All Blizzard Franchises to become MMOGs? *UPDATED*

[bapenguin]

I'm not sure about the credibility of this site (http://f13.net/?itemid=167) but if this turns out to be true it's pretty huge news. Apparantly Vivendi (the company that owns Blizzard) gave a presentation yesterday on WallStreet. During it Vivendi stated that all Blizzard games are going to be of the MMOG model.

"All Blizzard franchises will become MMOGs."

All. They claim they have a model now to develop an MMOG in 3 years for $50 million. WoW cost 50 million euros and took 4 1/2 years.

They have bifurcated the MMOG market into two parts: long session games (more than two hours per session) and short session games (less than two hour sessions.) They will also be rolling out a bunch of short session games under the Sierra Online brand. An example is FreeStyle, a pick-up basketball online game scheduled for 2007 release. No details on pricing model for the short session games.
All of you guys holding out for Star Craft 2? BOOM HEADSHOT!

Editor's Note - Looks like it's false. (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13867)

[Borys]

A Final Fantasy fanboi posting on some Final Fantasy Blog about a business Vivendi meeting?

I find it very hard to accept as truth.

[Vandenh]

You can bet it is gonna be World of Starcraft. Almost 1000% sure.

[Zawath]

I doubt their fans are going to buy another MMORPG. Most players play only one MMORPG at a time because they take so much time.

[AlmostSente]

I hate Blizzard right now, or at least Vivendi. And this is coming from their greatest fan...

[bapenguin]

A Final Fantasy fanboi posting on some Final Fantasy Blog about a business Vivendi meeting?

I find it very hard to accept as truth.

Yeah I agree. I'm starting to look for more sources now. That's why I put the question marks in the title.

[Reanimated]

Well, Warcraft III and Starcraft are pretty much just online titles. I want to see proper sequels to both, in addition to World of Starcraft and the resurrection of Starcraft Ghost.

I'm not asking too much am I?

[Kelegacy]

IF this were true, Blizzard would be dead to me.

[camberiu]

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidences"
--Carl Sagan

[MosBen]

Of course, the statement that "all Blizzard franchises will become MMOGs" could be read as saying that every franchise they do will get the MMOG treatment, but that single player games will be made as well.

Can somebody refresh my memory as to what the major Blizzard franchises are? All I can think of is Starcraft, Diablo, and Warcraft.

[Goronmon]

I don't think making Diablo 3 a MMOG would be that much of a stretch. Its still really popular online. If it was modeled after Guild Wars, you'd only be replacing the chat rooms with an in-game town.

[Varsity]

Can somebody refresh my memory as to what the major Blizzard franchises are? All I can think of is Starcraft, Diablo, and Warcraft.
That's the lot.

[bapenguin]

Of course, the statement that "all Blizzard franchises will become MMOGs" could be read as saying that every franchise they do will get the MMOG treatment, but that single player games will be made as well.

Can somebody refresh my memory as to what the major Blizzard franchises are? All I can think of is Starcraft, Diablo, and Warcraft.

Good point. Edited the title to reflect that.

[Lord Dongkey]

Goronmon, I hope you're right. Then again, I don't really feel like Guild Wars is an MMORPG in the traditional sense, and it certainly doesn't have the community most of the entrants into the genre have.

Blizzard better treat the Diablo franchise with great care...

[Herald42]

I for one welcome The Lost Vikings MMO.

For a grain of salt, if every Blizzard franchise is being made, you can also expect a second LOTR MMO, and MMOs of Superman, Rock and Roll Racing, and Blackthorn.

[inflamez]

Can somebody refresh my memory as to what the major Blizzard franchises are? All I can think of is Starcraft, Diablo, and Warcraft.

Those are all their major franchises.

But they also released a few other titles.

The Lost Vikings I + II (although I am not sure if it was contracted work or originaly invented by Blizzard.)

Rock 'n' Roll Racing (AutoAssault, anyone?)

and another RPG I can't remember the name of....

I wouldn't call those titles "franchises" and definately not worth creating an MMOG for. Maybe Vivendi got some other IPs for Blizzard to use.

[Demo_Boy]

"They claim they have a model now to develop an MMOG in 3 years for $50 million. WoW cost 50 million euros and took 4 1/2 years."

Now that they've got the unbeatable formula, I guess they can spit out Burning Cursade in 6 months? Wouldn't Blizzard have applied this system to their production flow for expansion packs so why is it taking so long with so little results?

Those numbers sound like the kind of catch line you put out to attract investors. 50 mil for WOW, here's all my money!!!! 4 years later reality hits and the investor is in the hole for so much that he's got to follow up with more to finish the project.

Has Blizzard just cashed in on the best spin line ever?

How long it is taking Duke Nukem Forever to come out will look like a drop in the pan after Blizz takes all the money for all the projects they are about to get flooded with.

Investor Alert!!! Buy NOW!!!

[laggerific]

totally lame! screw mmog's...let's see some real games.

[Goronmon]

Then again, I don't really feel like Guild Wars is an MMORPG in the traditional sense, and it certainly doesn't have the community most of the entrants into the genre have.I don't think any games, even WoW, have that good of communities anyways. I mean, playing AC1 was great, even though it had like 1% of the playerbase WoW has. People were helpful and generally easy going. Most of the times I logged in I wouldn't even fight anything, I would just hang out. Even if those same people play WoW, they are diluted by the 5 million other players, many of whom aren't the "community" type of gamers.

[Shifter]

I for one trust the folks at Blizzard to make a) good game decisions and b) good business decisions. They're one of the only developers out there that have consistently managed to balance both goals. Let's face it, I think they've earned the right for a little confidence. They don't release games until they're ready, period. Who else has beta periods that last a year?

[BigJonno]

Damn, beaten to the "Lost Vikings MMO" comment!

[Borys]

Diablo 2 on Battle.net IS still awesome.

Meph runs, pindle runs, cow runs FTW!

[SexualChoc]

I'll put money on Diablo 3 before World of Starcraft. Blizzard knows the fans want WoS, so they'll just make us wait that little bit longer.

[Voodoo]

I don't think making Diablo 3 a MMOG would be that much of a stretch. Its still really popular online. If it was modeled after Guild Wars, you'd only be replacing the chat rooms with an in-game town.
I've always heard that a Diablo MMORPG was going to be next after WoW. What would be interesting is if they incorporated the random dungeon thing into the MMORPG so that all dungeons and such would be completely randomly setup when instanced or something. Now that would be interesting.

[Worldcrafter]

Those are all their major franchises.

But they also released a few other titles.
Don't forget "Black Thorne". That was a sweet game. I couldn't imagine that translating well to a MMO environment. It would just consist of hundreds of people hugging the walls and taking pot shots at each other. Or you could play a slave and hang there until a stray shot accidentally kills you.

[Wyrm]

I'd be weary of this news, but you also can't really discount it. It's entirely possible that this is where Blizzard will be forced to go. Vivendi is only making Blizzard do this because they aren't profiting off of any other company they own. WoW is a money churning MACHINE. Vivendi alone has made billions from it, increasing their profit margins exponentially, and so, of course, they're requesting another MMO.

I want to know what Blizz has been keeping secret all this time. They have a team that has been working on something for awhile, but they just keep stone walling us. I'm hoping that we find out pretty soon that it's either: 1) Diablo III, 2) World of Starcraft, 3) A new IP.

While sequels to our favorite games would be sweet (and are definitely neccessary, especially in the case of DII), I would love to see something new from Blizz.

Chances are pretty good we wont see a sequel to Warcraft III for a LONG ass time, if ever. Since WoW is a continuation of the storyline and the universe, I doubt they'll do anything other than keep churning out expansions for that.

[CrashCart]

I want to see proper sequels to both, in addition to World of Starcraft and the resurrection of Starcraft Ghost.

I'm not asking too much am I?Only if you want them to bring back Warcraft Adventures, too.

