Battle.net to Rival Steam?

The Escapist cornered Rob Pardo at the GDC 2010 to ask if Blizzard has plans to license Battle.net to third parties.

Rob Pardo responded it's a theme the team has talked about and basically would be a lot of work and a challenge on their end to maintain. It would also represent a somewhat competitive platform for Blizzard giving the example that if Blizzard was to release a game and a third party game was on sale at the same time.

[Dorjan]

doubt it, although steam needs a few things fixed imo >.>

[Leord]

Yeah, I agree. time will tell.

However, you never know for sure with blizzard now when they are in kahoots with ActiBobbyKotick

[Montrealien]

Well, like steam, battle.net has a few great franchises to get rolling as a portal for games, so time will tell.

I am willing to bet as many people have battle.net that have steam, and battle.net only has Blizzard games, then again Steam only had Valve games when it started.

[wicko]

I would avoid it just because of the fact that Activision would stick their dirty little hands in it.

[Gestalt]

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if Activision really did make the effort to turn Bnet into their own version of Steam.

[Eoweniel]

I doubt Steam is on par with B.net but I dunno. Perhaps it's cause I'm biased.

[Cogo]

Battle.net does seem superior. I agree.

[King Klear]

I haven't actually used steam yet, so I can't tell

[XxRoosterxX]

If Blizzard tries to make a service like Steam it would be interesting for many reasons. The one I find most compelling is that one will have all of Blizzards games and the other will have all of Valves games.

I personally like Valve a bit more than Blizzard but an improved BattleNet is welcome. I wouldn't really like for them(BattleNet) to start selling games like Steam either, mainly because Blizzard has ties to Activision...

[King Klear]

Didn't they say at some point that they are aiming for something a little different from steam? I think it ws in one of the singleplayer reveal interviews...

[Recka]

Wouldn't mind it, though Battle.net to me has always been a Blizzard only thing..

[King Klear]

Yeah, they probably won't want to have their new battle.net soiled by poor quality titles from inferior developers. BTW, I'm not even being ironic right now

[Leord]

I can see the conflict of interest thing be the main problem.

Interesting how he doesn't turn the thought right down, however!

[King Klear]

Somebody should write a short story about the world 20 years n the future where mankind is decimated by a long war of these two services. Or maybe something terminator-like from th time, when b.net 5.0 has beaten all opposition and enslaved mankind.

[SCFreelancer]

It would be big news if blizzard decided to venture this way. In the past I would say it was not going to happen, but with the Blizzard - Activision merger I wouldn't totally rule it out.

[King Klear]

Let's hope Activision doesn't force Blizzard to do this, screwing it in the process.

[Letros]

As soon as they choose to adopt third party games, yes this would be very good competition, until then its just very nice supplement to already awesome Blizzard games.

Though Actiblizz better do something fast, its becoming increasingly popular for games to be integrated into Steamworks(require steam no matter where you buy it), Dawn of War 2, MWF2(activision title ironically), all SEGA games here-out, Metro 2033, Just Cause 2, etc...

[Slasher]

Really don't see this ever happening

[HarryM]

... I don't think so.

[conker121]

Again, Activision does NOT own Blizzard! Look it up. So many people are misinformed and its making Blizzard look bad. Activision has absolutely ZERO control over Blizzard!

[kwyjibo]

Blizzard may operate as an autonomous unit within Activision, that doesn't mean Activision can't call the shots when they feel like it.

Act out of line, and they'll smack the f*ck out of you like Infinity Ward.

[Montrealien]

Blizzard and Activision are two seperate Subsidiaries of Activision Blizzard which is a Subsidiary of Vivendi.

That means, Blizzard is owned by Vivendi, and Activsion is owned by Vivendi, and they are two seperate Subsidiaries. Activion does not own or control Blizzard. Blizzard answers to Vivendi, and so does Activision.

[kwyjibo]

When people say "Activision", they mean "Activision Blizzard".

Bobby Kotick is the CEO. Regardless of legal structure, Kotick is at the top.

----

Montrealian - No. Blizzard do not report to Vivendi. Blizzard are part of "Activision Blizzard" (the clue is in the name). The CEO of "Activision Blizzard" is Kotick.

This is a really simple concept - it's declared in all their SEC filings.

http://www.google.com/finan...

[Montrealien]

No matter how you spin it kwyjibo, Activision does not own Blizzard and Micheal Morhaim answers to Jean-Bernard Lévy and Jean-René Fourtou, not Activision.

[Montrealien]

Activision still does not own Blizzard.

[conker121]

"Blizzard retained its autonomy and corporate leadership" From the wiki. Bobby Kotick looks over Activision and the other companies also owned by Vivendi EXCEPT Blizzard. In that case they answer to no one but their own leadership.

[kwyjibo]

...Battle.net will evolve into Activision's own version of Steam.

Like Steam, it's starting off with simple goals, in this case - improving matchmaking on Blizzard games. Steam started out as a patch updater for Counter-Strike.

But they'll build and build on this until it becomes their official distribution client.

[Saryk]

Competition is good, I say let them compete with Steam. However, I am a Steam fanboy, so doubt I would use it. But I do follow the deals……………….