Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Blizzard Announces StarCraft 2

Posted by Zonk on Sat May 19, 2007 01:34 AM
from the my-life-for-aiur-again dept.
We'll be returning once again to the world of StarCraft, it appears, and not in the form of a Massively Multiplayer game. Blizzard has announced StarCraft 2 at their packed event in Seoul, South Korea. IGN is liveblogging the event, describing gameplay footage being played as well as full cinematics. From the description of ongoing events there are massive changes to the way the game plays, new units, a physics system within the game engine, and the capability to show over 100 units onscreen at a time. "Showing gameplay footage - Looks like protoss ships - floating over asteroid/ base structure - entering protoss ase - similar looking buildings - vespene gas still in the game - character pane shows up on right side - some protoss guy - shifts to terran bases floating on rockets over same type of territory - sill collecting crystals as resources - marines load out. Dustin is actually playing the game - nothing in the game is final." Additional coverage from Milky at 1up.

Related Stories

[+] Blizzard Confirms New Product, May Be Starcraft 2 229 comments
darkhitman writes "According to a Kotaku post yesterday, Blizzard has confirmed that they'll announce a new product at their World Wide Invitation in Korea next month. The statement issued by Blizzard verified that they 'do intend to announce a new product [...] next month" and "plan to revisit [Starcraft] at some point in the future,' but did not confirm the rumor that the new game would be Starcraft 2 — but we can certainly hope."
[+] StarCraft, Nothing But StarCraft 303 comments
Now that the news has been out for a few days and game journalists have had a chance to chat with the folks at Blizzard, there are a number of new stories detailing parts of the StarCraft II world. A massive press briefing about the game fills in a few more details on the game; only three factions, no new races, the game is built with competitive play in mind, and will run on both XP and Vista. For more nitty-gritty elements, the company held panel discussions on the art design and gameplay elements of the upcoming game. Video from the event is now widely available as well; check out the official trailer, some example gameplay, or the epic 22-minute long developer walkthrough.
[+] Can Blizzard Top StarCraft? 144 comments
MSNBC is running an interview with Blizzard designer Rob Pardo discussing a number of facets of the upcoming StarCraft II. Informational tidbits include the fact that, unsurprisingly, the game won't be released this year, and some background on the game's long development cycle. "Penny Arcade figured it out! We keep games under code names and we teach developers to refer to games by their code name. And we're just really careful about talking about the game internally. We don't bring external folks through unannounced product areas. But I think even I'm surprised that we were able to keep it under wraps all the way to the end."
[+] Protoss For a Day 138 comments
1up had a man on the ground at the announcement of StarCraft II to a legion of South Korean fans. James Mielke also had the chance to sit down with the developers of the game for a one-on-one hands-on with everything they're willing to share so far. Includes video with some new footage of the title. From the article: "Dustin Browder admitted that the Black Hole attack was something that would have to be nerfed immediately, as both he and Sigaty laughed at the sight of my entire fleet taking a nosedive in one fell swoop. As I stated earlier, there's still a lot of balancing that needs to go into the game, and this play session was one way for the developers to see what things need it the most. After all, Blizzard has been working on this game for two years already, and we were the first fresh eyes to see the game in a long time, so things that the dev team may now take for granted, are still a surprise to new players. Whether the Black Hole will be nerfed to absorb a limited number of ships, or do a specific amount of damage, or powered-down in some other way hasn't been decided, but the tide of battle will undoubtedly require slightly more skillful play than simply producing a Mothership and hitting 'Black Hole' on the enemy."
[+] The State of Korean PC Gaming 36 comments
Gamasutra has up a feature on the world of PC gaming in South Korea, a country well-known for their love of online play. Nick Rumas, the author of the piece, takes us further behind the scenes of a country stereotyped by swarms of screaming StarCraft fans. He looks at what is hot on store shelves, discusses the reality of illegal game downloading there, and walks through the ten most popular online games in the country (StarCraft isn't even #1). From the article: "That, in a nutshell, is where the PC gaming industry in Korea currently finds itself. Physical retail is dead, and while that isn't going to change any time soon, it's a rather insignificant issue, because the online market is the only one that really matters here ... The world of PC gaming in Korea may massively dwarf that of consoles, but Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are engaged in their own little war on the peninsula, as well."
[+] StarCraft 2 Terran Gameplay, Single Player Info 107 comments
It isn't all World of Warcraft at BlizzCon this year. That little sequel they're making to StarCraft has gotten quite a bit of attention as well. Gamespot has a liveblog transcript of a StarCraft II demo. This one, unlike the last, focuses on the Terrans rather than the Protoss. Several new units and build options are described, along with a bit about the single-player campaign. The campaign is the focus of Kotaku's game coverage, starring Jim Raynor and the crew of the Hyperion. "Part of the campaign in StarCraft II will be focused on Raynor's efforts to make money but taking jobs like this one, missions that ultimately tie into a larger plot. As you earn money, those funds will be put into purchasing technology--upgrades for units and units themselves. Pardo purchased (read: unlocked) the Viking ship for his next mission. This has been done to give players control over the tech progression of the game, instead of following a locked down set of upgrades. Hiking back up to the bridge, Raynor checks out the Star Map. This is where you'll choose your missions. They're much more open ended than in the previous StarCraft campaigns. You'll be able to pick the planet or system you want to tackle next, progressing the story in your own way. Mission briefings provide the summary, objectives, bonus objectives, mission bounty, and recommended technology, so you'll have to choose which best suits your current needs and matches your current level of tech."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Blizzard Announces StarCraft 2 | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 550 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • ...welcome our new ZERGLIasddAS24Y6JNGG-G--SAD9ODASIDAS98244128990WQA NO CARRIER
    • Re:i for one... (Score:5, Funny)

      welcome our new overlord overlords?
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Lame (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Puff of Logic (895805) on Saturday May 19, @12:35PM (#19191651)

