Still looks too easy, too cartoony, texture quality still looks really low, and i'm told 4-player coop is still the max.
No thanks
ps: Is it still forced online play? If i cannot play the whole game while offline anywhere I go then that's an insant no still.
Are you apart of the group that insists glorified browser games like TL2 and PoE are better than D3 2.0?
Unless your playing on a garbage machine with the graphics turned to max the game looks incredible. It is smooth, dark, gothic and loaded with gruesome and ALIVE details everywhere.
When exactly did it get too easy for you? At release, inferno mode elites were next to impossible to kill and if you play on torment 5 or 6 without the proper gear you are in for a rude awakening.
The RoS patch has saved d3.
They didn't include an offline mode to combat piracy. That is the day and age that we live in. Deal with it. Releasing an offline game in 2014 is an invitation to steal it and the industry loses millions because of piracy. It's a small part of the reason why we haven't seen as many AA titles in the past 2 years.
I agree that the RoS patch did a lot to save. To say that games add online only is still pretty presumptuous. They didn't add online only for consoles. Nor do many other games use online only. I said many others, i know there are a few. That being said, RoS will be fantastic I think. Cant wait to play my crusader.
Why should they reduce the price? Just because you are too cheap to buy it? I'm sure there will be sales in the future, so if coming up with $40 is too much for you, you will probably have a chance to grab it in the future. Save your pennies!!
I already pre-ordered. Can't wait!!
Funny how people defend price gouging. Kind of reminds me of that L'oreal commercial "Because Your Worth It" LMAO
Funny how people complain about the price...when it's had barely changed in the past 30 years. Who is the greedy one?
Barely changed in 30 years.... Interesting. Maybe i'm getting kind of old but I remember things a little differently.
"Though it's a fully featured expansion, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction does pack a hefty retail price of more than $30. So, the question with Lord of Destruction, as with any expansion pack, is whether or not the price suitably justifies the enhancements included."
$30 USD in 2001 when D2 expac was released is worth $39.77 USD today due to inflation.
Originally posted by EndoRoboto Well sounds like you got it all figured out man pat yourself on the back.
As for me: no thanks I'd rather play Simcity at this point instead because i own it and offline patch just released. The good old Diablo days are over for me at least.
While true, I can see why some do not feel the value is there considering they are only adding one new class, one act, and a design decision that finally addresses the randomness problem with the game. I am pretty critical of Actiblizzard and feel the expansion is a sham, but my wife and a couple of RL friends have really been enjoying the changes thus far so I already know I will be buying a copy for her. The game is easy enough for her to play so I am happy shes happy..
So? LoD added two classes, one act, a few UI improvements, new items, new monsters, increased stash space, revamped hirelings, and the ability to play at 800x600. The price ranged between $30-40.
RoS is adding one new act, one new class, new skills for existing classes, new items, new monsters, several entirely new game play modes, a new crafter, a level cap increase, new recipes for existing crafters, and runs between $30-40.
The 'design decision' you disagreed with was corrected with vanilla patch 2.0 free of charge, as well as several graphical enhancements. Clan support was added as well.
I don't see the problem here. Looks to me as if both expansions are roughly equal in content, with LoS just slightly ahead. While I will grant you that LoD did tend to range closer to the $30 mark, if you take into account inflation & increased development costs, a ~$10 higher price is actually pretty reasonable.
Hooray for hypocrisy, I guess.
Originally posted by sayuu
Originally posted by laserit
Originally posted by Darknessguy64
Originally posted by laserit
Originally posted by Darknessguy64
Originally posted by Legere
make it $15 or $20 bucks and I'll give it a go.
I've already paid $60 for D3 core game
Why should they reduce the price? Just because you are too cheap to buy it? I'm sure there will be sales in the future, so if coming up with $40 is too much for you, you will probably have a chance to grab it in the future. Save your pennies!!
I already pre-ordered. Can't wait!!
Funny how people defend price gouging. Kind of reminds me of that L'oreal commercial "Because Your Worth It" LMAO
Funny how people complain about the price...when it's had barely changed in the past 30 years. Who is the greedy one?
Barely changed in 30 years.... Interesting. Maybe i'm getting kind of old but I remember things a little differently.
"Though it's a fully featured expansion, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction does pack a hefty retail price of more than $30. So, the question with Lord of Destruction, as with any expansion pack, is whether or not the price suitably justifies the enhancements included."
