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."
Why can't that be a position for their current MMO?
WoW has been running on the same engine since release in late 2004. Many MMOs (Dark Age for example) are constantly updating their game engine. Maybe this is just a new engine for the same MMO.
It's worth noting that Blizzard have recently renewed their trademark on Blackthorne [uspto.gov]. Trademarks on other Blizzard games from that era appear to remain untouched.
Blizzard telling us that they are announcing a new game in *South Korea* next month almost guarantees that it is Starcraft-related IMHO. Starcraft is/was absolutely huge in Korea, so I can't see them choosing that spot for an announcement for anything else.
A Starcraft MMO also makes good market sense right now, even if I would also love to see a new Starcraft RTS. There has been a distinct lack of quality mainstream Scifi MMOs so far. Starcraft could fit into that area quite nicely -- and by the time the game was ready for release, WoW would also be around its 5th anniversary.
by Anonymous Coward
on Saturday April 28 2007, @03:41AM (#18910111)
Actually, the logical thing to do is pull a Warcraft 3. Announce Starcraft 2 in Korea, with a new 3D engine. Use this release to lay additional groundwork (in particular, any new story elements needed to create an MMO from it), while beginning serious work on the implementation of the MMO. Then release an expansion to the RTS 1-2 years later, then announce the MMO 1-2 years later, and release 1-2 years later.
That way, you get the franchise revitalized and updated, making the expected shedloads of money, while also setting things up for the MMO to follow. And if they really are working on Ghost in-house, then if the MMO is delayed, there's another entry in the Starcraft franchise to keep interest in the brand up.
The Warcraft "story" is completely stagnant in WoW; nothing ever changes. You grind the same old missions over and over again and yet nothing ever changes. That is, unless you count the perpetual next-tier of equipment that Blizzard releases to keep the mindless inhabitants grinding and paying.
Graphic wise, Starcraft was far superior to TA. Good 2d art is much better than simple 3d art. I can still look at Starcraft today and enjoy the graphics. It may be outdated, pixel-wise, but it is still art. TA however has aged significantly.
The custom AI was indeed a weak point of starcraft, but starcraft single player still had its charms with its better campaigns. Custom single player games was interesting also, mainly to see how many AIs you could defeat. You can't claim to have mastered starcraft single player until you have won 1vs7 games with all three races. Terran being the easiest (Bunkers+Siegetanks), protoss medium difficult (photon cannons+shield batteries and a good map) and zerg the toughest. (Quick expansion and tech to Guardians on a map with close expansion and long travel paths). There is no question however, that multiplayer was where Starcraft shined.
As for the better game. Starcraft and TA had completly different focus. TA was an army management game with the focus on strategy, and it did very well at that. Throwing large armies back and forth. Starcraft on the other hand had a few specific things that made it unique among RTS:s, then and now. This is why I consider it the best RTS of all times. These special attributes being
* 3 unique, balanced races. Most RTS games have some difference between the different sides, but Starcraft is to date the only game that I know off that pulled it off that well. The actual mindset changes when switching races. You can actually feel the swarm mentality when playing zerg, or the ability to hold ground as terrans, or the pure power of protoss units.
* Every single unit type matters from start to end. There isn't a single unit in Starcraft that becomes outdated as the game progresses. When it comes to dealing out pure damage, the basic units are the most cost efficent, while more advanced units are used to provide specific advantages. (such as attack range, area effects, health, cloak and flying abilities)
The only problem I found with Starcraft multiplayer was the insistance to play on the fastest game speed. Fastest game speed is simply to fast unless you are a pro player with incredible reflexes. I have always wished that RTS games would include something like a Max Payne style time slower where any player could slow down the game for a certain amount of time (the ability itself recharging over time). It would allow for a quick initial phase of the game, while still providing ample opportunity to use more complex tactics in the heat of battle.
Blizzard Announcement: "We will be having an announcement soon announcing when we will have an announcement about when we will announce a new product."
We do intend to announce a new product at the Worldwide Invitational next month in Korea, and we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest in getting an advance look at what that will be, but players will have to wait until May 19th to find out more. Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."
So that's a yes on a StarCraft 2, eventually, and a yes to a product announcement next month. The only question now is are they one in the same.
Which means the guy who wrote the article (not Blizzard) is questioning/hoping the announcement is one and the same as a new StarCraft being made.
Yeah, it is all a matter of semantics... and only time will tell. If Blizzard has nothing in their upcoming pipeline (except StarCraft 2) then I could see the reason for the ambiguity - it does m
Yeah, but if you spend $50 on drinks with a girl, you can be pretty sure she'll be going home with you but if she has to take YOU home you'll find out she's a man.
by Anonymous Coward
on Friday April 27 2007, @10:12PM (#18908827)
I bet they'll introduce the new "World of Starcraft" with an expansion pack for WoW. Just when a new guild is about to take down Kel'Thuzad for the first time, and a voice will come out of no-where and announce "Nuclear Launch Detected".
I hope they really make some improvements in the AI, assuming it's still an RTS. As much as I love playing online.. now and again.. sometimes i like to move at my own pace, or don't want to be rude to people if I know I might have to leave in the middle of a game. In too many games single player is just a joke. Sure they can give it perfect accuracy in an FPS, or make it cheat in an RTS, but I'd really like to see something that gives me something at least close to playing with a person. I enjoyed Warcraft
Galaxy of Starcraft or any other MMO. Please stay true to the Starcraft roots Blizzard. There are enough MMO right now and besides why would you create something that would take WoW players from you and convert them to GoS players?
I want the rest of the story. I want to see it all. I need a really good RTS so I can justify buying a new computer. I know there are a bunch of really cool RTS right now, but I'm a console player and nothing less than Starcraft 2 can bring me back to PC gaming.
I'd like to see a good, fully modernized version of Shattered Galaxy [shatteredgalaxy.com], its like starcraft if it actually required minimal tactical strategy competence.
"...starcraft if it actually required minimal tactical strategy competence."
Hold up there. If you're implying that Starcraft doesn't require tactical competence then perhaps you're dealing with some strange definition of tactics that I was unaware of. Tactics: Tactics is the collective name for methods of winning a small-scale conflict, performing an optimization, etc. This applies specifically to warfare, but also to economics, trade, games and a host of other fields such as negotiation.
Because it seems that even when they make a sequel or modification to an existing franchise they produce a fantastic game. I wouldn't mind a new game, but I would also love a new version of StarCraft updated to something even better.
Blizzard doesn't do creativity. Their top game is an Everquest clone that continues a franchise based on a setting created by Games Workshop. They haven't had an original title since Diablo in 1996, which is just a simplified dungeon crawler with online play.
I loved Warcraft I and II, but I lost interest when Bliz started emphasized the cartoony fantasy elements instead of the all-out war between the Alliance and the Horde. The RPG-esque elements of WC3 never appealed to me and the lower unit count drove me nuts. I loved the fast-and-furious RTS experience provided by the first two.
In doing so, Blizz set the groundwork for the successful fantasy world that is WoW, but it still doesn't make me happy:)
I will be somewhat disappointed in they take the same route in the next Starcraft.
Is that any sufficiently rabid fanboi will see what he wants, regardless of whether it flat-out contradicts the obvious.
To paraphrase Blizzard: "We're about to announce a new game, and we really want to do something with the Starcraft franchise, but this ain't it." Rabid fanboi writing article: "Woohoo! Blizz said Starcraft! Blizz said new game! This is it, Starcraft 2 next month!"
It's a shame, because I would really like to see another Starcraft. Unfortunately the fanbois are probably scaring Blizzard away from actually doing it, since they know the first screenshots or videos released from beta will set off a torrent of bad press from people saying "What is this crap? They were saying this was ready for release like two years ago, and this is all they have?"
