Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Classic Games (Games) Nintendo PC Games (Games) Games

New Release Of StarCraft In 4K Ultra High Definition Announced ( 161

The classic 90s-era videogames StarCraft and StarCraft: Brood War will be re-released this summer -- remastered in 4K Ultra High Definition. An anonymous reader quotes The Verge: It will also include a number of updates, such as remastered sound, new additional illustrations for the campaign missions, new matchmaking capabilities, the ability to connect to Blizzard App, the ability to save to the cloud, and more... Blizzard also announced that it was issuing a new update to StarCraft: Brood War this week, which will include some bug fixes and anti-cheat measures, but will also make StarCraft Anthology (which includes StarCraft and Brood War) available to download for free.
Kotaku reports that the news was announced at this weekend's I <3 StarCraft event in South Korea, "a mini-tournament between some of the game's best players being held to honor the game's legacy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Release Of StarCraft In 4K Ultra High Definition Announced

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Blizzard requires more minerals

  • by Anonymous Coward

    We have insane graphics and CPUs but no spell-checking?

  • Seriously? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Opportunist ( 166417 )

    There is like a million games like it out right now, most of them in the 10 bucks bin, or simply from some indie dev altogether. Why the fuck would I want to buy a 20 year old game just because "Ohhh, 4k resolution!"?

    • Because it's a fun game, mainly.

      At this point though, Starcraft 2 is vastly superior to Starcraft 1 in every way. When 2 was first released, you could make a decent argument that it was an inferior game. When Heart of the Swarm came out, it was at least close to Starcraft 1 in terms of gameplay, but now with Legacy of the Void the game is clearly a level above Broodwar.
      • by lgw ( 121541 )

        As a single player game - I found the original campaign to be a lot of fun, and every subsequent version less so. Admittedly, I gave up on SC2 before the expansions came out, as I found the campaign deadly dull. Still, if the single-player campaign is supported by the graphics pack, I'm up for it.

        • Truly the difference between single and multi-player should be emphasized. I was talking about the multiplayer, and you are talking about the single player.

          In terms of single-player, I enjoyed LoTV more than any of the others, although I admit the ending is kind of lame.
        • Just watch the cutscenes on YouTube between battles...

        • My problem was that the multi player and single player were built differently. The single player was more strategy focused as most of the micromanaging was automated (SCVs would automatically start harvesting, and automatically repair stuff around them). Nope, in the multiplayer, it was all about the clicks... Who can click faster? APM shouldn't be the sole factor in victory in a strategy game.

      • So it only took 100 or 120 bucks to be on par with a game that's been in the bargain bin for over a decade?

        • Don't know but it's only $30 for the latest now.

    • Let's not forget that most people do not have a 4k monitor.
      (and that if this game had any sort of demanding graphics there's very few cards that will run 4k smoothly)
      So the appeal is not only for die hard fans but a rare breed of them too...

      I guess someone at blizzard ran the old cutscenes at their native 640x480 bink video glory and just couldn't stand it any longer.
      • by Desler ( 1608317 )

        4k is being stated as the highest-level of the graphics. It's not locked at 4k only.

        • Yeah I get it. They are futureproofing it for when 4k monitors are mainstream...

          • by vadim_t ( 324782 )

            Didn't you notice that we're not gaming at 320x200 anymore?

            Yes, indeed the normal resolution for games does go up over time. 4K will be entirely mainstream eventually.

            • Except I was gaming at 1600x1200 back in the late 90s... So really haven't gained many pixels compared with the 1920x1080 typical resolution of screens today.

              • by vadim_t ( 324782 )

                Mostly because high res was easier on CRTs especially if you didn't mind horrible blinking, and it took LCDs a long time to catch up.

                4K is still very demanding for 3D gaming, but since it's exactly 4X of 1080p scaling isn't a big problem. And artwork looks really beautiful in 4K, which seems a good fit for a game like Starcraft.

    • Why the fuck would I want to buy a 20 year old game just because "Ohhh, 4k resolution!"?

      Because it was a good game.
      Because of nostalgia.
      Because you like the game.

      Based on the tone of your writing you don't fit in the above three. So don't buy it.
      I will.

  • by fisted ( 2295862 ) on Sunday March 26, 2017 @03:45PM (#54114089)


    • It's like you're asking Disney to release Mickey Mouse to the public domain.

      Blizzard still makes money on the StarCraft IP. Why would they want to stop?
      • I'd be surprised to see Blizzard do either; but he did specify 'the source' rather than 'the IP'; and the two are (relatively) easily separable.

        Given that, even at the time, most of the enthusiasm for Starcraft was for a combination of its play balance(having 3 actually-different sides without being horribly lopsided was pretty big news when the standard was two, often basically reskins of each other with a couple of flavor units) and overall style/art direction; I'm not sure who would be interested in j
    • If they release the source, then someone else gets to make the new graphics pack - maybe even improve on the game itself (imagine that!) - and Blizzard doesn't get a cut. Blizzard would rather keep ownership of it all, and advertise the prettified version to the new generation of gamers, who the game is now palatable to. Not only are they looking at re-selling the game to the original fans, they are trying to expand the fanbase to people who would have never played the original. That's a lot of bang for ver
      • by fisted ( 2295862 )

        If they release the source, then someone else gets to make the new graphics pack - maybe even improve on the game itself (imagine that!) - and Blizzard doesn't get a cut.

        If only there were licenses that prohibit distribution of modified software.

        • by Rakarra ( 112805 )

          If they release the source, then someone else gets to make the new graphics pack - maybe even improve on the game itself (imagine that!) - and Blizzard doesn't get a cut.

          If only there were licenses that prohibit distribution of modified software.

          Once the genie is out of the bottle, you're not shoving him back in again. Once the source is out, you can't take it back, and you can't stop others from doing anything they like with it and distributing it.

          • by fisted ( 2295862 )

            You can stop people from distributing and charging money for it.

            • by Rakarra ( 112805 )

              You can stop people from distributing and charging money for it.

              How? How do they stop people from hosting it off of some sketchy website in a country that ignores their lawsuits? They can't even stop private WoW servers that charge for access (or "donations"), no way would they be able to stop something as easy-to-distribute as this.

              • by fisted ( 2295862 )

                How? How do they stop people from hosting it off of some sketchy website in a country that ignores their lawsuits?


                That said, the number of people getting it from some sketchy website is probably small (drop in a bucket, for a company like Blizzard), compared to the number of people who'd get it from legitimate (as in, non-sketchy) sources, which in turn ought to be small compared with the number of people who don't give a flying fuck about the source, and just want to play the game, willing to buy it for small money from Blizzard.

                So I don't think Blizzard would have anything to worry about releasing the source, in

      • by nhat11 ( 1608159 )

        "then someone else gets to make the new graphics pack - maybe even improve on the game itself (imagine that!) - and Blizzard doesn't get a cut." Pretty sure someone already recreated it in the map editor in SC2. SC2 online is free too

  • As long as it isn't a broken mess with a bunch of cut content and missing half the missions (To be released later as DLC), it doesn't sound too bad. I'm looking at you, Painkiller HD. Still, it would be nice if they tried something new for once.

    Diablo II HD when?

  • Old games, especially FPS, could scale at pretty much any resolution, you just had to change the resolution setting.
    The first thing I'd ask is why doesn't starcraft already works in 4k resolution. Is it because of an artificial limitation in the game? What was the maximum resolution supported?

    • by Desler ( 1608317 )

      Because of the size and resolution of the sprites.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Because the sprites don't scale. How do you expect to upscale a 32x32 pixel sprite?

      Starcraft doesn't already work in 4k because then the sprites would have to be rendered for display in 4k too. But they weren't, because back then the resolution was 640x480 or whatever and there was no reason to waste space on supporting larger graphics.

    • Nothing like running Quake with an updated executable on a modern GPU and getting 500+ FPS at 800 x 600.
    • It doesn't work because it uses sprites of a fixed size, rather than scaled ray-tracing on underlying models like almost all FPSes do. Attempting to run it at 4k would result in units too small to see.

      Starcraft I was locked in at 640x480. It didn't run at any other resolution; this was done both to accommodate the fixed-size sprites and so that people with better hardware wouldn't have an advantage (because then they'd see more of the battlefield on their screens).

    • The maximum resolution was 1024x768. Non widescreen.

    • There are two ways a game can respond to screen resoloution changes. One is to keep the view the same but draw it in more detail. That works pretty well for realtime-rended 3D games but for 2D tile based games like starcraft it would mean having extra copies of all the artwork or using ugly scaling.

      The other is to give players with higher resolution screens more stuff on-screen at once (like how most desktop environments worked). The difficult thing with that is especially in a combat-focussed game seeing m

  • You create something that nobody wants or needs and then convince them that they have to buy it because they "love the brand" or because it's "rare" or because it's "better" even though it's the same.

  • 4K can last 20 years? I don't think so ..8K maybe .. but not 4K. I mean I hope we aren't stuck at 4K for 20 years.

    • by lgw ( 121541 )

      To see the difference between 4K and 8K, you have to have a screen so large or close that it exceeds your field of view, leaving you craning your neck around to see things, and with a flat screen getting a foreshortened picture anyhow.

      Heck, to see the difference between 4K and 1080p requires you sit closer than most people do when watching TV - it's much more interesting for gaming than "lean back" TV watching. (You'll find TV showrooms set up where you stand very close to the TV when you evaluate 4K vs 10

    • I hope we're stuck on 4k. Otherwise we'll be wasting a whole bunch of storage and/or bandwidth on pixels we can't see.
  • I mean this is the right time of year for it. But really; 4k resolution update for a twenty year old game?
  • When will they release an updated 4k Shareware Edition?

  • I've never gotten into StarCraft. Probably because Blizzard's prices defy gravity then and now. Won't be seeing any Blizzard's titles for $5 at Steam's Black Friday sale.
    • by bored ( 40072 )

      I''ve got a couple original starcraft disks. I'm pretty sure I didn't pay more than $10 for them (I was pretty cheap back then, I pirated most stuff, only picking up real copies as "payback" when I found them on discount racks). One of them is even in a blizzard game of the year collection I purchased at warlmart for $19 (sticker is still on it) that comes with warcraft 2, startcraft and diablo (the original). Looks like the original msrp was $50 but it was discounted by the time I purchased it (probably in

  • I think the correct spelling is "annoyed".
  • Key bindings (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Whatsisname ( 891214 ) on Sunday March 26, 2017 @05:37PM (#54114647) Homepage

    I wonder if they'll update the key-bindings and keyboard controls to match StarCraft 2. After playing SC2 for awhile, controlling units in SC is maddeningly primitive.

    • What key-mapping do you use in SC2? The default one, or do you use The Core?
    • Haha right you are. I actually wrote a python script to rebind my keyboard, so hitting n would make marines in case I missed the key. I didn't completely remap everything, that would have been smart.

    • It's a remastered version, not a remake. In other words, it should offer the same gameplay as the original, like it or not. Personally, I would prefer a remake with the SC2 engine.
      • by Nemyst ( 1383049 )
        Certain remasters went the extra mile, and people constantly claim that Blizzard is the sort to do just that. Homeworld Remastered comes to mind, having ported all the best features of each game (subsystems from HW2 with ballistics and formations from HW1, among others) into a single, unified, ultimate experience.

        Unfortunately, it does appear to be the case that Blizzard are just going to release a texture pack and widescreen fix and call it a day.
      • Personally, I would prefer a remake with the SC2 engine.

        The Starcraft 2: Mass Recall mod does exactly that.

    • by Nemyst ( 1383049 )
      Better luck next time, I would guess. They're keeping restrictions like maximum 12 units selected at once (which is completely inane and nostalgia fogged, I find), so expect the experience to be basically the same, just upscaled.
  • They're making the original, un-remastered version free. No one's saying you have to buy this. I don't see why the top comments are all negative.
  • D2 obviously would be more work, but I would pay for it. It's still an active game and still more fun than D3. Much more replay value despite their numerous attempts to add replay value to D3. The reason? It allows for creativity in character building.
    • by Trilkk ( 2007802 )

      It's harder to try to be the king of that market, as Diablo series has been, arguably, surpassed by other companies. As opposed to Starcraft, which (with Starcraft 2) remains the king of its genre.

      If you liked Diablo 2, I suggest checking out Path of Exile in particular, but there's a lot of options there.

      (And no, do not mention Total Annihilation or Supreme Commander - they might be better RTS games, but they haven't out-starcrafted Starcraft. They're more strategically oriented while Blizzard still does t

    • by Warma ( 1220342 )

      I suggest looking at Path of Exile. It is the closest spiritual successor to D2, which, by now, has been leading the pack for years.

      Even if they remade D2 and were willing to throw away all its bad features, it's probably too late. PoE has such a large amount of content and such a deep and rewarding skill tree (and -system), that it is extremely difficult for Blizzard to catch up anymore.

  • I'll wait for the Linux port, thanks. ;)

  • Doesn't really make me want to buy it. Simply sharpening up the graphics doesn't really do it for me. You have to fill all those extra pixels with more detail.

    Do a full rewrite against the newer engine with the exact same behavior and it might be more interesting.

    As it is, I have a couple old laptops with 10" screens that I play these old games on. At those sizes the games tend to look pretty good, its only when I fire them up an a 27"+ monitor that they really look terrible.

    • Diablo and Diablo 2, StarCraft, all of these classic 2D games are perfect netbook gaming fodder, as are all the good old adventure games though ScummVM.

  • I hope they get remove the mini map and scrolling.
  • This will make a lot of people mad, but please, stop complaining about the 12 unit max. There's a certain sense of satisfaction that comes from learning how to 1a2a3a4a your army around the map without having to think about it. That, along with a few other key mechanics truly separated the greats from the Gods.
  • I would love to see this done with Red Alert 2 and Yuri's Revenge! I loved those games.

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.