      No, this is lame. Blizzard had the chance to redefine computer gaming by coming out with a truly great, futuristic MMO, but instead decided to do another rehash of a game from nearly ten years ago that looks exactly like the old version. Woohoo. The fanboys from Korea who've been playing the same game for 10 years are happy, but the rest of us were told to suck it.
      Hardly. There are a lot of people who are very, very happy that SC2 has been announced. I'll admit that I would have been happy with either SC2 or a SC MMO, but my preference was definitely SC2. While I have no doubt that they've been rioting in the streets in Korea, there's definitely a lot of excitement in the rest of the world too.

      With respect to your first point, what makes you think that Blizzard is precluded from developing a SC MMO? It's been fairly common knowledge that they've been hiring on for a "next-gen" MMO and it would seem to follow that a focus on the Starcraft universe at the company for the RTS would be a great segue into an MMO. Storylines, concept artists, writers, and so on could very easily serve as a further foundation for your futuristic MMO.

      Perhaps, then, instead of complaining about SC2, you might consider taking heart from the fact that Blizzard has once again turned its eye towards the universe we both appreciate and that your hopes for Worlds of Starcraft have never been closer to fruition. Starcraft players the world over have many reasons to rejoice and I'd encourage you to remember that their gain is not necessarily your loss.

      cheers.
      [ Parent ]
    • Rehash? O RLY? by tepples (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @12:35PM
    • Re:Lame by aichpvee (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:46PM
      • Re:Lame by Kelbear (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @08:20PM
        • Re:Lame by C0rinthian (Score:2) Monday May 21, @12:26PM
    • Re:Lame (Score:4, Interesting)

      How about the excuse of "I have a life and don't want to dedicate it to a video game"? I can stop playing Final Fantasy XII, or StarCraft2, and leave it sitting for a month without losing any money, and then pick it right back up. MMO's require massive time dedication. I have better things to do with my time, thank you very little. I'm looking forward to a new RTS I can play on a LAN with my friends, rather than having a revolving cycle of questing, leveling, questing, ad infinitum.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @04:48PM
        • Re:Lame by geminidomino (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @12:02AM
          • Infinite Grinding by Alzheimers (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @01:29AM
          • Re:Lame by Vermifax (Score:2) Monday May 21, @11:56AM
          • Re:Lame by geminidomino (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @05:17AM
            • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @12:01PM
              • Re:Lame by geminidomino (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @07:55PM
                • Re:Lame by Fifty Points (Score:1) Monday May 21, @02:45PM
                  • Re:Lame by geminidomino (Score:2) Monday May 21, @07:29PM
                    • Re:Lame by CrashPoint (Score:1) Tuesday May 22, @12:25PM
                      • Re:Lame by geminidomino (Score:2) Tuesday May 22, @11:22PM
                        • Re:Lame by CrashPoint (Score:1) Wednesday May 23, @08:47AM
          • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @11:56AM
          • Re:Lame by Annymouse Cowherd (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @07:35PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Lame by Jackie_Chan_Fan (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:41PM
      • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @06:22PM
    • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @04:47PM
      • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:51PM
        • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:57PM
          • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @06:15PM
            • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @11:16PM
              • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @12:55AM
                • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @04:41AM
                  • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @12:05PM
                  • Re:Lame by loraksus (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @02:52PM
                  • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @04:04PM
                  • Re:Lame by Vicissidude (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @04:18PM
                  • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @05:14PM
                  • Re:Lame by WhatAmIDoingHere (Score:3) Sunday May 20, @08:19PM
    • Re:Lame by MobileTatsu-NJG (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @04:49AM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mgiuca (1040724) on Saturday May 19, @01:40AM (#19188695)
    Excellent, so glad it isn't a StarCraft MMO as rumoured.

    What I want to know is, will it have a Heroes model (after Warcraft III) or will it drop back to a more traditional model of RTS (just units). Or will it have an entirely new hook? I hope it follows after Warcraft III's model.

    However, the reports of having hundreds of zerglings makes it seem like it might be more of a macro scale RTS.
    • It has some heroes... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Myria (562655) on Saturday May 19, @01:43AM (#19188717)
      The Protoss mother ship (from IGN's Charles Onyett [ign.com]):

      3:18 - warprey also very effective against structures - very vulnerable to small unit fire - shws warpreys getting wiped out by terran marines. Physics system lets debris from warpreys roll down a ramp. Showing one more unit - warped in in a serious of cubes - giant floating base - called a protoss mothership - can only have 1 at a time - cost big resources - special abilities include timebomb that slows all enemy missiles inside - shows terran missle launcher shooting in projectiles that stop in the field before they reach the ship - when field ends missiles drop the ground - planet cracker attack - giant lasers stream from ship to ground - ship can be moved around while planet cracker laser is active - the ship looks like a metallic, triangular sand dollar - mothership can create a black hole anywhere it wannts to - creates distortion that actually sucks ships in and destroys them - in the demo the black hole destroyed four terran battle cruisers in about ten seconds.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Awesome by Leptok (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:46AM
    • Re:Awesome by Puff of Logic (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @01:52AM
    • we need more than eye candy by acidrain (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:53AM
    • Re:Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Derekloffin (741455) on Saturday May 19, @03:11AM (#19189065)
      I hope it follows after Warcraft III's model.

      God I hope not. I don't want a WCIII mod with SC skins, I want StarCraft II. It should stand out as unique from both it's predecessor and it's brother in the WC universe.

      [ Parent ]
      • Mod Parent Up (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Longtime_Lurker_Aces (1008565) on Saturday May 19, @09:38AM (#19190609)
        This is NOT flamebait, this is the sentiment of millions of gamers. I strongly prefer the starcraft style of gameplay to the warcraft 3 style.

        I too hope it does not have the heros, they're the reason I grew weary of wc3 in a week instead of the 4 years I played sc.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Mod Parent Up (Score:4, Insightful)

          I too hope it does not have the heros, they're the reason I grew weary of wc3 in a week instead of the 4 years I played sc.

          you only played starcraft for 4 years? I still play it relatively frequently.

          I agree with you, though. The more things you have to keep track of and manage, the more difficult the game becomes. It starts to be a chore to play rather than fun. That was the main allure of the SC- it was simple to learn and once you understood the upgrade path, it took a lifetime to master. Broodwars ruined it by adding the extra units further complicating the game. You have to worry about so much more (namely invisible units like the lurkers and the dark templars) earlier in the game.

          Heroes are fine, if you don't have to worry about building. That's what I liked about Bungie's Myth games. You didn't have to build anything, you went straight into battle, and if you had a unit that made more kills, he'd get faster and more accurate. It kept gameplay simple, yet dynamic enough to stay fun.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:Mod Parent Up by IdahoEv (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @01:52AM
      • Re:Awesome by Brad1138 (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @09:39PM
        • Re:Awesome by C0rinthian (Score:2) Monday May 21, @01:32PM
          • Re:Awesome by Soul-Burn666 (Score:2) Tuesday May 22, @06:41AM
      • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)

      by geniusj (140174) on Saturday May 19, @05:01AM (#19189533)
      (http://www.ods.org/)
      Ick. As far as I'm concerned, skip the heroes. It's the reason I didn't get into WC3. I've got enough to think about without micromanaging heroes too.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Awesome by olehenning (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @07:01AM
      • Re:Awesome by Andrew Kismet (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:50PM
        • Re:Awesome by KDR_11k (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @02:48AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Awesome by mrchaotica (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @12:38PM
      • Re:Awesome by mgiuca (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @12:53PM
        • Re:Awesome by Chandon Seldon (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @01:48PM
          • Re:Awesome by mgiuca (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @12:03AM
        • Re:Awesome by PyroMosh (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @02:19PM
    • Re:Awesome by Blakey Rat (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @01:30PM
    • Re:Awesome by hkmwbz (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:18PM
      • Re:Awesome by KDR_11k (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @02:55AM
        • Re:Awesome by hkmwbz (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @07:18AM
          • Re:Awesome by fractoid (Score:1) Wednesday May 23, @01:38AM
    • Re:Awesome by Snaller (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:59PM
      • Re:Awesome by geniusj (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @06:25PM
        • Re:Awesome by Snaller (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @12:27PM
    • Re:Awesome by AncientPC (Score:1) Wednesday May 23, @01:14AM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Wow. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 19, @01:40AM (#19188697)
    Even SC2 beat out Duke Nukem Whenever...
    • Re:Wow. by ornryactor (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:43AM
      • Re:Wow. by Ja'Achan (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @05:10AM
    • Re:Wow. by franksands (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @04:06AM
    • Re:Wow. by MarkKB (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @05:48AM
    • Re:Wow. by Isldeur (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @09:18AM
    • Re:Wow. by bckrispi (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @02:44AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Starcraft 2 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ASkGNet (695262) on Saturday May 19, @01:40AM (#19188701)
    (http://www.tehh4x.org/)
    I only hope that Blizzard won't try to mix&match genres in an attempt to gain wider audience. The fact that in WC3, the game degenerated into Hero rush is what kept me from playing it.

    They should look at the original Ground Control for an idea of a good strategy game
    • Re:Starcraft 2 (Score:5, Funny)

      by solios (53048) on Saturday May 19, @01:54AM (#19188765)
      (http://amongthechosen.com/)
      Word. I hated War3 - it slammed all of the most irritating elements of RPGs on top of an RTS and wound up being a severely unenjoyable experience as a result. I can't think of a Blizzard title I've enjoyed less.

      Hopefully Starcraft 2 is Improved Starcraft. If their previous release pattern is anything to go by, it should be. Then Starcraft 3 will suck ass, then we'll have World Of Starcraft, which won't suck.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Starcraft 2 (Score:5, Insightful)

        by dosboot (973832) on Saturday May 19, @03:13AM (#19189077)
        WC3 did however make it so you didn't spend half the game clicking peons, you could cast spells easily, and all around had subtle micro improvements. As much as I like starcraft, warcraft 3 was much more accessible. I'm still only a touch better than hopeless at starcraft, whereas in less time with wc3 I can understand the game very well. For me this makes being hero centric and small scale irrelevant, and it is where I want sc2 to be exactly like wc3.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Starcraft 2 by UnknowingFool (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @08:58AM
      • Re:Starcraft 2 by TheVelvetFlamebait (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @10:54AM
      • Re:Starcraft 2 by jadavis (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @11:58AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Puff of Logic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @01:54AM
      • Relic by StreetStealth (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @02:08AM
        • Re:Relic (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Puff of Logic (895805) on Saturday May 19, @02:31AM (#19188899)

          If Starcraft 2's going to be a Warcraft 3 with pylons, so be it; it'll probably sell millions in South Korea, and I don't doubt it will be a fine update of the balancing act that was Starcraft. Without something really new in the way battles are fought, though, I just can't imagine myself being that excited.
          That's fair enough. I've been saying for a while now that I'd actually be happy with exactly the same damned game with new graphics and maybe some neat physics. Starcraft was released an age ago in gaming terms and it's still resident on my drive simply because it's fun. I know that there are going to be a lot of unreasonable expectations for this game, but I think that as long as Blizzard can retain the core feel and gameplay of the original, they can't go wrong.

          And yes, I'm a huge fan of Relic's work.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Relic by fan of lem (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @10:32AM
          • Re:Relic by Anonymous Villain (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @09:06PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Relic (Score:4, Insightful)

          by evanbd (210358) on Saturday May 19, @02:33AM (#19188909)

          While I loved Homeworld, I thought the basic element they missed that Starcraft had was that the races should be *different*. There should be at least two, preferably 3 races that are unique yet balanced -- not the same units repackaged with a tweak or two. That and I have a pet peeve about "space" physics that include drag -- yeah, yeah, it made the game playable...

          Homeworld was quite well done, especially from a UI / controls standpoint. I also felt it had less of the micromanagement requirement that Starcraft and the like had. I'd love to see something like that but with Starcraft-like variety in the races.

          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Relic by markov_chain (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @10:18AM
            • Re:Relic by mink (Score:1) Monday May 21, @04:50PM
          • Re:Relic by AncientPC (Score:1) Wednesday May 23, @01:30AM
        • Re:Relic by king-manic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:04AM
        • Re:Relic by DragonPup (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:52PM
          • Re:Relic by Puff of Logic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @07:50PM
        • Re:Relic by rehtonAesoohC (Score:1) Monday May 21, @11:04AM
      • Re:Starcraft 2 by NiroZ (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @03:11AM
      • Re:Starcraft 2 by Screaming Lunatic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:14PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by king-manic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:38AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Aliriza (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:55AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Calyth (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:45AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Caine (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:23AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by aasitus (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @04:56AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Britz (Score:3) Saturday May 19, @05:32AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Gobiner (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @07:05AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by ajanp (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @10:46AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by Bachus9000 (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @03:30PM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by bckrispi (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @02:55AM
    • Re:Starcraft 2 by ardin,mcallister (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @06:12AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Bout time by Riktopher (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @01:41AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • May I be the first to say... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Karganeth (1017580) on Saturday May 19, @01:41AM (#19188713)
    KEKEKEKEKE ZERG RUSH!
  • It was a close race by Workaphobia (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:42AM
  • My Wife for Hire!!!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Steavis (887731) on Saturday May 19, @01:47AM (#19188739)
    ....Or was that "My life for Aiur!" I could never tell what those damn zealots were saying.
  • Interesting by Xaivius (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:51AM
  • Does this mean by Travoltus (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @01:52AM
  • Another crisis averted (Score:5, Funny)

    by tehSpork (1000190) on Saturday May 19, @01:58AM (#19188785)
    In other news, the rest of the world released a huge sigh of relief as the Doomsday Clock [damninteresting.com] was turned back. A spokesman for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was quoted as saying "A Starcraft MMO could have ended it all. We may never know how close we came to the complete and utter destruction of society as we know it."
  • Round 2 (Score:4, Funny)

    by Nihilgeist (1104329) on Saturday May 19, @02:00AM (#19188787)
    StarCraft is back for more. Will my academic career survive this time?
  • CGI Trailer on YouTube (Score:5, Informative)

    by Myria (562655) on Saturday May 19, @02:01AM (#19188795)
    Here [youtube.com]
  • Screenshots available (Score:5, Informative)

    by mgiuca (1040724) on Saturday May 19, @02:25AM (#19188875)
    IGN has posted screenshots here [ign.com].

    Looks incredibly cool graphically, though at the moment it looks like the gameplay is exactly the same as StarCraft. I wonder if there'll be some gameplay announcements soon.
  • yikes by jigjigga (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:25AM
    • Re:yikes by Faylone (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @05:44AM
  • Introduction Video by chazchaz101 (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:32AM
  • Looks like Starcraft 1 with new graphics... by ghostunit (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:33AM
  • I hope... by slayermet420 (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:34AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • So... by evanbd (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:35AM
    • Re:So... by aliquis (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @09:29AM
    • Re:So... by Achoi77 (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @10:42PM
  • User Interface by BloodyIron (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:41AM
  • Don't hold your breath... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mark-t (151149) <marktNO@SPAMlynx.bc.ca> on Saturday May 19, @02:41AM (#19188937)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday September 12 2006, @03:31PM)
    Or at least, that's what my kids (all have played Starcraft) said when I mentioned this to them, quick to point out that the Starcraft:Ghost project was delayed so many times it eventually died.
  • I feel enormously stupid ... by mstroeck (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:53AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Oh please by Frozen Void (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:55AM
  • by GFree (853379) on Saturday May 19, @03:00AM (#19189009)
    I, for one, welcome our new Zerg overlords.

    *whisper: dude, we don't have any overlords*

    SPAWN MORE OVERLORDS!
  • Looks exactly like SC1 by jorghis (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:04AM
  • Sprite Graphics? by jinxidoru (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:04AM
  • by mstroeck (411799) on Saturday May 19, @03:05AM (#19189039)
    (http://www.stroeck.com/)
    I'm entering "long, pseudo-philosophical rant"-mode here, so caveat lector:

    Improving StarCraft is like improving chess - arguably possible, but hardly without upsetting a lot of people. StarCraft is still being played today because as a game, it's one of the most polished and consistent experiences available. It's not truly "real-time", it has little to do with "strategy", it is certainly not trying to be realistic and the graphics suck by today's standard - but that's also true for poker and darts. I feel most of the comments calling for Blizzard to "look to Title X" for new ideas for StarCraft 2 are a little misguided. StarCraft's gameplay is in a class of it's own, people will buy it because it's StarCraft. And they will buy it because StarCraft -even in its current form- is just a damn good game in it's own right. It's just imaginable that, a hundred years from now, people will still enjoy slightly enhanced versions of exactly the same formula, just like we enjoy back gammon thousands of years after its original form was created.
  • Break a Leg. by ForCripeSake (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @03:07AM
  • Get rid of Kerrigan by lbbros (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @03:11AM
  • How to Make SC MMO-Like w/Out Making it an RPG by BlackGriffen (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @03:13AM
  • While I see some complain that Starcraft2 is just like Starcraft, I rather think that's just one of it's strengths. I would *hate* to have seen a completely 'revised' starcraft where one could hardly see any link with the old game. Let's face it; it may be true that Blizzard is (much like EA) a rather commercial company (well, they all are, but you know what I mean) who mainly goes for established and proven concepts, and doesn't come up with something daring or original - one must acknowledge they hit the spot with Starcraft. It was one of the best games of the genre in its time. Ah, the wee hours I spend on it (including broodwars). I'm not saying it was perfect (there were some missions who were rather tedious and boring), but all in all it was a great game - and even until this day I play it now and then (I bought it again for 6 euro or so last year; a real bargain, since it STILL looks reasonable and remains as enjoyable as when it came out).

    So, yes, Blizzard isn't really an innovative company and only bets on sure moneymakers, and their Starcraft2 is much like Starcraft, only with prettier graphics, a new story, new units, new AI and physics...but really, isn't that new enough for something that already was a superb game (and, as Blizzard well knows, a huge succes)? I think *many* more would complain if Blizzard had taken Starcraft into directions that completely deviated from the old game, frankly. Imagine they made a MMOG out of it...that would have been completely awful (just as when Beth would make the next TES game into a MMOG; a big mistake - though in that case, multiplayer for 4-8 friends to play in it would be cool). All in all, Blizzard did well not to tinker too much with the concept of the game itself; a huge fanbase would be more inclined to turn their backs on them if they would be *too* cavalier in changing an already established and loved game.

    That said, I would like to see Blizzard and EA try out something really innovative with a new game, though. It's a bit sad such huge companies dare less then other, often far more smaller game-developing corporations. Yeah, I know; going for the easy money is always...well, easier. But I can't imagine the game-devs themselves wouldn't like to tackle and try out something totally new too, even in those companies.
  • by Nim82 (838705) on Saturday May 19, @03:35AM (#19189147)
    I really appreciate the fact (judging by the visuals) that they have seemingly concentrated on making things aesthetically pleasing, rather than technologically demanding, as so many new games seem to.

    This means it should be fairly scalable to lower end PC's. Complete opposite to say Supreme Commander which kills even high-end computers, yet isn't exactly great looking - infact it looks worse than 10 year old TA on anything but the highest settings!.