$30 USD in 2001 when D2 expac was released is worth $39.77 USD today due to inflation.
so a price difference of $.33
Tunnel vision:
Tv's, Computers, etc. etc. have significantly dropped in price regardless of inflation.
Why?
Because through technology manufacturer's have been able to significantly reduce the cost per unit of these product's.
So how does this relate to PC games?
Remember those big shiny boxes with the printed manual the size of a small novel and the goodies? (kind of like your favorite breakfast cereal).
The vast majority of PC game sales in this day and age are sold digitaly, which equates to zero raw materials, zero manufacturing costs and more importantly in Blizzard's case, zero publisher's and zero retailer's.
Now lets also take into account the enormous increase in copies sold since the old days of yore.
I venture to say.... the cost per unit of PC entertainment has been drastically reduced over the year's. Infact I would argue that in some cases like Blizzard, the cost per unit has been reduced by as much as 90%
So one must ask themselves, why has the price of PC games unlike the hardware used to play them, actually increased and not decreased? After all the hardware requires raw material's and is much much more susceptible to inflationary pressures.
The answer is quite simple and suggests some self reflection.
Originally posted by SzczepanX Man power is expensive. It's not about making game boxes and goodies. You can't make a game with mass production machines.
Could you please stop bringing common sense to the table? We have no use for common sense and logical arguments in these forums
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Originally posted by SzczepanX Man power is expensive. It's not about making game boxes and goodies. You can't make a game with mass production machines.
Could you please stop bringing common sense to the table? We have no use for common sense and logical arguments in these forums
The use of logic and reason has always been against the rules. Even at home. Try using it with the wife...you'll spend the next week on the couch...
I think it looks pretty good, but im still not sure if i want to buy it.
Originally posted by laokoko "if you want to be a game designer, you should sell your house and fund your game. Since if you won't even fund your own game, no one will".
$30 USD in 2001 when D2 expac was released is worth $39.77 USD today due to inflation.
so a price difference of $.33
Tunnel vision:
Tv's, Computers, etc. etc. have significantly dropped in price regardless of inflation.
Why?
Because through technology manufacturer's have been able to significantly reduce the cost per unit of these product's.
So how does this relate to PC games?
Remember those big shiny boxes with the printed manual the size of a small novel and the goodies? (kind of like your favorite breakfast cereal).
The vast majority of PC game sales in this day and age are sold digitaly, which equates to zero raw materials, zero manufacturing costs and more importantly in Blizzard's case, zero publisher's and zero retailer's.
Now lets also take into account the enormous increase in copies sold since the old days of yore.
I venture to say.... the cost per unit of PC entertainment has been drastically reduced over the year's. Infact I would argue that in some cases like Blizzard, the cost per unit has been reduced by as much as 90%
So one must ask themselves, why has the price of PC games unlike the hardware used to play them, actually increased and not decreased? After all the hardware requires raw material's and is much much more susceptible to inflationary pressures.
The answer is quite simple and suggests some self reflection.
I've not posted on here and thus am a third party on this banter (in addition to having insomnia and not sleeping the last two attempts):
You're taking Moore's Law out of context in several ways (if that's what you're trying to refer to).
Marketing and retail, in addition to research and development are not equivalent to the selling of a blank DVD or chip. The only footing your assertion has is that -- due to Moore's Law (which you didn't name, but described in so many words) -- the price of DvDs has gone down. You also mention something about the method of manufacturing and call attention to digital distribution. Though these aren't really a part of Moore's law.
T.V.s, DvDs, and especially computers are subject to Moore's Law. Video game development, engines, the creation of new systems, upkeep, testing, modifications, advertisements, enhancements and creations typically are not. These all have increasing costs, as Moore's law dictates that it's technology that cheapens over time due to the inevitable enhancement of things -- development and research of new (for companies that use their own engines, Such as Blizzard) are still top dollar development costs and show something brand new that is not subject to lowering costs (unless they use inferior tools that were subject to Moore's law, in addition to old engines that are really cheap to buy the licenses to). In essence, due to Moore's law the chip in a music postcard that we throw away is more powerful than all of the computers and technologies we had during World War II. Multi-billion dollar machines brought low to pieces of paper we just throw away -- worth pennies if that.
The research and development is a part of what makes Moore's Law what it is. It almost never drops in cost, and is always subject to inflation from an economics point of view. This is in addition to salaries paid; any new systems require substantial effort to be put in even a custom made in-house engine. This is without even taking into account supply and demand (or as some are now calling, just demand; brands, alpha testing purchasing, etc.).
