don't hold out much hope.

nawgz 6y ago

Haha, Warzone is a great game with one of the worst UI/UX designs I've ever seen. As a player who got it 5 months ago or so, I fully disagree with your assessment. It has a horrible and confusing store, no pay-to-win aspects, and solid gameplay with some actual decent depth. I am in no way condoning Activision, and I think their approach to Warzone maintenance has been pretty horrible (they are just turning a corner on that it seems), but Warzone is a good game without any gameplay-obtrusive MTX

de_keyboard 6y ago
I was disappointed with Warzone. * Best load-outs are faster to unlock with the paid game, so it is semi play-to-win * Warzone client is MASSIVE (seriously, like fill your entire SSD massive) because it installs other games alongside * Servers are awful, with extremely low tick-rates, so movement and shooting feels pretty ropey * A general sense of sameyness crept in after a few hours. I have a hunch that this is due to a low skill ceiling to the mechanics. Whilst I'm sure this makes the game more accessible to a wider audience, I found it left me with no sense of progression. Like eating a Big Mac rather than a nourishing meal.
- nawgz 6y ago
  * Plunder provides a similar ability to progress loadouts as either paid game * it’s the biggest game I’ve ever seen and updates way too much. Feels like it ate my entire 1.2TB soft cap last month. Sadly the other games are also coming with +60-80gb on top of wz itself * agreed * in solos, it is a pretty terrible game, but the other modes require good team play and utility usage. I think there is a big skill gap, but the game is very slow paced, and it’s hard to objectively describe success. Is it frags? Placement? I suppose it depends on your goals. I can say watching streamers get 25 frags against top quality players shows you that aggression and mechanical skill are still rewarded in my opinion

meristohm 6y ago

I used to be trapped in those icky Skinner boxes, and feel so much better to have moved on. While I have some good memories of my time in WoW, especially the early “wonder days” of shared social space and learning how to communicate with people online, and fewer good memories relative to time spent in Diablo 3, Heroes of the Storm, and Hearthstone, I feel like there are large chunks of time missing from my past. From what I’ve read about alcoholism it feels similar. Thanks to The Blindboy Podcast and his sharing the mental-health tools (CBT, TA & others) that helped him crawl through crippling anxiety I feel much more in control of my time and actions. Very rarely now do I feel like hours slipped by with no lasting benefit. Escaping responsibilities with games I wasn’t refreshed, but drained. Multitasking will elicit this drained feeling still. Reading or listening to a good book (and I’m more and more willing to not finish books that aren’t “good” for me), going for a walk in the woods, gardening, making music, and making useful things are how I’ve replaced the videogame Skinner box.