Don't forget "Black Thorne". That was a sweet game. I couldn't imagine that translating well to a MMO environment. It would just consist of hundreds of people hugging the walls and taking pot shots at each other. Or you could play a slave and hang there until a stray shot accidentally kills you.Ah, the memories.

[Goronmon]

I've always heard that a Diablo MMORPG was going to be next after WoW. What would be interesting is if they incorporated the random dungeon thing into the MMORPG so that all dungeons and such would be completely randomly setup when instanced or something. Now that would be interesting.Random dungeons would be sweet, but I can imagine it would be much more difficult in a 3D environment then 2D.

That brings up another point. I wouldn't mind if they made Diablo 3 2D/Pseudo 3D and just made it look absolutely stunning with great special effects, great shadows, reflections, etc.

[Manzy]

Any MMOG's they create will compete with their WOW products. Anyone trying to make an MMOG right now is taking way to high of risk.

[NeuroMan42]

I would welcome a Starcraft MMO-style game. The market needs a great Sci-Fi MMO, as the market currently is unimpressive for this.

Now a new Diablo with good PVP, and a free subscription model would KILL Guildwars.

[Voodoo]

Random dungeons would be sweet, but I can imagine it would be much more difficult in a 3D environment then 2D.

That brings up another point. I wouldn't mind if they made Diablo 3 2D/Pseudo 3D and just made it look absolutely stunning with great special effects, great shadows, reflections, etc.
I agree, but I think you going to have to stop calling it Diablo 3. I do not see a Diablo 3 itself happening. Plus the information I have gathered about the Diablo MMORPG has some sort of three worlds things going on. You'll have Heaven, Hell and then the Earthly world. It would be remarkable (I don't know if possible) to give players a choice of which of the three they choose to play as. And, as in both Diablo games, Heaven and Hell are at war with the Earthly world as being the battlefield. This time I bet all three are fair game possibly. I think at this point I am rambling so I'll go back to writing IT Security policies. :)

[Demo_Boy]

World of Diablo.

[slimfatbaby]

Blizzard can fuck off if that's how it is. The company was built around quality PC releases. Warcraft, Warcraft 2, Starcraft, Diablo, Diablo II, Warcraft 3. They need to continue this tradition. They have their cash cow WoW and it's already hurt the company image enough. They've invested all of their resources in WoW it seems while giving everyone else the shaft. Blizzard NEEDS to continue making their RTS and Action RPG games in a non MMO setting.

The only reason I bought WoW was so the collector's edition could gain value. I refuse to play it. Hell, I even sold my beta to some guy in Germany for $700. I do not like the way MMORPGs can take over people's lives so I swore them off after Ultima Online. I have patiently been waiting for Starcraft 2, Diablo 3 and Warcraft 4. Don't disappoint Blizzard or you'll just be a shit sell out developer.

[CrashCart]

Blizzard can fuck off if that's how it is. The company was built around quality PC releases. Warcraft, Warcraft 2, Starcraft, Diablo, Diablo II, Warcraft 3. They need to continue this tradition. They have their cash cow WoW and it's already hurt the company image enough. They've invested all of their resources in WoW it seems while giving everyone else the shaft. Blizzard NEEDS to continue making their RTS and Action RPG games in a non MMO setting.
You are familiar with how long this particular development house takes to release anything, right? Sure, WoW has a dedicated team of developers and everything, but they are most certainly not the only people working on Blizzard IPs. Whether or not other teams are focusing on turning their other properties into MMOs or not remains to be seen. And it's been known for a while that Blizzard is working on something aside from WoW.

So, unless this is confirmed, you might want to calm down a little bit and wait to see what Blizzard produces. They've always released quality PC games (and technically they haven't broken their tradition of quality PC releases with WoW), and I'm sure they'll continue to do so. With WoW being so huge now, it seems silly for them to compete directly with themselves at this point in time. Plus they've got the first expansion on the horizon, which is sure to draw some people back as well as pick up newcomers. I just can't see them putting two offerings out into the MMO space simulataneously. At least not yet.