You mentioned that Blizzard no longer has any publishers and that they basically own themselves. Even this deal cost them billions -- billions they have to make back. All of which -- business wise -- they likely mark as investments for all future games they will sell. Why else would they spend so much (invest so much) if not to make more? This isn't a charity purchase for their fans, and they did it so that they will get more of what the price is they usually sell for. This is in addition to them still having retail boxes being sold and sent to retailers (that cost has not been eliminated, and they still even have physical collector's editions. Believe it or not, there are still a lot of people who only buy these copies and large amounts of reservations and boxes sent).
To be blunt, Blizzard has a history of selling expansions for 30-40 without much deviance. This is even with escalating costs of development (one chief reason why console games went from 49 to 59 as explained by some developers). It's a wonder why they don't charge more if inflation truly is playing a part here; perhaps they believe that $39 or whatever was too much in the past, and just let inflation even it out now? Though that wouldn't really explain why Warlords of Draenor is $50 all of the sudden. But, that could possibly be explained by the above with regards to research and development as well as resources and manpower.
There is also the fact that businesses are businesses. They are not there to be your friend; they are there to make money. Oft times this means providing a quality product when it comes to Blizzard. At the very least, they don't abandon their games and support them for decades at least to some extent. In addition to that, there is also another term called Precedence. Since Blizzard has been known to sell most of their expansion in recent memory at this same price, it has been expected by those who know business and the industry. Those who know Blizzard. Therefore, the only notion I would support about obscene prices would be with Blizzard's newest WoW Expansion, as well as them selling a virtual character for more than a new AAA computer game.
Aside from all of this talk of Moore's law... Believe it or not, Video Games used to sell for $99 back in the day. They're very cheap by comparison nowadays, and a primary reason why computer games usually go about $10 cheaper than console is due to computer games not needing to pay the license in which to have their game on said consoles. The inability to sell games on Steam has also made for valuable deals once a product has reached a certain age as well. Though that is a released product that very likely does not have massive development and research still in progress (at least for free). Though the lesson / story of the Video Game Industry's collapse and the creation of Seals of Quality is a tale for another day.
Ultimately it relies on demand: Do you want to pay the normal price for a Blizzard expansion, or wait a year for a half off to come around? That's up to the individual. Indeed, for no one but Blizzard itself knows what the development costs for their anticipated AAA expansion was / is (some would even think of patches and further maintenance / server upkeep as a part of a box price).
One could call it tunnel vision all they want; they could even impose and apply sound logic. Though logic is based on certainties and what is known. They typically do not account for variables or facts that are unknown to them at the time. This is where reality strikes down logic and why humanity in itself is an enigma to reason. It is also why Spock can't seem to fully understand our actions. :P Though ignoring what is in front of us because it is not logical, is in itself not logical. Adaptation, education and realization are what is needed in society. The logical will almost always be left in the dust. It's a realist's world out there, and this price and the many known and unknown reasons for it, the reality.
The only choice we have in the matter is to like it or leave it. If one leaves it due to morality, more power to them. They make a stand on what they believe based on the information available for them. I'd even thank them for standing up for consumer rights if they truly think that's what they're doing.
This all also begs the question. Who decides value? We see things all the time -- "Suggested Retail Value" and the like. Companies even selling virtual packages at a discount to their individual prices, stating you "save $100" of their original value. Yet there is no physical device. Or perhaps on an infomercial where they are trying to sell a product, and you get an additional one for for (which is a $19.95 value!) if you pay processing and handling. Those who buy decide the price ultimately; there may be stern sellers who refuse to go down, but if it gets sold then whatever it was sold for -- it is worth that. This also plays a part in lowering ancient technology that was subject to Moore's law (with research and development costs of the new card, and everyone wanting the most powerful... even though a lot of the base design of a card may have already happened a long time ago; industry standards and whatnot). Why last season's video card is a $100 lower once the new series comes out. Or perhaps even why a trading card I bought for $1 would be worth $100,000 to someone.
Due to frequent travel in my youth, English isn't something I consider my primary language (and thus I obtained quirky ways of writing). German and French were always easier for me despite my family being U.S. citizens for over a century. Spanish I learned as a requirement in school, Japanese and Korean I acquired for my youthful desire of anime and gaming (and also work now). I only debate in English to help me work with it (and limit things). In addition, I'm not smart enough to remain fluent in everything and typically need exposure to get in the groove of things again if I haven't heard it in a while. If you understand Mandarin, I know a little, but it has actually been a challenge and could use some help.
