Activision Blizzard 4Q Results: D3 12m sold WW

General Discussion
Prev 1 4 5 6 15 Next
02/07/2013 01:30 PMPosted by Monsta
Pretty good for a dying game. See you all at the expac!


It was not dying when it was born, its dying now.
02/07/2013 08:22 PMPosted by xanzul


Opinionated.

It was actually most disappointing game of the year. < Fact.


I agree and yet the game did what Blizzard set out to do: sell copies. And yet again shareholders aren't interested in a philosophical debate on video game design. They care about a return on their investment and really honestly don't care about what actually happens in game.


Xanzul the massive problem you're overlooking is the fact that D3 success in the eyes of the "shareholders" is contingent on good will & hype engendered by previous titles. These previous titles defined genres and pushed the edge.

While D3 enjoys success derived from its predecessors, the same may not be true with regard to its successors. It may be stable for several titles yet to come, but in time, should the downward trend in genuine quality continue, "shareholders" will lose faith just as players will lose faith.

Good will only lasts for so long -- it requires replenishment.


Guess I'll just keep saying that since you keep saying your line over and over.
Xanzul the massive problem you're overlooking is the fact that D3 success in the eyes of the "shareholders" is contingent on good will & hype engendered by previous titles. These previous titles defined genres and pushed the edge.

While D3 enjoys success derived from its predecessors, the same may not be true with regard to its successors. It may be stable for several titles yet to come, but in time, should the downward trend in genuine quality continue, "shareholders" will lose faith just as players will lose faith.

Good will only lasts for so long -- it requires replenishment.


But again, several million were sold after all the hue and cry and bad reviews, so D3's success hasn't relied on D2's as much as everyone claims.

In any case, there seems to be a lot of people emotionally invested in D3 being perceived as a failed game, for whatever reason.
Xanzul the massive problem you're overlooking is the fact that D3 success in the eyes of the "shareholders" is contingent on good will & hype engendered by previous titles. These previous titles defined genres and pushed the edge.

While D3 enjoys success derived from its predecessors, the same may not be true with regard to its successors. It may be stable for several titles yet to come, but in time, should the downward trend in genuine quality continue, "shareholders" will lose faith just as players will lose faith.

Good will only lasts for so long -- it requires replenishment.


But again, several million were sold after all the hue and cry and bad reviews, so D3's success hasn't relied on D2's as much as everyone claims.

In any case, there seems to be a lot of people emotionally invested in D3 being perceived as a failed game, for whatever reason.


Making the claim that people arguing for D3 not being a lively game must be people who are irrationally invested in disliking the game is about as a valid a point as claiming that due to the fact copies were sold X time after launch, it must necessarily be due to interest apart from past title success.


But again, several million were sold after all the hue and cry and bad reviews, so D3's success hasn't relied on D2's as much as everyone claims.

In any case, there seems to be a lot of people emotionally invested in D3 being perceived as a failed game, for whatever reason.


Making the claim that people arguing for D3 not being a lively game must be people who are irrationally invested in disliking the game is about as a valid a point as claiming that due to the fact copies were sold X time after launch, it must necessarily be due to interest apart from past title success.


The fact that people are in this thread negatively spinning D3's success makes my point very valid.

Especially since D3 has sold well even after been slammed with horrendous reviews and (as has been pointed out in this very thread) failed to win any gaming awards. Well, it did win one, didn't it? Best sound or something like that?
12 million in all of 2012? They sold 10 million in 4 months, 3.5 million in the first 24 hours and 6.3 million in the first week, this doesn't look good because that's a sharp decline.
12 million in all of 2012? They sold 10 million in the first month, this doesn't look good.


*Sigh*

7 million. They sold seven million the first month, so an additional five million have been sold since then.

Edit: You do know that that 3.4 million in the first 24 hours is included in the 6.3 million sold in the first week, right?
Look, I had fun in the game. I had even more fun playing the AH.

Logically though, I just forsee the need





Guess I'll just keep saying that since you keep saying your line over and over.


Look I'm not saying D3 doesn't have significant issues and that Blizzard didn't drop the ball. The game has issues and they need to be fixed and many decisions of the D3 development team are quite questionable but to sit there and claim it happened simply and purely because of greed is flat out pants on head stupid. I'm sorry but that is just the reality of the situation.

Is Blizzard perfect? No. Do they make mistakes? Most definitely. Do they learn from them? Yes which is precisely why they are still here after over two decades and not some one hit wonder. That is what matters to shareholders and what is one of many important factors in determining long term viability of an investment. So again like I said the shareholders just don't care about the minutia that gets whined about on these forums and they certainly don't buy into the hyperbole and mass hysteria that passes for constructive feedback around here. They are looking at the big picture whereas most of you can't seem to look past your own pet issues.


The glaring problem is this:

Blizzard's first games were rock-solid genre defining games. WarCraft series. Diablo series. Starcraft & BW. Even WoW catapulted the popularity into the mainstream.

The concern, however, is that the current line of games seem to lack those original, lasting, genre-defining qualities -- for which Blizzard received its successes in the past. Thus should they fail to return to that lasting quality, they stand to risk losing the good will and faith engendered by these past titles.

It is not as if there are good games and bad games intertwined in chronological order. The concern is that the good games have transitioned into games of less genuine quality and staying power -- they're stale.

How is Blizzard to overcome this if they are simply to be content with high sales figures derived from their past success? The missing link is that they must continue upholding the making of genuine, strong games, in order to ensure long term success

IMHO
02/07/2013 08:46 PMPosted by Ryaskybird
12 million in all of 2012? They sold 10 million in the first month, this doesn't look good.


*Sigh*

7 million. They sold seven million the first month, so an additional five million have been sold since then.

Edit: You do know that that 3.4 million in the first 24 hours is included in the 6.3 million sold in the first week, right?


I edited my original post

The glaring problem is this:

Blizzard's first games were rock-solid genre defining games. WarCraft series. Diablo series. Starcraft & BW. Even WoW catapulted the popularity into the mainstream.

The concern, however, is that the current line of games seem to lack those original, lasting, genre-defining qualities -- for which Blizzard received its successes in the past. Thus should they fail to return to that lasting quality, they stand to risk losing the good will and faith engendered by these past titles.

It is not as if there are good games and bad games intertwined in chronological order. The concern is that the good games have transitioned into games of less genuine quality and staying power -- they're stale.

How is Blizzard to overcome this if they are simply to be content with high sales figures derived from their past success? The missing link is that they must continue upholding the making of genuine, strong games, in order to ensure long term success

IMHO
02/07/2013 08:49 PMPosted by Icon0clast
I edited my original post


As of December 31, 2012, the game had been out seven months. According to your numbers (citation needed), in the first four months, it sold 9 million copies, meaning that the next three months it sold 3 million copies.

Where's the decline?

Edit: forgot the quote.
#1 PC game of 2012, 12 million copies sold worldwide.

Pretty good for a dying game. See you all at the expac!

0/10


less then 0/10
Grats blizz! All you haters out there that bought the game, there is nothing to blame but you. At least you get to waste your time to troll (enjoy) the D3 forums. Later futards.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum