Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Starcraft Ghost Update

Posted by Zonk on Fri Jan 21, 2005 03:26 PM
from the nuclear-launch-detected dept.
Real Time Strategy (Games) Entertainment Games
GamesIndustry.biz has an interview up with Blizzard creative director Chris Metzen and VP of business operations Paul Sams, where they discuss the status of the Starcraft Ghost title. From the article: "Basically the status of that is that we've kind of gone back and reassessed certain of the elements of the game that we felt needed to be refined. I think E3 was a big influence to us - we looked at other products that were in that genre, and felt as if we were quite competitive in many ways, but maybe there were some other things that we weren't getting to where we needed to go."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Starcraft Ghost Put On Hold 110 comments
After numerous previous delays, Blizzard has made the likelihood we'll ever play Starcraft: Ghost effectively nil. They've announced they're putting game development on hold indefinitely, as they're reconsidering options for the next generation of consoles. From the Gamespy article: "Like many in the industry, we've been impressed with the potential of the new consoles, and we're looking forward to exploring that potential further ... In addition to allowing us to determine the best course for StarCraft: Ghost, this review period will help us lay the groundwork for our future console games."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Starcraft Ghost Update 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • The development team has an unstated desire to compete with Duke Nukem: Forever's development cycle. Teasing people with little updates seems to be part of the plan. Am I the only person who doesnt care to hear about a game until its out?
  • ...JUST RELEASE THE FREAKING GAME ALREADY!

    Not that I'll buy it -- I'm still pissed at Vivendi over the bnetd debacle. Cocksuckers. (Nice to see all you WarCraft III and WoW players stuck to your principles on _that_ one.)
    • Well luckily my principles never stopped me from just playing a game and having fun. Does a companies ethics make a game any less fun?

      I'm enjoying WoW (servers issues aside) and I will buy Starcraft Ghost when it releases... (well after it gets Cedega support...)

      • From the sound of it, *what* principles?

        Actually, yes, the company's ethics *did* make some online play of Diablo (and I think some other blizzard games) on people's own servers a lot less fun, or rather, nonexistent/impossible/etc.

        bnetd was a great project cease-and-desisted to death. A lot of people bitched and moaned at the time of course, but when it can time to put their money where their mouths were, of course they all ran out instead and bought the latest Vivendi games.

        • I'm not trying to start a fight here.. so keep that in mind...

          I'm just trying to put a spin on this... that people are going to talk... but when it comes time to either play a game they may enjoy alot... principles are prolly going out the window...

          as to my principles.. i should prolly rephrase that sometimes principles do keep me from playing games... I really wanted to play EQ2... despite the fact that after 4 and half years of EQ1 I REALLY hate S.O.E. but EQ2 looked fun... so principles out the window
      • Well luckily my principles never stopped me from just playing a game and having fun. Does a companies ethics make a game any less fun?

        Do STDs make unprotected sex with prostitutes any less fun?

        -tid242

        • You are correct. I could have sworn I saw it was getting a PC release as well, but upon further reading I see I was wrong. Still looks like a great game to me and I'll get it for my Xbox.

    • Re:Shut up and.. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Because I had no problem with Blizzard controlling their own fucking product in the first place, particularly given that the sole purpose of Bnetd beyond letting people use pirated copies of the game. War3 and WoW are brilliant games, the fact that Blizzard wanted to control a previous property (in order to prevent piracy, no less) is no reason to not play them.
      • Another reason it was around was to let people play in a large LAN using the battle.net matchmaking features and ladders in the games... If they had had the code to verify that the CD Keys were in fact legit, there would have been worse problems than people playing pirated games using bnetd...
  • I find it interesting to compare the movie industry and game industry. Movie studios are generally able to predict the date of a release as soon as production begins. Dates do change, but this is rare. But in the game industry, it's rare when a game publisher is actually doesn't change the date. Is it that there are more people involved? No. Money? No. Are games just more complicated to make than a movie? I can't see why. So what is it about games that makes it so difficult for publishers

    Why is it
    • I guess the fact that movies have been made for almost 100 years and that software production in it's current form has only been around 20, maybe 30 years, is irrelevant? The fact is that software is still not very mature as an industry, and in about 40-50 years or so, it should be comparable to the current movie industry.
    • That is a false comparison. Movies are an established form of entertainment, and have a fairly well laid out production arc. Hardware considerations are a non issue, and neither are alpha and beta testing (and yes, I know about test screenings, and they just don't compare for difficulty). When was the last time you saw a "bugged" movie? Design in a movie is what's done before production; you don't write the script after you've started filming. Conversly, game design is what take up much of the producti
      • "When was the last time you saw a "bugged" movie?"

        Starship Troopers!

      • When was the last time you saw a "bugged" movie?

        Depends what you consider "bugged". Do "glitch" style bugs count? If so, every time I've seen a boom, or a reflection of a camera man, or a continuity problem, I've seen a bug.

        That said, they're all really minor bugs compared to the kinds of bugs that can happen in games, and while I've seen a movie crash (or, rather, melt), that was entirely the fault of the projectionist, not the movie itself.
      • "When was the last time you saw a "bugged" movie? "

        Lots of movies have bugs [imdb.com]...

        Even this one [imdb.com]..

        It happens all the time!
        • Those are things like costume slipups and continuity errors. In the context of a game those are not "bugs"; they're rarely even noticed.

          If, in a game, someone's clothing changed between two levels with no plausible explanation that didn't violate continuity, would it count as a bug? That's the sort of thing you linked to in IMDB, and it doesn't fit the definiton of a software bug. "Bug" in the context of software means something that prevents the program from executing properly, like a crash bug, or a r
          • " Those are things like costume slipups and continuity errors. ...."Bug" in the context of software means something that prevents the program from executing properly, like a crash bug, or a rendering anomaly."

            Sounds like one and the same to me.

            I go by the dictionary definition of bug:
            2: a fault or defect in a system

            A fault or defect in a movie.. hmm!

    • Re:Release Dates and Growing Up (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bskin (35954) <bentomb@NOSpAM.gmail.com> on Friday January 21 2005, @05:56PM (#11437060)
      I think anybody who's ever coded anything of even a moderate size, much less a giant project of the scale of what Blizzard would be taking on, knows that the unexpected just happens sometimes and it can set you back weeks, or more. Predictions of how long software projects will take are usually more accurately called "guesses". And trying to get a project out by a deadline no matter what usually means "Ship it with the bugs, we'll patch it later." I don't think Blizzard should be criticized for *not* taking this approach.

      Of course, it's not like Blizzard products have never shipped with a bug in them. But I think the entire idea of polishing a product until they're sure it's worth putting out is a good one. Lots of good games have been ruined by being pushed out too early. And while Blizzard's development cycle is quite long, they don't seem to have a vaporware problem, either.

      Course, Blizzard seems to have almost nothing to do with this game, so we'll see if they hold it up to the same standards since their name's gonna be on it.
      • Course, Blizzard seems to have almost nothing to do with this game, so we'll see if they hold it up to the same standards since their name's gonna be on it.

        Actually Blizzard fire nihilistic and took over themselves. Now that WOW is out they have the man power. I think they initially out sourced it so they can concentrate on WOW. But nihilistic didn't do the gameplay up to blizz expected level of quality so they gave them the boot (paid them out) and took over.
    • I don't think it is true with movies either.

      The predicatable part of the schedule for movie production happens after the script has been written and directors and actors signed. Predicting how long it will take for all of the steps after that is a relatively straightforward business.

      However, before you get to that stage there are a number of steps which are not predictable. Someone writes the script. Perhaps it goes through re-writes. You need to retain the right director. Casting for principal characters
    • The end of movie production is in studio editing, something that can be rushed.

      Also it can be considered complete more readily than say, a video game bug.

      You've seen the effects, scars moving to opposite cheeks, timing that isn't funny, all kinds of stuff.

      Artists are passionate and need time to create what they envision.
    • So, what I'm hearing is, you think those games are great and all, but you want them on the original release date. So I suppose it might not have mattered to you had Half Life 2 been released in fall 2003 with less than one playable level.

      Would you like a playable game?

      No no no, I'm being obtuse, you say. You want the game playable AND on time. Right. Well, in THAT case I suppose those game developers should have gone back in time and changed the original release date. Or maybe slipped in and extra mo
    • Are games just more complicated to make than a movie?

      Yes. For one, problems with movies generally don't snowball. For example, if you can't shoot the scene where Harrison Ford jumps out of the helicopter and lands on the top of the state building because it is raining too much every day you have available, you quickly film a shot where he's taking off in a helicopter, then cut to an interior of the state building with Harrison Ford sneaking around and the helicopter flying off. On the other hand, if y
    • Why is it that the best studios are the ones who often claim the mantra "when it's done" as their release date?

      Doesn't that more or less tell you that movies are nothign liek video games. While a tiny glitch in a movie (say the mike was in a scene or a car was parked int he back ground of a fantasy movie) doesn't matter. But a tiny glitch in a game can ruin the whole game.

      Somone needs to kick you in pants. The ones who follow their schedules religiously do so at the expense of the game. EA is one good ex

  • Interesting story (Score:3, Funny)

    by Pan T. Hose (707794) on Friday January 21 2005, @04:48PM (#11436280) Homepage Journal
    Even if completely irrelevant for loyal Slashdotters.
    Because we [slashdot.org] are [slashdot.org] still [slashdot.org] boycotting [slashdot.org] Blizzard [slashdot.org], right? Just checking.
    • since when does everyone who reads a certain website have to act in the same manner? obviously some feel blizzard's actions warrant a boycott and some don't. there's no hipocracy, jsut a difference of opinion.
      • But we have access to the same arguements which converted the others.

        If you're not convinced then you are probably interpretting them diffrently.

        Or you're stupid... but we'll forgive you.

  • Anyone read the article? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Alkaiser (114022) on Friday January 21 2005, @05:40PM (#11436900) Homepage
    The "relevant" part about Ghost is 1 question, and it's in the post. Fairly useless post if you want to know anything about Ghost. I have to say that she looks better in Gabe's drawings, too.