Also, I thoroughly enjoy debates and have accounts on over a dozen sites for this. If you wish to engage in such, please put effort in a post and provide sources -- I will then do the same with what I already wrote (if I didn't) as well as with my responses to your own. Expanding my information on a subject makes my stance either change or strengthen the next time I speak of it or write a thesis. Allow me to thank you sincerely for your time.
An excellent intelligent read. Much more informative and compelling argument than "Just because you are too cheap to buy it" as Darknessguy64 puts it.
Many of your points I can agree with, many I do not. The gaming industry is more akin to the Entertainment Industry then it is to Moore's law. I'm an equal owner in our family business, which concern's Tool & Die making, Fabricating and Manufacturing. Our pricing has changed very little over the last 20 years to remain competitive and we are at the mercy of commodity prices.
In business there is one golden rule, "Charge as much as the market will bear"
In the end it really doesn't matter: The Entertainment Industry is one of the most lucrative businesses there is and consumer's are their own worst enemies, when it comes to it. Many lose rationality.
I always find your posts very informed and intelligent.
I very much enjoyed this one:
Originally posted by Yaevindusk
It's very much like others have said in that it's supply and demand, and the creators are able to charge what they want. Though there is a morality towards it that people oft forget, in addition to personal preference to see if you believe it is worth it.
I'm traditionally a frequent purchaser of Blizzard related products, though that's because I enjoy their games immensely. Lately I'm somewhat disgusted with their tactics; when they bought themselves out I thought it would mean they could be themselves 100% without any investors or parent companies telling them what to do. It has resulted in them charging more for things than they usually do, implementing cash shops into a P2P game, pricing an automatic process (level 90 boosts) for the price of a new AAA console game, and increasing the price of their latest expansion up to a new PC game. Not only that, but they skimped on content for the new PvP season by reusing old models and forcing PvPers to grind all over again in the same patch (I.E. double dipping) if they want to stay competitive (522 -> 550 Ilvls).
They're starting to be kind've a douchebag game developer / publisher in my eyes. They still do good work, but I'm becoming less inclined to buy their stuff because of the brand name simply because of personal morals. The last games I'm likely to purchase from them in a long while will likely be Reaper of Souls, as I believe they did a good job with a lot of the changes in live, as well as the new expansion. Started a new monk and absolutely enjoyed it.
We'll have to see when it comes to WoD (really want race specific buildings for bases, especially if I'm paying an extra $10... or at least the ability to use the other faction's buildings, as Forsaken and Blood Elves have more in common with those (considering their past and kinships, respectively) than they do with bones, mud, wood and spikes that the orcish buildings have. The last Starcraft Expansion will likely be a purchase as well, simply because I invested time in the other two and enjoyed their single player campaign. Also Warcraft IV if it ever releases.
So, reading the above paragraph... it truly is supply and demand and game franchises. I'm pretty much just as guilty as anyone else in instantly buying them now. Though with regards to any new franchises, I'm pretty much boycotting unless they're free to initially try out or have a demo of some sorts. Blizzard's name is tarnished for me, even if the names of certain franchises are not.
Comments
I agree that the RoS patch did a lot to save. To say that games add online only is still pretty presumptuous. They didn't add online only for consoles. Nor do many other games use online only. I said many others, i know there are a few. That being said, RoS will be fantastic I think. Cant wait to play my crusader.
$30 USD in 2001 when D2 expac was released is worth $39.77 USD today due to inflation.
so a price difference of $.33
simcity-tee hee
Tunnel vision:
Tv's, Computers, etc. etc. have significantly dropped in price regardless of inflation.
Why?
Because through technology manufacturer's have been able to significantly reduce the cost per unit of these product's.
So how does this relate to PC games?
Remember those big shiny boxes with the printed manual the size of a small novel and the goodies? (kind of like your favorite breakfast cereal).
The vast majority of PC game sales in this day and age are sold digitaly, which equates to zero raw materials, zero manufacturing costs and more importantly in Blizzard's case, zero publisher's and zero retailer's.
Now lets also take into account the enormous increase in copies sold since the old days of yore.
I venture to say.... the cost per unit of PC entertainment has been drastically reduced over the year's. Infact I would argue that in some cases like Blizzard, the cost per unit has been reduced by as much as 90%
So one must ask themselves, why has the price of PC games unlike the hardware used to play them, actually increased and not decreased? After all the hardware requires raw material's and is much much more susceptible to inflationary pressures.
The answer is quite simple and suggests some self reflection.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Could you please stop bringing common sense to the table? We have no use for common sense and logical arguments in these forums
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
The use of logic and reason has always been against the rules. Even at home. Try using it with the wife...you'll spend the next week on the couch...
Originally posted by laokoko
"if you want to be a game designer, you should sell your house and fund your game. Since if you won't even fund your own game, no one will".
I've not posted on here and thus am a third party on this banter (in addition to having insomnia and not sleeping the last two attempts):
You're taking Moore's Law out of context in several ways (if that's what you're trying to refer to).
Marketing and retail, in addition to research and development are not equivalent to the selling of a blank DVD or chip. The only footing your assertion has is that -- due to Moore's Law (which you didn't name, but described in so many words) -- the price of DvDs has gone down. You also mention something about the method of manufacturing and call attention to digital distribution. Though these aren't really a part of Moore's law.
T.V.s, DvDs, and especially computers are subject to Moore's Law. Video game development, engines, the creation of new systems, upkeep, testing, modifications, advertisements, enhancements and creations typically are not. These all have increasing costs, as Moore's law dictates that it's technology that cheapens over time due to the inevitable enhancement of things -- development and research of new (for companies that use their own engines, Such as Blizzard) are still top dollar development costs and show something brand new that is not subject to lowering costs (unless they use inferior tools that were subject to Moore's law, in addition to old engines that are really cheap to buy the licenses to). In essence, due to Moore's law the chip in a music postcard that we throw away is more powerful than all of the computers and technologies we had during World War II. Multi-billion dollar machines brought low to pieces of paper we just throw away -- worth pennies if that.
The research and development is a part of what makes Moore's Law what it is. It almost never drops in cost, and is always subject to inflation from an economics point of view. This is in addition to salaries paid; any new systems require substantial effort to be put in even a custom made in-house engine. This is without even taking into account supply and demand (or as some are now calling, just demand; brands, alpha testing purchasing, etc.).
You mentioned that Blizzard no longer has any publishers and that they basically own themselves. Even this deal cost them billions -- billions they have to make back. All of which -- business wise -- they likely mark as investments for all future games they will sell. Why else would they spend so much (invest so much) if not to make more? This isn't a charity purchase for their fans, and they did it so that they will get more of what the price is they usually sell for. This is in addition to them still having retail boxes being sold and sent to retailers (that cost has not been eliminated, and they still even have physical collector's editions. Believe it or not, there are still a lot of people who only buy these copies and large amounts of reservations and boxes sent).
To be blunt, Blizzard has a history of selling expansions for 30-40 without much deviance. This is even with escalating costs of development (one chief reason why console games went from 49 to 59 as explained by some developers). It's a wonder why they don't charge more if inflation truly is playing a part here; perhaps they believe that $39 or whatever was too much in the past, and just let inflation even it out now? Though that wouldn't really explain why Warlords of Draenor is $50 all of the sudden. But, that could possibly be explained by the above with regards to research and development as well as resources and manpower.
There is also the fact that businesses are businesses. They are not there to be your friend; they are there to make money. Oft times this means providing a quality product when it comes to Blizzard. At the very least, they don't abandon their games and support them for decades at least to some extent. In addition to that, there is also another term called Precedence. Since Blizzard has been known to sell most of their expansion in recent memory at this same price, it has been expected by those who know business and the industry. Those who know Blizzard. Therefore, the only notion I would support about obscene prices would be with Blizzard's newest WoW Expansion, as well as them selling a virtual character for more than a new AAA computer game.
Aside from all of this talk of Moore's law... Believe it or not, Video Games used to sell for $99 back in the day. They're very cheap by comparison nowadays, and a primary reason why computer games usually go about $10 cheaper than console is due to computer games not needing to pay the license in which to have their game on said consoles. The inability to sell games on Steam has also made for valuable deals once a product has reached a certain age as well. Though that is a released product that very likely does not have massive development and research still in progress (at least for free). Though the lesson / story of the Video Game Industry's collapse and the creation of Seals of Quality is a tale for another day.
Ultimately it relies on demand: Do you want to pay the normal price for a Blizzard expansion, or wait a year for a half off to come around? That's up to the individual. Indeed, for no one but Blizzard itself knows what the development costs for their anticipated AAA expansion was / is (some would even think of patches and further maintenance / server upkeep as a part of a box price).
One could call it tunnel vision all they want; they could even impose and apply sound logic. Though logic is based on certainties and what is known. They typically do not account for variables or facts that are unknown to them at the time. This is where reality strikes down logic and why humanity in itself is an enigma to reason. It is also why Spock can't seem to fully understand our actions. :P Though ignoring what is in front of us because it is not logical, is in itself not logical. Adaptation, education and realization are what is needed in society. The logical will almost always be left in the dust. It's a realist's world out there, and this price and the many known and unknown reasons for it, the reality.
The only choice we have in the matter is to like it or leave it. If one leaves it due to morality, more power to them. They make a stand on what they believe based on the information available for them. I'd even thank them for standing up for consumer rights if they truly think that's what they're doing.
This all also begs the question. Who decides value? We see things all the time -- "Suggested Retail Value" and the like. Companies even selling virtual packages at a discount to their individual prices, stating you "save $100" of their original value. Yet there is no physical device. Or perhaps on an infomercial where they are trying to sell a product, and you get an additional one for for (which is a $19.95 value!) if you pay processing and handling. Those who buy decide the price ultimately; there may be stern sellers who refuse to go down, but if it gets sold then whatever it was sold for -- it is worth that. This also plays a part in lowering ancient technology that was subject to Moore's law (with research and development costs of the new card, and everyone wanting the most powerful... even though a lot of the base design of a card may have already happened a long time ago; industry standards and whatnot). Why last season's video card is a $100 lower once the new series comes out. Or perhaps even why a trading card I bought for $1 would be worth $100,000 to someone.
An excellent intelligent read. Much more informative and compelling argument than "Just because you are too cheap to buy it" as Darknessguy64 puts it.
Many of your points I can agree with, many I do not. The gaming industry is more akin to the Entertainment Industry then it is to Moore's law. I'm an equal owner in our family business, which concern's Tool & Die making, Fabricating and Manufacturing. Our pricing has changed very little over the last 20 years to remain competitive and we are at the mercy of commodity prices.
In business there is one golden rule, "Charge as much as the market will bear"
In the end it really doesn't matter: The Entertainment Industry is one of the most lucrative businesses there is and consumer's are their own worst enemies, when it comes to it. Many lose rationality.
I always find your posts very informed and intelligent.
I very much enjoyed this one:
Originally posted by Yaevindusk
It's very much like others have said in that it's supply and demand, and the creators are able to charge what they want. Though there is a morality towards it that people oft forget, in addition to personal preference to see if you believe it is worth it.
I'm traditionally a frequent purchaser of Blizzard related products, though that's because I enjoy their games immensely. Lately I'm somewhat disgusted with their tactics; when they bought themselves out I thought it would mean they could be themselves 100% without any investors or parent companies telling them what to do. It has resulted in them charging more for things than they usually do, implementing cash shops into a P2P game, pricing an automatic process (level 90 boosts) for the price of a new AAA console game, and increasing the price of their latest expansion up to a new PC game. Not only that, but they skimped on content for the new PvP season by reusing old models and forcing PvPers to grind all over again in the same patch (I.E. double dipping) if they want to stay competitive (522 -> 550 Ilvls).
They're starting to be kind've a douchebag game developer / publisher in my eyes. They still do good work, but I'm becoming less inclined to buy their stuff because of the brand name simply because of personal morals. The last games I'm likely to purchase from them in a long while will likely be Reaper of Souls, as I believe they did a good job with a lot of the changes in live, as well as the new expansion. Started a new monk and absolutely enjoyed it.
We'll have to see when it comes to WoD (really want race specific buildings for bases, especially if I'm paying an extra $10... or at least the ability to use the other faction's buildings, as Forsaken and Blood Elves have more in common with those (considering their past and kinships, respectively) than they do with bones, mud, wood and spikes that the orcish buildings have. The last Starcraft Expansion will likely be a purchase as well, simply because I invested time in the other two and enjoyed their single player campaign. Also Warcraft IV if it ever releases.
So, reading the above paragraph... it truly is supply and demand and game franchises. I'm pretty much just as guilty as anyone else in instantly buying them now. Though with regards to any new franchises, I'm pretty much boycotting unless they're free to initially try out or have a demo of some sorts. Blizzard's name is tarnished for me, even if the names of certain franchises are not.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee