That is the exact description of a Blizzard fanboy. Just look at all the stupid conventions they hold, which the main purpose is to glorify themselves. People dress up like idiots, and pratically memorize obscure Blizzard stuff. That is the definition of a fanboy.
Definitions are subjective. You are using a negative connotation of 'fanboy' rather than the positive connotation of 'fanboy', which is where my disagreement comes in. To state it plainly, "You're trolling." I remember you having a couple of anti-Blizzard threads around here, so feel free to state on-topic comments in those threads rather than taking this one off-topic.
Blizzard games most certainly do build up on hype. Look at Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3. More hype than you can possibly imagine. I'm betting that these games will be disappointment, and that Blizzard will fade away.
You're ignoring the root of it, which is that Blizzard's "hype" would have nothing to build upon if it didn't already have a strong and successful base built of quality games. Even if a person doesn't like the genre, they have to admit to the quality of it, unless they're being thick-headed.
Another reason that Blizzard games are stupid is that they refuse to try anything new. They claim that is "disrupts" the "feel" of the game.
Can I get a source for that "claim" other than twisted opinion? Blizzard does new things with all of their games, and what is implemented is what has proven to be successful.
Since Blizzard won't change anything, people are eventually going to say, "Okay I'm sick of these games being copies of each other with so-called 'better' graphics, so I'm gonna play something else."
As I said earlier, look at the number of games that Blizzard has put out within the timeframe of its existence. It's become what it is due to solid development of quality games that appeal to people. This isn't a company that throws out rehash after rehash every consecutive year. Also, if your main criticism against Blizzard is the graphics, keep in mind their year of release. Besides that, graphics are eye-candy, but they don't make an game into a superb or excellent game. They can enhance what is already a good game.
Companies need to try something new, or the game will probably not be as popular. Look at the old Rollercoaster Tycoon games. RCT2 was a big disappointment because it was exactly like RCT1 will no major changes, which is the same scenario as Starcraft 1 and Starcraft 2. But then, major changes were made to RCT3, and it was a major hit. Bottom line, new ideas are good.
I don't see how you're comparing the gameplay and "story experience" of a rollercoaster simulation game and its subsequent changes with that of Starcraft and its eventual sequel.
Although I had the free-time to respond to this, I regret having spent it feeding a troll. So do use these comments as food-for-thought, meaning "think about it", rather than claiming that your opinion about Blizzard is the truth while everyone who likes Blizzard games are just blind to their horrible graphics and craptacular gameplay that just happens to get crappier and crappier with each iteration, yet they still somehow manage to be immensely successful with their "garbage" releases.
GalCiv2 Forums
Sins Forums
Stardock Forums
PolMach Forums