    As far as another 3rd person stealth action game on the console...YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN.

    Seriously...what could this game possibly do that would be markedly different than other games out there? Have you infiltrate Zerg bases? Whoopty doo. If it comes out, maybe I'll care at that point, until then, I file all Ghost news along with the Duke Nukem Forever news.
  • Inspired by E3?

    E3 was in May last year, is this article old?

  • And just cause the quote's funny... (Score:3, Informative)

    by bskin (35954) <bentomb@NOSpAM.gmail.com> on Friday January 21 2005, @06:23PM (#11437279)
    From the article, about WoW:

    That's one of the other things that I think is interesting about this product. It's really the only MMO that has an extremely long history, where there are millions and millions of people that are already dedicated to that franchise. They're already tied into the storylines, the characters and what have you, and as a result of that we think that we have a built in audience that is going to be interested in checking it out.

    Uhm, I don't suppose you've ever heard of Star Wars Galaxies? There are, apparantly, people who are just a tiny bit attached to this "Star Wars" franchise as well. And that made it such a great game, too...

    And, y'know, while on that subject...isn't talking about Warcraft in terms of its grand plot about on the same level as talking about the original Doom that way? I've played the games since the first one, and I haven't gotten much more out of the plot other than "Orcs kill humans, and then humans kill orcs." Admittedly, that may be because I filtered most of it out, but I still hardly think it's a crowning achievement that people are extremely attached to, character-wise or plot-wise...

  • Blizzard Puts Foot In Mouth (Score:3)

    by SirBruce (679714) on Friday January 21 2005, @09:22PM (#11438388) Homepage
    Quoting Paul Sams:
    "That's one of the other things that I think is interesting about this product. It's really the only MMO that has an extremely long history, where there are millions and millions of people that are already dedicated to that franchise. They're already tied into the storylines, the characters and what have you, and as a result of that we think that we have a built in audience that is going to be interested in checking it out."

    Umm, hello, McFly?!? How about a little game called ULTIMA ONLINE? Perhaps you've heard of it.

    Sheesh.

    Bruce
  • Nothing to see here. Move along.
  • I say just let them take their time, and do what they want. However, just don't tell us about it until you are almost done.
  • This game will be just like C&C renegade. Cute for a few minutes, because you see all the buildings you built in the first game but from first person perspective! And they're huge and they look really cool! Then you play the game a bit and it's pedestrian and there's nothing new. Some players might dig out an old copy of Starcraft and play that.

    What they really need to do is make the Starcraft 2 we're all waiting for. How big was Starcraft? It was *huge* for its time. How much does the games biz
      • You're almost right. Almost. 20 out of 88 realms are having problems. 23% is pretty close to 7%.

        Linky [worldofwarcraft.com]

        Text:

        The overwhelming success of World of Warcraft has brought hundreds of thousands of people together to adventure in Azeroth, and concurrency numbers are well beyond what we expected or even hoped for. Unfortunately, this high concurrency, especially when concentrated on a small number of realms, initially caused issues with our hardware infrastructure. We were able to streamline our code to

        • Of course, because problems affecting 138,000 players are a NON ISSUE, right? That's assuming, conservatively, that those 20 servers hold proportionnate amounts of people as working servers, which is false (as the ones not working properly are among the most populous ones).

          It's good to know that 138,000 people don't have anything to worry about. The game is working as intended.

          • Re:Yeah, like other games completely? (Score:1, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward
            Nice try, genius.

            All my friends happen to be on the one of the 18 servers that got nuked yesterday for hardwaare maintenance...maintenance that could have happened at any other point in the day, but they decided to go ahead and perform at 6PST, i.e. MMO Rush Hour.

            The 2 hours it was supposed to take went over 5.

            "Simply playing" on one of the other serves means absolutely nothing when you lose your character. You don't spend 3 weeks levelling a character up to level 30 or so only to jump ship and start up
      • Woohoo, the Iraqi information minister is posting on Slashdot!
      • "That leaves 84 servers that are working ABSOLUTELY PERFECTLY that Tycho and Gabe could be playing on but won't."

        Won't? Can you move your characters from server to server at any time?
      • There are a very few vastly overcrowded servers that are suffering issues. There are 88 servers total. Something like four are having issues. That leaves 84 servers that are working ABSOLUTELY PERFECTLY that Tycho and Gabe could be playing on but won't.

        According to the average /played, once you reach around level 30 and have your profession suitably leveled-up as well, you've played the game with that character for at least 48 hours. Therefore, moving to a new server is the equivalent of having your memor
    • No, if it turns out to be crap, they don't release it in the first place. See Warcraft Adventures, the game Blizzard eventually scrapped because it wasn't good enough. Ghost has been in development a while, and by most accounts it's shaping up to be a mediocre game. I'm honestly sort of surprised it hasn't met the same fate by now.

      • Re:Unrelease, just in case (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        See Warcraft Adventures, the game Blizzard eventually scrapped because it wasn't good enough.
        Do you believe everything you read in interviews? WA was canned because it was horribly over-budget and adventure games were a dead genre. Quality is a secondary consideration at best; Warcraft III is proof of that.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.