http://www.gamers.com/news/1175534
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Printable View
http://www.gamers.com/news/1175534
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
makes sense so im not gonna bother clicking that link.
Damn that's a lot of pre-orders !! And people say PC games don't sell well.
I'm not interested in Warcraft III, but World of Warcraft or whatever it is called looks smokin' hot !!
- Kabuki
... holy crap that's a lot... :eek:
Remember when Driver 2 ads pressed how many preorders it got?
(Remember Driver 2, for that matter?)
Thats Blizzard and Warcraft we are talking about here. They have a great reputation for great games, and people know that.
Looking forward WC3 myself :)
Yeah I was gonna post a link to this.
Does anyone really understand how much money blizzard just made?
4.5 million copies have been pre-sold. And since blizzard publishes its own games and their are no liscensing fees in PC land. Blizzard just raked in millions. I would have to make an assumption that they are getting somewhere in the $20-30 range off each copy sold.
20 X 4,500,000 = 90,000,000
Actually, Serra publishes thier games now. Marketing takes a little off the top too for advertisement fees. I'd put thier earnings closer to $10 a copy.
Don't forget that this is 4.5 million sold units to stores, not pre-sales to customers.
well I hope the game turns out as good as I hear its going to be
anyways I am happy for Blizzard since they make some good games
You sure about that?Quote:
Originally posted by Zondaro
Don't forget that this is 4.5 million sold units to stores, not pre-sales to customers.
Sounds like pre-sales to customers to me.Quote:
Originally posted by Gamers.com
...the 4.5 million pre-order copies sold...
dam
Yeah the news posts I have seen on the "Going Gold" article all state that 4.5 million copies have been pre-sold. That is the number of copies world-wide on presales.
Gamestop Managers with the most reservations in thier district for Warcraft 3 get a Leather Warcraft 3 Jacket. Retail managers live for that shit.
ºTracer
It is. Erm... will be, I mean. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Strawberry Shortcake
well I hope the game turns out as good as I hear its going to be
I saw that too and I could not believe it. 4.5 million is a staggering amount. That may be the pre-order from stores and not straight to customers. Sounds like it won't be a hard game to get.
People love Blizzard games, and when you only have 3 franchises, release a new game about every 2 years, it builds up demand! Oh and Blizzard games are published by Vivendi...
I can't imagine why people like these games. I just can't. I'd rather play MGS2 than these types of games... seriously.:eek:
You'd play MGS2 over a Blizzard game? Eesh, that's saying a lot. No offense to the MGS2 lovers out there.
thats why i hated working there. when do you ever see a DM/Manager tring to get reservations? it's always the naieve kids that work there busting their asses to keep their jobs that get the reservations but they always the first to get the axe. fuck them and eb...they both need to go out of business. and anybody who's worked there can agree with me. they treat their employees like shit while the higher ups get all the recognition.Quote:
Originally posted by TracerBullet
Gamestop Managers with the most reservations in thier district for Warcraft 3 get a Leather Warcraft 3 Jacket. Retail managers live for that shit.
ºTracer
"oh manager of store 1305 got good reservation percentages for the month"
no he didnt....HIS CREW DID!
Quote:
Originally posted by Rumpy
You'd play MGS2 over a Blizzard game? Eesh, that's saying a lot. No offense to the MGS2 lovers out there.
I'd play with a PS2 controller, plugged into fresh hot dog shit before I'd play a Blizzard game. A company I hate more than Square/EA... I'm not exaggerating even....
Blizzard pwnz all j00 base :)
if this game could work on console it needs to be on Xbox and online.
it looks good, but i miss the hand drawn stylings of warcraft 1 and 2.
actually you know what ? fuck warcraft. im not buying it, cause the last two were more addictive than crack, soon as i get one of those pretty real time strategy toys dont expect to see me for a month.
I can't imagine why people like these games. I just can't. I'd rather play MGS2 than these types of games... seriously.
************
If it was on Xbox, he would probably change his mind, but since its not, than it crap. Typical Ethugg. Sometimes I wonder if ever likes anything at all, since most of his replyes are complains about crap this and crap that.
Why would being on XBchange my mind? I hate at least 55 of the 70 or so XB games released. You sound like a broken record with your 'typical EThugg' replies. I hate Blizzard, RTS games, and this game specifically. Don't try to pretend my opinion is invalid because you have no taste.Quote:
Originally posted by Despair
If it was on Xbox, he would probably change his mind, but since its not, than it crap. Typical Ethugg. Sometimes I wonder if ever likes anything at all, since most of his replyes are complains about crap this and crap that.
I call a lot of stuffcrap because a lot of stuff is.... crap.
Just about what the fuck are you trying to say here?Quote:
Originally posted by Andy787
Blizzard pwnz all j00 base :)
Damn Thugg, this is one point we don't agree on. Blizzard makes some damn fine games. They may not be your style but you can't diss and say they aren't great games. Otherwise there still wouldn't be people playing a five year old game on the net.
Your opinion is your opinion and on this occasion, we don't have the same said opinion.
I just preordered the special edition on Amazon.. you guys taking down names of players? Add me to the list then... I'll probably get hooked on this real quick.
And Warcraft 3 on Xbox? Please... the Xbox can't touch the greatness of WC3 on a PC. It would be sacrilegious. Some games don't belong on consoles.
PS: Just in case you're wondering, Starcraft 64 wasn't that great IMO, stick with the PC if you can.
Dang, even Diablo? That game kicked ass when it was called Record of Lodoss War: Advent of Kardice.Quote:
Originally posted by EThugg
I hate Blizzard
Especially Diablo! :)
A good statement that can be turned around and used on the one who said it.Quote:
Don't try to pretend my opinion is invalid because you have no taste.
Please stop doing that.Quote:
Originally posted by Andy787
Blizzard pwnz all j00 base :)
Blizzard can suck it. Almost no innovation over there. What was their last game that wasn't a sequal? Starcraft? And that was just Warcraft-in-space. Yeesh.
They're Square of the PC developers. But even Square makes the occasional good game.
That's the difference between Square and Blizzard. Square makes the occational good game, Blizzard always does. And who the Hell cares about innovation? Fun, a nicely woven story, character design, game play sure. But innovation? Tony Hawk 4 isn't any less fun than THPS one just because it runs on the same engine (essentially). Sometimes innovation can be a hinderance. Look at FFVII. I'm a fan of the game, but Square almost messed up by doing to many new things all at once.Quote:
Originally posted by The Ampersand
Blizzard can suck it. Almost no innovation over there. What was their last game that wasn't a sequal? Starcraft? And that was just Warcraft-in-space. Yeesh.
They're Square of the PC developers. But even Square makes the occasional good game.
Let me guess, you just don't like PC games, and especially RTS?
There's a few things you're missing:Quote:
Originally posted by The Ampersand
Blizzard can suck it. Almost no innovation over there. What was their last game that wasn't a sequal? Starcraft? And that was just Warcraft-in-space. Yeesh.
They're Square of the PC developers. But even Square makes the occasional good game.
There isn't a single Square game in existance that gets played for as many years by such huge communities as Blizzard games. Warcraft II still gets played by large clans, and that came out in 1996. And I know you know about Diablo obsession.
Blizzard games all have two things Square games rarely have/never have/don't have together: multiplayer and perfect balance. All of Blizzard's games work perfectly in multiplayer, and their RTS' are never unbalanced in any way. On top of that, one can have groups of people playing together for a common goal against other players, and that's always fun.
Blizzard adds new things to their respective genres, so they do innovate. No, they don't create wholly new games, but that alone is not innovation (for instance, if I repackage FFVII and call it Pillow's Quest and change nothing but the look and name of the characters, is that innovation?), however, what they add is. Introduing runes in Diablo 2 had effects on game developers that can still be felt in games yet to be released. The Heroes in WC3 are like nothing else in any RTS, and literally change the entire way parties must be setup and how battle flows. They've combined genres, adding in shops and hired help, adding in Creeps. Those concepts alone are not new, but the way in which they are used and presented are.
And I don't even have to mention how much Worlds of Warcraft is going to make FFXI look like a middle schooler's programming project.
Innovation is awesome and nessecary to improve in the long run. Perfection can be enjoyed until innovation reaches the next level.
i respect Blizzard for one reason. they always release FINISHED games. sure they have a few....and i mean VERY few patches for their games but the bugs they fix are nitpickey at best. of course if i had 8 years to make a game it's be that good too :) you cant say that about most game developers these days.