    Blizzard did the same with WC3, which ran nicely on my low end laptop back in the day and still looked nice. Kudos to them for putting gameplay, and true art ahead of 'graphics technology'.
  • Also check... by WhiskyMoon (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @04:02AM
  • Just Graphics by GrouchoMarx (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:05AM
  • oh god (Score:5, Funny)

    i'm starting grad school next semester. i hope to god that sc2 is delayed long enough for me to get my phd.
  • Graphics updgrade != fun upgrade by DoofusOfDeath (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @05:10AM
  • Starcraft 2 trailer music - Star Wars ripoff by notrandom (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @05:38AM
  • Expected and cautiously optimistic by akypoon (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @07:22AM
  • Although I have nothing to do with the torrent myself, I should note for the benefit of those who are finding starcraft2.com to be sluggishly slashdotted, all the "good stuff" from the site is available via BitTorrent. [demonoid.com]

    Enjoy.
  • Starcraft 1.5? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by crswanny (949449) on Saturday May 19, @07:45AM (#19190147)
    Soon as I saw the announcements I ran to starcraft2.com and read everything as much as I could about the game. You're pretty limited at what you can see, and the only race with a wee bit of info are the Protoss. As someone who got the original the day it came out (best April Fool's day, evar!) I'm been a rabid fan for years. But looking at all the preliminary info I just get this feeling that it's SC1.5 instead of 2. Yeah it made the leap to 3D graphics (whoopty-doo) but there's still only the 3 races, no new Hybrid that I and bunches of others have been expecting. I know this is still really early to make any calls on and looks like another fantastic, awesome Blizz game, just throwing my two cents in. PS. Please Blizz, keep this as a strategy game and don't try a "RPS" or whatever WCIII is.
  • While I am happy to see Starcraft 2... by DragonPup (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @07:58AM
  • Damn you Blizzard! by Lee148 (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @08:09AM
  • Looking good by Vexorian (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @08:52AM
  • Blizzard now the best source by moderatorrater (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @10:26AM
  • by AHumbleOpinion (546848) on Saturday May 19, @11:10AM (#19191075)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    The Linux gaming market is not really viable yet, at least for large developers. I wish this were not true, but it is. Recent events like the Apple Intel migration have not really changed the situation. I'll address some good questions that came from a troll thread.

    Supporting Mac OSX on X86 and not supporting Linux is nothing short of Laziness now.

    You are mistaken. The migration from PowerPC to Intel has not made a Linux port one bit easier. It has made the Mac market more important as a greater percentage of Macs are now viable gaming systems, especially on the laptop side.

    Mac games are not *nix based, they still use proprietary APIs like Carbon and Cocoa to some degree. Also a company like Blizzard that has been supporting Macs for over a decade surely has some internal libraries that are pretty Windows and Mac specific as well. The source code to Mac based games is not really any more compatible with Linux than it was before Apple's Intel migration. All that has happened is that assembly language / SSE from the Windows side does not have to be rewritten in PowerPC / Altivec.

    I have to think the game marketshare of Linux is running neck and neck with Apple systems. Blizzard is showing that it is worth it to port to MacOS, so why don't they also feel the same about Linux?

    The Linux game market is *not* all those willing to buy a native Linux port of a game, it is *only* those who refuse to buy a Win32 version and dual boot or emulate. If a company does a native Linux port it needs *new* sales to justify it. Cannibalizing existing sales, having a person buy a Linux version instead of a Win32 version, does not bring in any new money. It loses money, they got the same sale but they spent more money getting it. The majority of Linux gamers dual boot or emulate, until that changes the Linux gaming market will not be viable - Linux gamers are already paying customers via the Win32 version.

    Historically the Mac side was a very different story. Dual boot was not an option until recent times, and emulation was not practical for games - the CPU, not just the APIs, needed to be emulated. So Mac gamers had to have a native port. This made the Mac gaming market viable. If anything has changed, it is not Linux becoming more viable, it is Mac becoming less viable. If Mac gamers begin to dual boot or emulate, so that they more gaming options, then they will create an environment where developers will find it more profitable to reach Mac gamers via the Win32 version as well. One version (Win32) to rule them all (Win32, Linux, and Mac).

    A secondary but non-trivial problem with targeting Linux, support. Targeting Linux is not like Mac where you have one platform, or two if you still want to target PowerPC. There are many Linux distribution, your code and/or installer may need to be aware of some of their subtleties, your support personnel surely will need to be aware. These support people may even need to be more technically inclined than Mac support people, on second thought that's a given isn't it? Your quality assurance testing matrix just ballooned from Win2K, WinXP, WinVista, MacOS X Intel, MacOS X PowerPC to the former plus Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, SUSE. Doesn't seem to bad at first glance, but keep in mind the much smaller return that the latter four provide. All this support and qa effort *must* be paid for by the Linux gamer subsegment that refuses to buy the Win32 version and dual boot or emulate.
  • While this is great and all... by wilgibson (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @11:17AM
  • Looks a little cartoony by Unreliable (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @11:18AM
  • Its a Trap by db32 (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @11:27AM
  • Diablo 3 by Penguin's Advocate (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @12:46PM
  • Star Craft Ghost by Kuvter (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:31PM
  • eh? by glwtta (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:43PM
    • Re:eh? by Cowardly Anonymity (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:47PM
  • SC2 by gricha2380 (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:43PM
  • Return to concept (Score:4, Interesting)

    The first thing I thought when I saw the screenshots of Starcraft II was: "The units look just like they did on the box for the original Starcraft."

    I remember after playing Starcraft for a while looking at the box and thinking: "That's not how the game actually looks! Those units all have extra spiky parts and the buildings have more attachments and who the hell sends a command center into battle?!" I figured that the shots were from many months before release and they simplified the graphics and abilities as they polished the game.

    Well, Starcraft 2 doesn't look exactly like those old screenshots. It's more like a beautiful, glowing, high definition revisit to the original concepts. I wonder how much Starcraft 2 is based on their original vision for Starcraft but with ten times as much computer power and a hundred times as much cash available.

    Actually, that sounds like the Star Wars prequels -- an old idea returned to with new technology. Except I have some faith that Blizzard can remake an old idea without adding annoying characters, terrible acting, and boring storylines. Then again, they might add a fourth race....

    AlpineR
  • SC2 != WC3 by thebroken (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @04:20PM
  • Is that all? by 75th Trombone (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @06:46PM
  • really, physics? why? (Score:3, Interesting)

    why would they need a physics system? People are complaining that you had to micromanage the heros on WC3, what can realistic physics add, other than more little useless details (oh no! the Goliath tripped over a rock on the ground, I better go help him!)

    I'm not a fanatic who thinks physics are just a gimmick to replace good gameplay (I loved hl2), but it should be interesting to see what they're doing with this. Otherwise it sounds like they're caving to "peer pressure" (all the cool game engines are doing it!)
  • Starcraft 2 Hype (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Danathar (267989) on Saturday May 19, @08:46PM (#19194979)
    (Last Journal: Sunday August 20 2006, @09:16PM)
    I liked Starcraft and will probably like Starcraft 2 like a lot of other people...but the hype surrounding it, dancing girls, thousands of people stuffed into a stadium to see it..seems more than a bit over the top and bizzare.

    It's a game, not the answer to forgoing a life.
  • The more I read about SC2, the more psyched I am.. by bughunter (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @09:13PM
  • Starcraft2 Who Cares? by pcdave (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @10:34PM
  • 100 units? by jgoemat (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @10:55PM
    • Re:100 units? by WhatAmIDoingHere (Score:2) Monday May 21, @03:43PM
  • Finally! by JFMulder (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @12:21AM
  • kind of an mmmm yawn by jollyreaper (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @07:05AM
  • Strategic Zoom by jfodale (Score:1) Monday May 21, @11:25AM
  • Amazing! by brkello (Score:2) Monday May 21, @10:32PM
    • Re:Amazing! by shoptroll (Score:2) Thursday May 24, @12:15PM
  • Explains Starcraft: Ghost by stpk4 (Score:1) Monday May 21, @10:58PM
  • Hurra for SC2 by KirkCotton (Score:1) Friday May 25, @12:53AM
  • Re:Meh (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Puff of Logic (895805) on Saturday May 19, @01:58AM (#19188783)

    Was never taken with Starcraft, liked TA much better. Will be worth trying at least.
    Well, you must have been pretty happy with Supreme Commander, since it was essentially TA 2.0. I enjoyed the demo (although the dual screen functionality needed work) but haven't picked up a copy of it yet. Starcraft 2 has been a hell of a long time coming and I'm glad to see that it's been confirmed.
    [ Parent ]
    • Re:Meh by Uthic (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:01AM
      • Re:Meh by Puff of Logic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:40AM
        • Re:Meh by game kid (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:01AM
        • Re:Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

          by RoffleTheWaffle (916980) on Saturday May 19, @03:51AM (#19189225)
          (Last Journal: Thursday March 16 2006, @11:29AM)
          The point about style that you made is probably why everyone remembers Starcraft, while Total Annihilation is practically unknown to most gamers today. While I'm sure most of us can agree that Starcraft was a technically inferior program, it was much more memorable for its style, appearance, and story. Total Annihilation, meanwhile, was a game far ahead of its time, and it got left in the dust because it had zero personality. Total Annihilation's gameplay was and continues to be top-notch, even surpassing Supreme Commander in a few respects. (Namely in unit diversity and pacing.) It had features most RTS games don't have now, and that was ten years ago. The problem is, there was no 'coolness hook' - no real style - to draw you in unless you really, really appreciated the gameplay and the feature-set. In today's world of pretty lights, convoluted storylines, and stylishly dressed feature characters, games like Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander are just too difficult for most gamers to appreciate.

          That's not to say they're both not completely incredible games, which they are. They're just totally square in spite of being so awesome.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Meh by blahplusplus (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @10:42PM
          • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Meh by MeanderingMind (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @10:46AM
        • Re:Meh by Taco Meat (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @03:43PM
          • Re:Meh by Puff of Logic (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @07:38PM
            • Re:Meh by Taco Meat (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @08:57PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

      It appears the good ole days of the RTS are back. C&C 3, Supreme Commander, and now StarCraft 2. Throw in some very good newcomers like Company of Heros, and it's the best time to be an RTS gamer since the 90's.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Meh by Jackie_Chan_Fan (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:46PM
      • Re:Meh by ghyd (Score:1) Sunday May 20, @01:13PM
      • Re:Meh by dr00g911 (Score:2) Sunday May 20, @05:27PM
    • Re:Meh by KDR_11k (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @11:01AM
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. by Shinra (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @02:55AM
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. by MLS100 (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @02:59AM
  • Thats funny...... by Sillygates (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @03:06AM
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. (Score:3, Funny)

    by DrSkwid (118965) on Saturday May 19, @04:03AM (#19189279)
    (http://www.milksucks.com/ | Last Journal: Monday September 15 2003, @12:30PM)
    "Starcraft in 3d in Directx 9 with particles systems and a few minor tweaks to the gameplay."

    I'd buy that for a dollar!
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. by physicsnick (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:31AM
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. by Nim82 (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @04:31AM
  • Coming from a longtime linux user... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nobodyman (90587) on Saturday May 19, @05:06AM (#19189559)
    I share your frustration, but I think you're over-simplifying the linux issue...

    Supporting Mac OS X on X86 and not supporting Linux is nothing short of Laziness now.

    This is simply not true. Games for Linux may be more viable than, say, 5 years ago, but it is no means a trivial endeavor to create a cross-platform game that spans Linux, Mac, and Windows. And the Linux desktop market share is still so small there is very little chance it would be profitable. I doubt the profits would even pay for writing an installer RPM, writing Linux-specific documentation, and manning the Linux support calls.

    And the fact that all three OS's have x86 implementations doesn't help as you might think. Sure, you might be able to have sections written in assembly that can run in all three targets, but game developers don't need to muck nearly as much as they used to (CPU's are faster, compilers are *much* improved). On the other hand, API's and middle-ware tools are becoming more and more prominent, and depending on which ones you choose and it can have a bit impact on portability.

    On the other hand, the bnetd thing *does* piss me off, and I share your frustration. At the time Bnetd was written, battle.net was a horribly broken mess. Bnetd was less of a vehicle for cheating than it was an workaround for when battle.net was down. Honestly I think that Blizzard was embarrassed at being one-upped by a group of part-time OSS hackers.

    [ Parent ]
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. by boo19 (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @05:23AM
  • Re:Hopes and Dreams by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @06:00AM
  • Re:BleahBleahBleah. by bodan (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @06:29AM
  • Re:Fuck Blizzard. by Tim Browse (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @07:08AM
    • Re:Fuck Blizzard. by winphreak (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @10:37AM
    • by AHumbleOpinion (546848) on Saturday May 19, @10:56AM (#19191007)
      (http://slashdot.org/)
      I have to think the game marketshare of Linux is running neck and neck with Apple systems. Blizzard is showing that it is worth it to port to MacOS, so why don't they also feel the same about Linux?

      The Linux game market is *not* all those willing to buy a native Linux port of a game, it is *only* those who refuse to buy a Win32 version and dual boot or emulate. If a company does a native Linux port it needs *new* sales to justify it. Cannibalizing existing sales, having a person buy a Linux version instead of a Win32 version, does not bring in any new money. It loses money, they got the same sale but they spent more money getting it. The majority of Linux gamers dual boot or emulate, until that changes the Linux gaming market will not be viable - Linux gamers are already paying customers via the Win32 version.

      Historically the Mac side was a very different story. Dual boot was not an option until recent times, and emulation was not practical for games - the CPU, not just the APIs, needed to be emulated. So Mac gamers had to have a native port. This made the Mac gaming market viable. If anything has changed, it is not Linux becoming more viable, it is Mac becoming less viable. If Mac gamers begin to dual boot or emulate, so that they more gaming options, then they will create an environment where developers will find it more profitable to reach Mac gamers via the Win32 version as well. One version (Win32) to rule them all (Win32, Linux, and Mac).

      A secondary but non-trivial problem with targeting Linux, support. Targeting Linux is not like Mac where you have one platform, or two if you still want to target PowerPC. There are many Linux distribution, your code and/or installer may need to be aware of some of their subtleties, your support personnel surely will need to be aware. These support people may even need to be more technically inclined than Mac support people, on second thought that's a given isn't it? Your quality assurance testing matrix just ballooned from Win2K, WinXP, WinVista, MacOS X Intel, MacOS X PowerPC to the former plus Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, SUSE. Doesn't seem to bad at first glance, but keep in mind the much smaller return that the latter four provide. All this support and qa effort *must* be paid for by the Linux gamer subsegment that refuses to buy the Win32 version and dual boot or emulate.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Fuck Blizzard. by pecosdave (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @12:43PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:Hopes and Dreams by markh100 (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @08:00AM
  • Re:Blah... by nwbvt (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @08:26AM
  • Re:Hopes and Dreams by robzon (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @09:54AM
  • Re:Hopes and Dreams by MeanderingMind (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @10:52AM
  • Intel based Mac do not mean easy Linux port by AHumbleOpinion (Score:2) Saturday May 19, @11:01AM
  • It'd be nice to see blizzard get their act together and release for linux as well, instead of depending on WINE or chite like Cedega for us to play their games. I'm not holding my breath on this one though, they've been failing us for years.

    No, Linux gamers have been failing themselves for years. The choice to dual boot or emulate undermines the Linux gaming market, more here: http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=235329&c id=19191075 [slashdot.org]. It is not the role of game developers to develop the Linux gaming market, they just follow the customers to whatever platform the customers choose and Linux gamers are largely choosing Win32. It is the role of Linux gamers to promote their preferred platform and to abstain from Win32 versions. Of course, there are also gamers who don't really give a rat's ass about operating systems and that is just fine. I have no gripe with "gamers" who dual boot or emulate, it is only those who identify themselves as "Linux gamers" that I would chastise and say put your time/money where your advocacy is.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Hopes and Dreams by SwedishPenguin (Score:1) Saturday May 19, @01:13PM
  • Re:penguins by stonedcat (Score:1) Friday May 25, @12:44AM
  • 18 replies beneath your current threshold.