You forgot to mention on how they messed up the story of the Warcraft series so bad, especially with the human side. I'm sure Lord Anduin Lothar will be rolling in his grave right now...

i wont be purchasing diablo 3 due to blizzard's business actions as of late. I was a consistent top 100 ladder druid (hardcore) player back in the early 00s.

With that said, they still (sadly) will get my money for starcraft 2. I play that game a lot, SC1 is my favorite game of all time, and I have a fairly large community of friends who play it.

But ya, blizzard took a major turn for the worse when they released WoW. Not because "OMG MMORPGS R DA DEVIL!!!", but because they stopped releasing a hit every year (look at blizzard's release schedule from 1995 to 2004..war 2, diablo 1, starcraft, broodwar, diablo 2, diablo 2: lod, war 3, war 3: tft). WoW came out in 2004, and then from 2004 to 2010 we got nothing but 2 WoW expansions.

good article (very long tho): http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battle-net-2-0-the-antithesis-of-consu...

I think I had heard that the WC story was indeed screwed up in WoW, but again, since I don't play WoW....Also, I'm not as enriched in the WC story anyway, so they could have done a number of things and I'd probably never know. But yeah, I had heard something about that.

Speaking of stories, I haven't looked up too many thpoilerth, but I had heard that StarCraft II's story becomes disappointing. From some things I have heard....yeah, I agree. Now, I suppose one could say, and I have heard it said, the games' story was never that deep or involved to begin with. True, but when I played through the first game...so many years ago...I liked it enough, and wanted to see what would happen. Another thing that some might say is that SCII is all about multiplayer anyway, which, well obviously that is a huge, if not the key, part of it, I don't deny that. But since they actually bother to add a story mode, then you'd hope it would at least be worth something, too.

Something I forgot to mention about SCII the first time was I also thought it was complete bullshit when Blizzard announced that only the Terrans would be playable on the game's story/1-player mode. Yes, I know everyone is playable in multiplayer, which again, many would argue is the most important thing, but to me, it still made no sense why only one species is featured in the story mode. That would be like if Blizzard kept releasing 'expansions' for each species and/or class in WoW because the original game only had one, same with Diablo III. Was this another more Activision action/decision? Perhaps.

That's an interesting point you made in 'they stopped releasing a hit every year,' once WoW came out. Looking at their release roster, yeah, actually, that is what happened, you're right! I don't necessarily hold that against them too much, but I guess when you did know something cool from them was coming every year, then yeah, it can be disappointing when that stops.

Oh also, yeah, I think I read that article, DTX! I remember it. Yeah....Yeah, it didn't help Blizzard's case to me, either...At least Blizzard  didn't end up using RealID, in the end....

Blizzard very much underestimated the success that WoW would be on its release. It shouldn't be too hard to find some of the interviews with Blizzard staff saying how overwhelmed they were once they unleashed WoW to the world. They confirmed that other titles being delayed and pushed back was due to maintaining WoW.

As for their newer approach of splitting SC2 into multiple titles, it can be seen in numerous ways.

For one, Blizzard's level of polish and refinement of their games is undeniably one of the highest in the gaming industry - if not the highest. Neither SC2 or any WoW related titles have suffered and great issues upon release. If all campaigns were released originally, it could have delayed the final product a great deal. It could also be viewed they didn't want a repeat of WoWs launch and be overwhelmed with workload if all SC2 titles were combined. (The latter seems unlikely due do SC2 expansions being mainly campaign related - not multiplayer).

On the other hand, as former mentioned in this thread, it would seem Activision is trying to pull out every dollar they can. This seems likely in the case of the SC2 expansions. Other than the additional campaigns, multiplayer would only inherit a few new units and balancing tweaks - something that could be seen as a free patch fix. I don't think many would take kindly to paying for something so minimal.

Finally, there's the view that Blizzard are keeping their games fresh. Without all the WoW expansions, the game would have got stale and receptive - something that many MMOs fall victim to unless they are constantly creating new content for its users. As for SC2, a similar approach was probably adopted to keep the title fresh and highly profitable.

My own opinion on Blizzard is fairly neutral. I understand that the gaming industry is a business after all, but how far can a company go without making victims of their users? I don't feel Blizzard have crossed the line - yet.
Expansions depreciate in price quickly after their release, so it's unlikely I'll be first in line when Heart of the Swarm comes out. Though, I'll definitely obtain it sometime not to distance from its launch.

It was also mentioned about Blizzard's lack of new original titles. Don't forget about their rumoured/leaked MMO codenamed 'Titan' in the works. But if you're not looking to take up a MMO, I can sympathise with your disappointment,

Yeah, I know 'Titan' is in the works, and I guess at least that's something, as far as an all-new property goes. It's...literally the first one they've had in many, many years. But also yeah, since...I don't play online RPGs, Blizzard wouldn't have won me over with the game anyway, even though we know nothing about it right now.

You made some good points, SLY JD, and while I keep them in mind, I just feel differently about Blizzard now anyway. I probably always will, now. :/

I miss the old Blizzard.   World of Warcraft has taken too much from them.  I hope games like Elder Scrolls never go MMO or the same thing will happen to them.

Well, given how enormous WoW is,  successful TES series is, and Interplay is working on Fallout Online, it may just be a matter of time before TES is an online RPG, at this point. I wouldn't be surprised.

Well, I'm still paying for WoW, at least enough to promise I'll use WoW for the next year to get D3 for free.

I was going to pay for it anyway.

It would be sad if TES goes MMO because when making one game they try their best to make a great game.  With MMO they will try to keep people playing like WoW with repetitive tasks, useless pets, things you can buy with real money.

Well, not all online RPGs are the same though; they don't all have 'useless pets,' for example. :P However, given the nature of this kind of game's format, they should consistently give you new things to do, to incentivize you to keep playing, like you said. This type of game is persistant, so without a lot of tasks to do, the game becomes stagnant and pointless. They might as well just make a standard RPG, with Bethesda, for example, already does. I prefer that type of RPG, too, personally, but online types are also popular. It's just the way it is.

The DeathSpank series really mocks the fetch-quest format of RPGs. It's awesome, and I suggest you check the series out! For a lot of reasons, really!

As far as transactions with real money goes, I admit I also find that to be kind of silly, too, but I'm not even sure all RPGs do that; yet, anyway. Most major ones probably do, and they do because well, it's a system they found that works. Keep in mind, you don't have to play that way though, at least, not in any RPG I've ever heard of; it's just an option.