Blizzard ownz all your base* l33t speak at that.
mech does have a real point here- one thing Blizzard is excellent at is balance., i mean look at starcraft, you have a game with 3 completely different races which each employ 3 completely different sets of troops and each race requires a totally different tactic then the next, and yet somehow they're balanced.
that's beyond commendable.
I was just trying to be so rediculous that someone would want to know what the fuck I'm talking about :)Quote:
Originally posted by Zorro
Just about what the fuck are you trying to say here?
Wow... statements like these are the perfect example of the effects of mainstream gaming and people who are WAY too biased. You obviously have not played more than 2 minutes of Starcraft to be able to make a ridiculous statment like that. Go play some games and then talk.Quote:
Originally posted by The Ampersand
Blizzard can suck it. Almost no innovation over there. What was their last game that wasn't a sequal? Starcraft? And that was just Warcraft-in-space. Yeesh.
They're Square of the PC developers. But even Square makes the occasional good game.
Blizzard isn't really the company of innovation... they are the company of perfection...
there's isn't a single company with a Real-Time-Strategy game that is better than Starcraft... and there isn't a single Action/RPG-dungeon-crawler that can top Diablo 2...
... sure, they don't like to mix things up... but if they keep making perfect games, i really don't care...
I don't play much other PC titles, so I'm not sure if anyone's done it before...
but the way the Zerg, Terran, and Protoss races each of unique strengths and weaknesses that affect the gameplay is a testament of how great this game was. Not only that, Blizzard has a great sense of humor as well.
I'm not looking forward to an MMORPG (basically because I don't like 'em) game from Blizzard but I really hope Starcraft gets a worthy sequel.
I would love to see Diablo 3 as well :) I love Diablo 1&2, and another game in the series would be great.
The next game in the Star Craft universe in supposed to be a FPS.
I thought Diablo 1 & 2 were fun but not as great as Starcraft. And it's not because of the different genres. I thought that D2's combat system could've been a little more... say.... complex. That's right. The magic system was great... but the simple clicking of a mouse for a few repetitive hits didn't do much for me. I think Revenant had a combo system for its fighting... not too sure.
And if there's nothing else, Blizzard makes some damn fine quality cinemas. They top Pixar in my book.
Yes, Blizzard has a great GCI work(some of the best in the business), and voice acting in their games. I also enjoy the music, and art related to the games, like those great manuals for WC2, Diablo and SC.
My roommate loved the WC2 soundtrack so much he would rip the music off the cd and just listen to it for hours. I didn't mind. :)Quote:
Originally posted by Despair
Yes, Blizzard has a great GCI work(some of the best in the business), and voice acting in their games. I also enjoy the music, and art related to the games, like those great manuals for WC2, Diablo and SC.
And artwork is incredible. Not so much Starcraft but in Warcraft I really like the mythical creatures that Blizzard borrows from ancient history art and "updates" them to breathe new life into the myth of the era. The orcs are looking very cool this time around and I like the fact that they are now a more proud and honorable race then a bunch of savage, barbaric monsters... kinda blurs the line between good and evil.
For me, Diablo series was Blizzard best, I spent countless hours playing it in single play and on Battle net, and I loved every minute of it. Sure, the clicking can get repetetive, but I love the atmosphere of the game, random generated dungeons and ares, countless items to find, and many other things.
Not to say that I dont like WC2 and SC, which are my favorite RTS games. I just loved the fantasy world of WC, with great characters and building art and presentation. And SC was a very unique take on the space combat, and 3 different races were great on each own accord.
One thing I have to say about Diablo 2... when I'm playing and I think I'm done playing... I can't stop. I have to keep going and raising my character... or I want to kill a couple more enemies to squeeze in a few more EXP. I think Everquest is kinda like that... but even worse...
I don't know...last time I played Brood War, my Zerg had taken a brutal hit from a patch. All their strengths had been deminished and Protoss became the stand out dominate race of the three.Quote:
...and their RTS' are never unbalanced in any way
AMEN to that... and what other company can make a multiplayer game that works perfect over the internet with only a 56KB connection?? almost every online game now needs you to have a DSL connection just to play decent gameQuote:
Originally posted by MechDeus
Innovation is awesome and nessecary to improve in the long run. Perfection can be enjoyed until innovation reaches the next level.
Plus I think Blizzard should be commended for running and maintaining Battle.net. It couldn't be easier to get a game online.
But, I REALLY hope they are set for WCIII's release. The servers are going to be bum rushed come launch. It's going to be nuts. Let's hope it doesn't turn into another D2 cluster fuck.
Hey, I freakin' LOVED Lodoss War. After hearing everyone say that it was a "Diablo-Clone" I picked up Diablo II for the PC and I have to say 'What are you talkin' about?"Quote:
Originally posted by StriderKyo
Dang, even Diablo? That game kicked ass when it was called Record of Lodoss War: Advent of Kardice.
Sure, the games LOOK similar, but the control in Lodoss War was SO much better. I hate the idea of just clicking on things. I think you get a much tighter experience with a controller in hand, moving your character, and swinging you sword in the direction you face, and actually having an attack button. Not only that, but it seems to me that Diablo II had more in common with PSO than Lodoss War. Lodoss War had a real story, and one constant huge world, with side quests galore. Diablo II is a randomly generated dungeon crawl where the emphasis was on finding cool rare itmes.
I wish Diablo was like Lodoss War, cause I don't think we'll ever be seeing a sequel to that fine game.
Well, I would agree with you.Quote:
Originally posted by SearchManX
Wow... statements like these are the perfect example of the effects of mainstream gaming and people who are WAY too biased. You obviously have not played more than 2 minutes of Starcraft to be able to make a ridiculous statment like that. Go play some games and then talk.
But . . . I own and have played more than I should have: Warcraft 2, Diablo 1 and 2, Starcraft and the expansion pack.
I also regularly play PC games. Some of my favorties include: Age of Empires 1 & 2, Civilization 3, Quake 3, GTA3, and various MUDs. I probably play PC games more than I do console games, but I like them an equal amount.
I guess I could say that Blizzard sticks to what they know best.
:rolleyes:
So does Sid Maier, ID Soft, and Rockstar:Quote:
Originally posted by The Ampersand
I guess I could say that Blizzard sticks to what they know best.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:Quote:
...Civilization 3, Quake 3, GTA3...
Ok. Let me explain:
There's a few types of games that I consider good (or worth my time).
1. A game that is innovative and fun. Enough said about that.
2. A game that is innovative but not quite as good as it could be. I commend developers for trying something new, even if it doesn't turn out to be a good game. There's always hope for an improved sequel.
3. A game that is not innovative, but does what it tries to do very well. As you said, ID, Rockstar, and Fireaxis fall under this category. The Street Fighter series is an excellent example. The series doesn't have many major jumps in gameplay, but rather focuses on many smaller changes.
I do not consider Diablo, Diablo 2, Warcraft, Warcraft 2, or Starcraft to fall under any of these categories. Therefore, I do not like Blizzard as a company. I cannot comment on their one SNES game, as I have never played it. Who knows, it may be good.
All you have to say is that you don't like them. Not that they don't fall into your categories, or that you "don't like them as a company."Quote:
Originally posted by The Ampersand
Ok. Let me explain:
There's a few types of games that I consider good (or worth my time).
1. A game that is innovative and fun. Enough said about that.
2. A game that is innovative but not quite as good as it could be. I commend developers for trying something new, even if it doesn't turn out to be a good game. There's always hope for an improved sequel.
3. A game that is not innovative, but does what it tries to do very well. As you said, ID, Rockstar, and Fireaxis fall under this category. The Street Fighter series is an excellent example. The series doesn't have many major jumps in gameplay, but rather focuses on many smaller changes.
I do not consider Diablo, Diablo 2, Warcraft, Warcraft 2, or Starcraft to fall under any of these categories. Therefore, I do not like Blizzard as a company. I cannot comment on their one SNES game, as I have never played it. Who knows, it may be good.
Them as a company has nothing to do with whether or not you like their games.
So, just say it already! You don't like their games. And for God's sake! Please stop skirting around that statement. It isn't anyone's fault. You just don't like them.
:lol:Quote:
Originally posted by Captain Vegetable
All you have to say is that you don't like them. Not that they don't fall into your categories, or that you "don't like them as a company."
Them as a company has nothing to do with whether or not you like their games.
So, just say it already! You don't like their games. And for God's sake! Please stop skirting around that statement. It isn't anyone's fault. You just don't like them.
I . . don't . .
prefer their games.
:pQuote:
Originally posted by The Ampersand
:lol:
I . . don't . .
prefer their games.