Why paraphrase when you can just copy and post the quote? "We do intend to announce a new product at the Worldwide Invitational next month in Korea, and we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest in getting an advance look at what that will be, but players will have to wait until May 19th to find out more. Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."
Now let me paraphrase, the first part is saying "We have a secret.", the second part is saying "and we really like Starcraft.", and the last part, "but we can't tell you anything yet."
I think you are missing something or I am. This is ambiguous PR talk, but nowhere does it state that they are defiantly not going to do Starcraft, in fact they seem to be suggesting that it is in fact a Starcraft game, or they are a bunch of serious teases.
Also, "fanboi"? Is your disdain of the English language so great that you need to strike out at all of us like that?
Actually et's take those first two parts basically as you state them:
"we have a secret we'll be reealing next month." "We Really like Starcraft."
the third part, with no reading between lines required, quite plainly says "But the secret we plan to reveal next month has nothing to do with Starcraft."
I have a big caveat to my first impulse though. Please, please, make sure that the stand alone version is as good, if not better than the original. My game time is limited. I don't play any games online so if there is a new Starcraft, I need there to be an awesome stand alone version.
Starcraft could be the perfect strategy game if it was more editable and several fixes were applied. (applies to Battle.net itself too) The map editor sucks(by capabilities,everyone uses Starforge). Games start with delay of 5 seconds. Ladder was so prone to abuse blizzard closed it on all gateways. When someone's client doesn't respond,game DOES NOT drop him,but instead freezees the game, shows a non-modal timeout screen,for 40 seconds and then at 0:00 it could just stop if the player uses the very popular lag hack. Maphack and other exploits are not fixed.Maphack gives an enormous advantage in Starcraft. Dragoon(and several other units) AI dances around when used with obstacles. Pairs of units start dancing when they can't decide the right of way(heading towards each other). All channels on battle.net with exception of 20-30 are not shown in channel list(it probably a crude anti-spam measure blizzard "invented"). The ability to save games is limited to host(unlike replays). The random element of 70% chance firing to higher ground does not belong in this game. When connecting to battle.net client opens 7-10 extra connections to the same server,and closes them only after several minutes pass. Friendlists are limited to 20. ignore lists are stored server side and reset each time you login. Ums Map preview is disabled for some reason. Maps in singleplayer list are limited to 1024 IIRC,beyond that it just doesn't displays them (batlle.net list works fine). Spam bots which spam each 60 seconds are never banned and players who speak too fast are kicked out from the server. Replays must be passworded games only. The observer glitch:when observer is exactly on center of missile turret, missile turret stops firing and just freezes. You need to place map revealers and disable fog of war,but cannot make the map be visible 100% in UMS without this. Unit range,cooldown,AI etc are not modifiable by editor. lack of math operations and variables in editor. Spells/abilities are not modifiable and cannot be cast by triggers with exception of few. Direct coordinates and locations are not supported.
Scenario A) The game will not follow the exact same formula, instead taking the original and building upon it. Substantial changes to game play and design are bound, implementing common features available in modern RTS games.
People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too different from the original.
Scenario B) The game is a minimalist upgrade. Basically being the original but in 3D, with the intention of not trying to break a tried and true formula.
People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too similar to the original (see reception of Command and Conquer 3).
Actually, I'd rather they didn't make World of Starcraft, because I'm extremely skeptical that they'd be able to pull it off. While the high-fantasy genre works very well because it's fairly limited in scope and "magic" supplies the necessary explanation for the really wacky stuff, I think that science fiction is a victim of its own scope. Sci-Fi tends to be really big, as evidenced by that cut-scene in Starcraft when the marine is about to get chewed up by Zerg as the massive battlecruiser flies overhea
I think that would be good twist on the MMORPG idea. Doing Big stuff right could be interesting. Wargames have been left out because they're too complicated. How you'd manage a fleet of ships and planet/solar system/galaxy wide strategy would be neat. Blizzard is trying to push WoW into massive battles with hundreds of combatants where there's real armies on line and not just playing against scripts. There's definitely a lot of work to make such an idea practical but hard ideas make big profits!!!
The RTS genre that SC pioneered is pretty much dead. C&C and all the (many, way too many) clones beat that horse to death. Blizz probably knows making another RTS, even a very sexy next-gen RTS, will never have the market impact that a new StarCraft MMOG would.
MMO doesn't equal MMORPG, even though the RPG sub-genre is the biggest of the MMO genres. It could be just as possible that they are planning an MMORTS, or maybe a MMOFPS.
I second that. Diablo 2 was, in my opinion, the greatest game ever made. I'm still playing it. Also, Diablo and Diablo 2 to this day are the only non-MMORPG RPGs that I have ever personally seen girls play on a regular basis. How's that for mainstream? Wake up Blizzard. Make Diablo 3.
Ghost died, pure and simple. It was Blizzards first attempt at re-entering the console market since the SNES days, and they got beaten by their own characteristically long development cycles. It was supposed to be XBox and Ps2, but then the next gen rolled around while they were still working on it, and eventually they gave up, since it would already be dated (its Blizzard, 5-6 years is a SHORT cycle).
heh (Score:3, Funny)
Blizzard announces... (Score:5, Funny)
Not far from the truth. (Score:5, Informative)
Job Update 4/26/07
New Position - Lead Engine Programmer Next-Gen MMO
Parent
Re:Not far from the truth. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why can't that be a position for their current MMO?
WoW has been running on the same engine since release in late 2004. Many MMOs (Dark Age for example) are constantly updating their game engine. Maybe this is just a new engine for the same MMO.
Parent
Re:Not far from the truth. (Score:4, Interesting)
It's worth noting that Blizzard have recently renewed their trademark on Blackthorne [uspto.gov]. Trademarks on other Blizzard games from that era appear to remain untouched.
Parent
Re:Not far from the truth. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Not far from the truth. (Score:5, Interesting)
That way, you get the franchise revitalized and updated, making the expected shedloads of money, while also setting things up for the MMO to follow. And if they really are working on Ghost in-house, then if the MMO is delayed, there's another entry in the Starcraft franchise to keep interest in the brand up.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Blizzard announces... (Score:5, Insightful)
Graphic wise, Starcraft was far superior to TA. Good 2d art is much better than simple 3d art. I can still look at Starcraft today and enjoy the graphics. It may be outdated, pixel-wise, but it is still art. TA however has aged significantly.
The custom AI was indeed a weak point of starcraft, but starcraft single player still had its charms with its better campaigns. Custom single player games was interesting also, mainly to see how many AIs you could defeat. You can't claim to have mastered starcraft single player until you have won 1vs7 games with all three races. Terran being the easiest (Bunkers+Siegetanks), protoss medium difficult (photon cannons+shield batteries and a good map) and zerg the toughest. (Quick expansion and tech to Guardians on a map with close expansion and long travel paths). There is no question however, that multiplayer was where Starcraft shined.
As for the better game. Starcraft and TA had completly different focus. TA was an army management game with the focus on strategy, and it did very well at that. Throwing large armies back and forth. Starcraft on the other hand had a few specific things that made it unique among RTS:s, then and now. This is why I consider it the best RTS of all times. These special attributes being
* 3 unique, balanced races. Most RTS games have some difference between the different sides, but Starcraft is to date the only game that I know off that pulled it off that well. The actual mindset changes when switching races. You can actually feel the swarm mentality when playing zerg, or the ability to hold ground as terrans, or the pure power of protoss units.
* Every single unit type matters from start to end. There isn't a single unit in Starcraft that becomes outdated as the game progresses. When it comes to dealing out pure damage, the basic units are the most cost efficent, while more advanced units are used to provide specific advantages. (such as attack range, area effects, health, cloak and flying abilities)
The only problem I found with Starcraft multiplayer was the insistance to play on the fastest game speed. Fastest game speed is simply to fast unless you are a pro player with incredible reflexes. I have always wished that RTS games would include something like a Max Payne style time slower where any player could slow down the game for a certain amount of time (the ability itself recharging over time). It would allow for a quick initial phase of the game, while still providing ample opportunity to use more complex tactics in the heat of battle.
Parent
It's just like running for president (Score:4, Funny)
Who writes these story headlines? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We do intend to announce a new product at the Worldwide Invitational next month in Korea, and we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest in getting an advance look at what that will be, but players will have to wait until May 19th to find out more. Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."
Which brings it down to speculation
Re: (Score:2)
From the article:
So that's a yes on a StarCraft 2, eventually, and a yes to a product announcement next month. The only question now is are they one in the same.
Which means the guy who wrote the article (not Blizzard) is questioning/hoping the announcement is one and the same as a new StarCraft being made.
Yeah, it is all a matter of semantics... and only time will tell. If Blizzard has nothing in their upcoming pipeline (except StarCraft 2) then I could see the reason for the ambiguity - it does m
This is just in! (Score:5, Funny)
No details are as of yet released, but rumour has it that it *might* be the highly anticipated s equal to their previous bestseller "BAR"
More details at eleven.
Good Locale (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Reminds me (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Korea? Bet it's Starcraft-related (Score:5, Informative)
Also it's not a total surprise given the hints [wikipedia.org] that Blizzard has been putting out (validity of "hints" left as an exercise to reader).
Another expansion pack (Score:5, Funny)
MMO (Score:2)
Please, let it NOT be... (Score:2)
I want the rest of the story. I want to see it all. I need a really good RTS so I can justify buying a new computer. I know there are a bunch of really cool RTS right now, but I'm a console player and nothing less than Starcraft 2 can bring me back to PC gaming.
Re: (Score:2)
Cheers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hold up there. If you're implying that Starcraft doesn't require tactical competence then perhaps you're dealing with some strange definition of tactics that I was unaware of.
Tactics: Tactics is the collective name for methods of winning a small-scale conflict, performing an optimization, etc. This applies specifically to warfare, but also to economics, trade, games and a host of other fields such as negotiation.
That kind o
BLizzard said no (Score:2)
hello? that sounds like it is not SC2
wtf? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Blizzard doesn't do creativity. Their top game is an Everquest clone that continues a franchise based on a setting created by Games Workshop. They haven't had an original title since Diablo in 1996, which is just a simplified dungeon crawler with online play.
I hope SC2 isn't like WC3... (Score:3, Interesting)
In doing so, Blizz set the groundwork for the successful fantasy world that is WoW, but it still doesn't make me happy
I will be somewhat disappointed in they take the same route in the next Starcraft.
What this proves... (Score:4, Insightful)
To paraphrase Blizzard: "We're about to announce a new game, and we really want to do something with the Starcraft franchise, but this ain't it."
Rabid fanboi writing article: "Woohoo! Blizz said Starcraft! Blizz said new game! This is it, Starcraft 2 next month!"
It's a shame, because I would really like to see another Starcraft. Unfortunately the fanbois are probably scaring Blizzard away from actually doing it, since they know the first screenshots or videos released from beta will set off a torrent of bad press from people saying "What is this crap? They were saying this was ready for release like two years ago, and this is all they have?"
Re:What this proves... (Score:5, Interesting)
"We do intend to announce a new product at the Worldwide Invitational next month in Korea, and we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest in getting an advance look at what that will be, but players will have to wait until May 19th to find out more. Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."
Now let me paraphrase, the first part is saying "We have a secret.", the second part is saying "and we really like Starcraft.", and the last part, "but we can't tell you anything yet."
I think you are missing something or I am. This is ambiguous PR talk, but nowhere does it state that they are defiantly not going to do Starcraft, in fact they seem to be suggesting that it is in fact a Starcraft game, or they are a bunch of serious teases.
Also, "fanboi"? Is your disdain of the English language so great that you need to strike out at all of us like that?
Parent
Re:What this proves... (Score:4, Insightful)
"we have a secret we'll be reealing next month."
"We Really like Starcraft."
the third part, with no reading between lines required, quite plainly says "But the secret we plan to reveal next month has nothing to do with Starcraft."
Parent
I'll go out on a limb with my personal opinion... (Score:2)
I have a big caveat to my first impulse though. Please, please, make sure that the stand alone version is as good, if not better than the original. My game time is limited. I don't play any games online so if there is a new Starcraft, I need there to be an awesome stand alone version.
Starcraft II (Score:5, Informative)
(applies to Battle.net itself too)
The map editor sucks(by capabilities,everyone uses Starforge).
Games start with delay of 5 seconds.
Ladder was so prone to abuse blizzard closed it on all gateways.
When someone's client doesn't respond,game DOES NOT drop him,but instead freezees the game,
shows a non-modal timeout screen,for 40 seconds and then at 0:00 it could just stop if the player uses
the very popular lag hack.
Maphack and other exploits are not fixed.Maphack gives an enormous advantage in Starcraft.
Dragoon(and several other units) AI dances around when used with obstacles.
Pairs of units start dancing when they can't decide the right of way(heading towards each other).
All channels on battle.net with exception of 20-30 are not shown in channel list(it probably a crude anti-spam measure blizzard "invented").
The ability to save games is limited to host(unlike replays).
The random element of 70% chance firing to higher ground does not belong in this game.
When connecting to battle.net client opens 7-10 extra connections to the same server,and closes them only after several minutes pass.
Friendlists are limited to 20.
ignore lists are stored server side and reset each time you login.
Ums Map preview is disabled for some reason.
Maps in singleplayer list are limited to 1024 IIRC,beyond that it just doesn't displays them (batlle.net list works fine).
Spam bots which spam each 60 seconds are never banned and players who speak too fast are kicked out from the server.
Replays must be passworded games only.
The observer glitch:when observer is exactly on center of missile turret, missile turret stops firing and just freezes.
You need to place map revealers and disable fog of war,but cannot make the map be visible 100% in UMS without this.
Unit range,cooldown,AI etc are not modifiable by editor.
lack of math operations and variables in editor.
Spells/abilities are not modifiable and cannot be cast by triggers with exception of few.
Direct coordinates and locations are not supported.
the list goes on and on.
Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? (Score:5, Insightful)
People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too different from the original.
Scenario B) The game is a minimalist upgrade. Basically being the original but in 3D, with the intention of not trying to break a tried and true formula.
People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too similar to the original (see reception of Command and Conquer 3).
No!! Please don't so this (Score:5, Funny)
I've been Blizzard's bitch since 1994 and it sucks. I feel like Sharon Stone in Casino....
Sure Starcraft II (Score:3, Insightful)
The "Korea" is the key, a country known for its massive amount of current Starcraft players.
It will be at least Starcraft related.
cash cow? (Score:2)
as far as I kno,w blizzard is just fine.
Re:WoW/WoS? (Score:5, Funny)
Spawn more overlords!
Parent
Re:WoW/WoS? (Score:5, Funny)
We require more minerals.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What everyone really wants is World Of Starcraft.
Actually, I'd rather they didn't make World of Starcraft, because I'm extremely skeptical that they'd be able to pull it off. While the high-fantasy genre works very well because it's fairly limited in scope and "magic" supplies the necessary explanation for the really wacky stuff, I think that science fiction is a victim of its own scope. Sci-Fi tends to be really big, as evidenced by that cut-scene in Starcraft when the marine is about to get chewed up by Zerg as the massive battlecruiser flies overhea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)