But yeah, this is all speculation until we see something official. I personally don't trust the source on this one, but we'll have to wait and see. The post claims that Vivendi made a presentation to Wall Street yesterday? Can this be confirmed anywhere?

[anakin876]

Does Vivendi own Blizzard, or are they just the publisher? I was under the impression that Vivendi was the publisher - in which case they couldn't force Blizz to do anything like this. Anyone know?

[Manzy]

Does Vivendi own Blizzard, or are they just the publisher? I was under the impression that Vivendi was the publisher - in which case they couldn't force Blizz to do anything like this. Anyone know?


They own em.

[anakin876]

They own em.

Sucks to be Blizz. I hope the original owners got so much money that they built an Uncle Scrooge style money bin and now they can swim in fat piles of cash. Otherwise - bummer. Vivendi seems to be solely focused on making money at the expense of everything else - rather than making money WHILE making good games.

[CrashCart]

Sucks to be Blizz. I hope the original owners got so much money that they built an Uncle Scrooge style money bin and now they can swim in fat piles of cash. Otherwise - bummer. Vivendi seems to be solely focused on making money at the expense of everything else - rather than making money WHILE making good games.Well, I don't know for sure, but it seems like Blizzard can do pretty much what they want. As far as deadlines go, they appear to be able to take as much time as they want/need. Vivendi may (or may not) have a say in what they produce next, but if you were them, would you bully around a developer that makes as much cash money for you as Blizzard?

[Rook34]

Shit... I liked Diablo the way it was and I WAS waiting for it with baited anticipation. Maybe it will still be good. I normally like to play with myself.. heh.

[Goronmon]

I think people have to realize that just because its a MMOG does not mean its going to be a WoW version of Diablo/Starcraft. I mean, people don't complain that Blizzard shouldn't release more than 1 single player game at a time because it would just be competing with itself. Why all of a sudden does this argument come up because the game is based online?

Like I said before, Guild Wars proves that you can get a single player experience in an online game. Though, that does not mean that it has to be exactly like GW.

Think of it from a business perspective. With a MMOG like environment, you have greater control over pirating games (if you need to log in to play, people have to have a real copy to create an account). You have the choice to charge subscription fees. You have control over cheats/hacks/etc.

Only downside (as with all online games) is that since the internet connection is required, anytime your internet is down or the servers are down, you can't play.

[SymetriX]

Worthplaying.com just reported that Blizzard has officially come out and stated this is FALSE.

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=34822

For what it's worth, I don't expect they'd *ever* plan to canibalize on WoW's success, or attempt to split the market. But, who knows. Maybe they'll try a massively multiplayer game of a totally different play style, rather than just "skinning" WoW for the starcraft universe.

[CrashCart]

I think people have to realize that just because its a MMOG does not mean its going to be a WoW version of Diablo/Starcraft. I mean, people don't complain that Blizzard shouldn't release more than 1 single player game at a time because it would just be competing with itself. Why all of a sudden does this argument come up because the game is based online?Not because the game is based online, but because of the huge costs associated with maintaining, updating, and adding content associated with a game like WoW. All of this relies heavily on retaining subscribers. People generally don't have time to play multiple MMOs at once because of how time-intensive they can be. And if I don't have sufficient time to feel like I'm getting my $15/month's worth out of it, I won't continue paying. Competing directly in the MMO space is a bad business decision, I think, for that reason. Your actual profit comes from the recurring subscription fees, which people are less likely to shell out to two separate games each month.

Single player games, with online content (DII and the like), or games played over Battle.net or whatever (the Guild Wars servers) are significantly less dependant on retaining customers. The money they make comes that initial purchase and expansions, and they do not have to offset huge costs of maintaining their servers, paying devleopers/support staff, etc. And I wouldn't say that a game like this would be competing with WoW or any of Blizzard's other properties, nor a bad business decision.

I'm not real familiar with Guild Wars, but aren't the only MMO-ish parts of the game the towns? Essentially their match-making 'servers' of the game? Once you go out into the world adventuring, isn't it similar to Diablo II in that the majority of the load is placed on the users (I think?)?

[Goronmon]

Not because the game is based online, but because of the huge costs associated with maintaining, updating, and adding content associated with a game like WoW. All of this relies heavily on retaining subscribers. People generally don't have time to play multiple MMOs at once because of how time-intensive they can be. And if I don't have sufficient time to feel like I'm getting my $15/month's worth out of it, I won't continue paying. Competing directly in the MMO space is a bad business decision, I think, for that reason. Your actual profit comes from the recurring subscription fees, which people are less likely to shell out to two separate games each month.Still, you're assuming that every MMOG they make has to be time-consuming and cost $15 a month to play. Sure, this may end up being true, but my point is that it might not be. And honestly, how many people play multiple single player games at once? Even if you have a couple games you are currently playing, its not often (at least in my case) where I am switching between the two on a daily basis even. If the game is online-based, with an episodic-type pay model, then people only have to play as long as they want to.

Single player games, with online content (DII and the like), or games played over Battle.net or whatever (the Guild Wars servers) are significantly less dependant on retaining customers. The money they make comes that initial purchase and expansions, and they do not have to offset huge costs of maintaining their servers, paying devleopers/support staff, etc. And I wouldn't say that a game like this would be competing with WoW or any of Blizzard's other properties, nor a bad business decision.Except even with Battle.net they are maintaining servers, paying developers for updates, etc. Just because the scale isn't as grand as WoW, doesn't mean these costs suddenly evaporate.

I'm not real familiar with Guild Wars, but aren't the only MMO-ish parts of the game the towns? Essentially their match-making 'servers' of the game? Once you go out into the world adventuring, isn't it similar to Diablo II in that the majority of the load is placed on the users (I think?)?The easiest way to think of it is that everything is instanced except for towns. I still consider it a MMOG however, since you are still on GW servers the entire time and are maintaining a persistent online character.

Edit: Heck, if you've played endgame WoW, you've gotten a taste of GW. At 60 all you really do is use the cities to find instance groups.

[TrackZero]

Sweet zombie jesus. What are you doing to my StarCraft 2?!? You fucking profit driven animals!

[Goronmon]

Sweet zombie jesus. What are you doing to my StarCraft 2?!? You fucking profit driven animals!Who knows. Maybe S2 will be a MMOG where your "character" is a general who commands an army. As you do better you can get more units, unit improvements, etc...you know, that kinda stuff.

[CrashCart]

Except even with Battle.net they are maintaining servers, paying developers for updates, etc. Just because the scale isn't as grand as WoW, doesn't mean these costs suddenly evaporate.You bring up some very good points, which I won't address item by item as I don't disagree with you, though I do think this particular point warrants discussion.

It is true that your costs don't evaporate but I suppose my point was the cost between maintaining games of one type versus the other is drastic enough to not want two WoWs running at once. As far as the cost of continued development/support for the singleplayer games with online capability like Diablo II goes.. Sure, they patch it once in a while but I would argue that the development costs are practically non-existent compared to an MMO-style game. I haven't played D2 in years, but I remember when patch 1.10 was "due out soon," and it came out no less than a year later.

Anyway, it seems like it would be a bad idea to me only because you're basically (in a very generalized sense) doubling your server and personnel requirements to maintain two such games, while not necessarily doubling your subscriber-base. You'll certainly draw some people away from WoW and certainly pick up some new subscribers, but I would imagine the best idea is to stick with what you've got in that genre (MMO) and release something that uses a different subscription model (if it uses one at all) or release another singleplayer title with multiplayer capability or something. With any other type of game than the beast that is WoW, you're not necessarily relying on the customers playing essentially indefinitely, and you can afford to see people come and go as they please for other games that you or other developers produce.

In any event, it appears the rumor has been debunked for now. Basically they've just said that nothing about what they're doing other than the expansion has been confirmed. So, it could still be possible. But who knows what they're going to do next. Apparently not the guys at F13.net.

[ÜberJumper]

AFAIK, Starcraft 2 is in development.

[Voodoo]

AFAIK, Starcraft 2 is in development.
You damn right it is!