Dummies who hold Starcraft's pink-slip

[Sarxis]

Every other weak, there is a poll at the big game websites asking "which games should get a sequel?", and Starcraft usually have thousands of replies and beats out the other options by a large margin.

What the hell is wrong with Blizzard Entertainment? Why won't they capitalize on this?

I actually went and bought the game a few months ago (the budget pack) and, even though it has aged tremendously, I can see why it is STILL such a hit.


So, what is the deal?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh, I bet they will... They are busy with Warcraft 3 and all.

Blizzard doesn't really announce games until they have a bunch of kick ass screen shots .

[Sarxis]

I see.

Yeah- forgot that Warcraft III was in beta testing. I bet we will hear something about SC2 within the next few years/months/days.

[mactbone]

There's also World of Warcraft in the works.

You have to realize that Warcraft 3 has been confirmed since sometime in 1999 - that's three years ago. They take a lot of time, whether that's good or bad is up for grabs. I've seen WC3 in action, and it's pretty good, but it doesn't really grab me and make me look - certainly not the way it did when the first screenshots were released.

[General Ludd]

I've played the WarCraft III beta and, personally, I'd sooner play StarCraft. ('though I wish StarCraft had higher resolution options )

[Urban Ranger]

There is little difference between all those realtime games that came out of Blizzard so far.

[SnowFire]

I've played the WC3 beta and think it rules beyond rulership. But that's just me. I like micromanagement and heroes.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by SnowFire
I've played the WC3 beta and think it rules beyond rulership. But that's just me. I like micromanagement and heroes.

Although I didn't play it for long, I don't remember anything that involved more micromanagement then any other RTS. What, exactly, are you refering to?


As for the heroes - I thought they where pretty cheesy, and a half-assed attempt at adding new content.... but I didn't exactly hate them, either.

[tniem]

IIRC, Blizzard currently has three full design teams. One is working on WC3, one is working on Worlds of Warcraft, and the other was the team that did Diablo II. What the third team is working on is a mystery. Officially they are working on the story and starting work on a new game, but nothing announced. Blizzard usually makes sure that they are pretty far into the game before releasing such information.

The assumption I have heard on some Blizzard boards is that the team working on WC3 will move on to SC2 after WC3 is finished. The third team is working on some other game (most likely not Diablo3 but can never be sure). Of course this all speculation.

I would assume that Blizzard will return to the StarCraft world before too long, though, it would make them a killing - of course all their games will.

[Grumbold]

Yeah give Blizzard their due. Many other companies would churn out mediocre new versions of their successful games every few months or so to maximise their profits (Sims: Bored to Tears anyone?) Making a quality version every few years stops it getting too stale provided you don't go round buying every second rate alternative that comes out in the meantime.

[Urban Ranger]

Yeah but there is no new idea coming out of Blizzard. All their realtime games are more of the same, just different settings.

Is there anything innovative from Blizzard?

[Jethro83]

My brother is still OBSESSED with playing Starcraft on Battle.net

Kinda sad really, since there aren't that many people who play fair on Battle.net (not to mention killer lag). I wonder how he will survive when I leave home and take all MY games with me (since I did buy Starcraft back in 1998).

If they do make a Starcraft II, I just hope they DO innovate rather than simply make it another "Warcraft in Space"

I do occasionally still play it, but only the single player campaigns (love the Terran campaign of Brood War, well... the second and second-last scenarios at least), however, I am more into Civ III, SMAC and Diablo II.

And in the C&C vs. Warcraft II debate years back, I was on side with C&C.

[tniem]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Yeah but there is no new idea coming out of Blizzard. All their realtime games are more of the same, just different settings.

Is there anything innovative from Blizzard?

Probably not, except a radical approach to making games - finish them. Sure they release patches and some of them have had problems. But most of that has had to do with online gaming conflicts. The games have when released been the best industry. They are complete and quality. Not a single one has come out at Christmas but instead when finished. So the reason Blizzard has been so successful is that while they might not be making innovative games, they are making the best games in the genre they choose to work in.

[FrustratedPoet]

very true ... innovation is great (and the games industry needs more of it), but Blizzard have an excellent track record of only releasing their games when they're ready (often several months late, not early ) and for producing some of the best games in the genre.
i really like the way that WC3 is shaping up, Blizzard's patching of the Beta has been frequent and they have demonstrated a commitment to work out as many bugs and balancing issues as possible before release ... a lesson most other companies would do well to follow.

[Spaced Cowboy]

Hey FP,

Love your sig!

Still no sign of the Skanky Mafia.

R:PM