Activision Blizzard Trying To Scare Off Competition?

A few months ago, Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick said investing $500 million to a billion still wouldn’t be enough to compete with an MMORPG like World of Warcraft. The MMORPG space is a costly investment and you’d need to really burn a lot of money to start competing against the mega-giant, but Mythic VP and Warhammer Online lead designer Mark Jacobs disagrees with that quote.

Jacobs says $100-million dollars would be needed to start competing against the giant subscription generator that is World of Warcraft. Although few developers are sitting on $100-million USD, it’s a bit more realistic an investment for a studio to scrape up compared to a billion bucks! A billion dollars is a scary number when you consider that’s the start of an investment that may, or may not, pay off in the end.

Kotick may not be using complete scare tactics, he may be working off experience when dealing with MMORPG’s. A startup MMO isn’t a cookie cutter system, there is a lot of development efforts, $100-million dollars worth, but MMO developers slip dates many times. When you start slipping your dates you’ll start burning more money and, before you know it, you’re a billion in the hole. Jacobs thinks $100-million will cover development costs and messing up, so a billion is still way over budget.

Perhaps this is a bit of a scare tactic, assuming a developer will fail and slip their dates isn’t really a great way to start quoting prices. However, shooting too low isn’t always the best method of building your development assessments. The end result, scream ONE BILLION and you may scare off any potential startup MMO developers.

Warhammer Online lead designer did mention one big barrier to entry: the need for “at least half a million subscribers to be successful.”

(Thanks, 1up)

0 thoughts on “Activision Blizzard Trying To Scare Off Competition?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 407: Third Time’s the CharmEpisode 407: Third Time’s the Charm

If you’re wondering where the podcast has been, it’s been in technical hell. Twice the podcast was recorded each week, and both times there were serious technical issues. This time, we’ve got it right, and even have Paul dropping by to discuss his new book, “Gaymers: the Difference a ‘Y’ Makes: How (and Why) to Make Video Games LGBT Players Care About“. Actually, it’s mostly dominated by a discussion of an episode of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic.

Otherwise, the news items include:

The Question of the Week: “Who is your favorite superhero?”

Achievement Unlocked: Diablo III and Starcraft 2’s New GoalsAchievement Unlocked: Diablo III and Starcraft 2’s New Goals

Microsoft has proven the achievement system is one of the best ways to add replay value to a title and inspire players to overachieve in every game title, no matter how obscure. Now, Blizzard joins the battle for achievements by bringing them to the Blizzard franchises.

As of now, they’re talking Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 enabled achievements to reward players for exploring, leveling and, of course, doing the impossible. Jeff Kaplan, World of Warcraft lead designer, spoke with MTV Multiplayer blog at length about some of the topics on achievements. The future holds an Xbox 360 style achievement system across all Blizzard properties such as WoW, Starcraft and Diablo allowing people to see how you play at “Blizzard games.”

Today, we’re able to compare a gamers score on the Xbox 360 from games like GTA IV and Halo 3 down to titles like Texas Hold’em and Geometry Wars. Imagine being able to compare a players Diablo 3 skills combined with their Starcraft 2 techniques as compared to their epic World of Warcraft battles.

Will it work? Microsoft has proven the achievements drive more players interests but do we need this in a title like Diablo 3? Of course, people overachieve in all Blizzard games because their all so great while some 360 games are only beaten for the achievements (i.e. Madden NFL 06, GUN, etc.)

The end result, value add to a game you’re going to buy anyway. Can anyone really complain?

(Thanks, 1up)