04-04-2003, 06:23 AM
...they can't ban Warcraft III players without touching Diablo II players. It would be two-faced, and Blizzard doesn't have enough "face" left to lose to such an act. By banning Warcraft III players from pretty much the get-go, they opened their own Pandora's Box: now they have to enforce at LEAST Diablo II, or suffer some VERY bad PR.
And, if you don't believe it, ask yourself: why now? After ALL this time that the game has been out, why NOW? This is just further compounded by the fact that ANY revenue they gain from sales off of D2 these days will NOT counter-balance the current, nor future, cost of maintaining D2.
And the final thing? Server costs. It's one small (or large, depending on how you look at it) step towards phasing out Diablo II support. I don't (yet) believe Blizzard would permanently stop supporting ANY of their games, as I don't think they're that horrible of a company (after all, they're "gamers too"; I think they'd take the loss of older game support about as well as we would, which is to say not very well at all). However, I do think that, by the time Warcraft III is as old as Diablo II is now (or, rather, by the time Diablo II is as old as Diablo is now), we'll be seeing ALOT more restrictions on Diablo II. Like, perhaps, the loss of Open support? Maybe restricted to only public channels? The list can go on.
Blizzard has said it a thousand times: D2 is old, and they need to make money. Simple as that. All the above points tie DIRECTLY into that mindset. I don't think the above points are the ONLY reason Blizzard did these bannings (remember: they're gamers too), but I think it was probably the weightier of the reasons. *shrugs* But, hey, I'm not Blizzard, and I don't know them. I'm just connecting the dots. Your picture may vary. :)
In any case, I'm glad they did it, and I hope they continue. I'm sure it'll be a big headache for them, but in the long run, it's for the best. And, I think they're smart enough to know that, and believe it.
And, if you don't believe it, ask yourself: why now? After ALL this time that the game has been out, why NOW? This is just further compounded by the fact that ANY revenue they gain from sales off of D2 these days will NOT counter-balance the current, nor future, cost of maintaining D2.
And the final thing? Server costs. It's one small (or large, depending on how you look at it) step towards phasing out Diablo II support. I don't (yet) believe Blizzard would permanently stop supporting ANY of their games, as I don't think they're that horrible of a company (after all, they're "gamers too"; I think they'd take the loss of older game support about as well as we would, which is to say not very well at all). However, I do think that, by the time Warcraft III is as old as Diablo II is now (or, rather, by the time Diablo II is as old as Diablo is now), we'll be seeing ALOT more restrictions on Diablo II. Like, perhaps, the loss of Open support? Maybe restricted to only public channels? The list can go on.
Blizzard has said it a thousand times: D2 is old, and they need to make money. Simple as that. All the above points tie DIRECTLY into that mindset. I don't think the above points are the ONLY reason Blizzard did these bannings (remember: they're gamers too), but I think it was probably the weightier of the reasons. *shrugs* But, hey, I'm not Blizzard, and I don't know them. I'm just connecting the dots. Your picture may vary. :)
In any case, I'm glad they did it, and I hope they continue. I'm sure it'll be a big headache for them, but in the long run, it's for the best. And, I think they're smart enough to know that, and believe it.
Roland *The Gunslinger*