Slashdot Mirror


Blizzard Announces New Starcraft Game

About a zillion readers wrote in to tell us about all the commotion over at the Blizzard site. Following a countdown, they've announced the latest Starcraft game, Starcraft: Ghost. Note that this game will be console-only, and the FAQ is very adamant that this is not a Starcraft 2.

375 comments

  1. heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammered.. by kasek · · Score: 4, Informative

    Q: What is StarCraft: Ghost?
    A: StarCraft: Ghost is a tactical-action console game set in the StarCraft® universe.

    Q: How will StarCraft: Ghost be different from other tactical-action console games?
    A: StarCraft: Ghost will be different from other tactical-action games in many ways. Taking on the role of Nova, the game's elite Ghost operative hero, players will be able to:

    Utilize a Wide Range of Elite Ghost Abilities

    Outmaneuver your enemies at sonic speed
    Infiltrate bases and sneak past guards using the cloak ability
    Lock down vehicles and electronic devices to immobilize them
    Engage in both face-to-face firefights and planet-scale warfare

    Leverage the Resources of an Entire Army

    Call down massive Battlecruiser and Siege Tank strikes
    Take control of familiar StarCraft vehicles
    Wield a variety of familiar weapons, such as the Gauss Rifle and Perdition Flamethrower
    Join your allies in battle and do your part to ensure mission success

    Experience the World of StarCraft in 3D

    See the world of StarCraft on a personal level
    Visit familiar planetary settings
    Explore 3D environments designed for strategic interaction
    Use the camera to find unique strategic possibilities
    As Nova, players will be able to scale fences, hang from wires, climb poles and scale walls, and negotiate tightropes

    Unveil the Next Chapter in the StarCraft Saga

    Experience story-driven missions complete with multiple plot twists
    Play a crucial role in the rich StarCraft history
    Engage in combat with a variety of fully rendered units from the StarCraft universe, including the Terran, Zerg, and Protoss

    Q: Is this StarCraft II?
    A: No.

    Q: Will there be a StarCraft II? When?
    A: Although we have not made any announcements and do not have a development or release timeline, we do fully intend to revisit the world of StarCraft on PC at some point in the future.

    Q: Why is Blizzard Entertainment® entering the console arena?
    A: We began our early development efforts in console gaming, and we have always been excited about returning to this arena. Additionally, we've wanted to revisit the StarCraft universe for some time. With StarCraft: Ghost, we are able to do both. Also, due to the game's control interface and tactical-action nature, developing this title for the next-generation console systems makes the most sense. In addition to expanding StarCraft's rich storyline, the game gives players a chance to experience the sci-fi universe from an all-new perspective.

    Q: Does Blizzard plan to develop any other console games?
    A: While we have not made any announcements, we are considering future console development plans.

    Q: What is the relationship between Blizzard and Nihilistic Software, Inc.(TM)?
    A: Blizzard and Nihilistic are co-developing StarCraft: Ghost.

    Q: Why did Blizzard choose Nihilistic as a development partner?
    A: Nihilistic Software, Inc. is made up of a talented group of developers. We chose them because they share our vision and focus in developing games. Their team members have worked on several great titles, and we are very pleased to be expanding the StarCraft universe with them.

    Q: What is the relationship between Blizzard Entertainment and Capcom?
    A: Blizzard and Capcom are co-publishing StarCraft: Ghost in Japan.

    Q: Why did Blizzard choose Capcom as a publishing partner in Japan?
    A: Blizzard has a longstanding relationship with Capcom. We chose them as our publishing partner because we have a great deal of respect for the company and their products.

    Q: When will StarCraft: Ghost be released?
    A: We expect to ship StarCraft: Ghost in late 2003.

    Q: What rating do you expect for StarCraft: Ghost?
    A: We expect StarCraft: Ghost to receive a Teen rating from the ESRB.

    Q: On what platforms will StarCraft: Ghost be available?
    A: We are currently developing the game for multiple console systems. Further details regarding platform/country specifics will be released in the months ahead.

    Q: Will there be a PC and Mac version?
    A: No. StarCraft: Ghost is only being developed for console systems.

    Q: How many copies of StarCraft have been sold?
    A: To date, the StarCraft franchise has shipped over 6 million copies.

  2. Damn it! by Disevidence · · Score: 1

    Everyone was wishing/hoping for Starcraft 2, but then they announce a cool-sounding game thats not going to even come to PC?

    Insert Microsoft payed them off conspiracy here.

    Most disappointing thing i've ever heard. Console game. Who cares?

    --
    Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    1. Re:Damn it! by fluor2 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you 10000000000000% !

      I know Vivendi (Blizzard is owned by them I think) needs money, and are actually trying to sell Blizzard to Microsoft. This might be a "gesture" to Microsoft.

      On the other hand, this SC:Ghost is developed by another firm, so it's not like Blizzard is not developing StarCraft2 as we speak. Everybody make a petition to contact vivendi.!!!

    2. Re:Damn it! by thewheeze · · Score: 1


      Oh God. Get over it, Microsoft doesn't control EVERYTHING. They actually have wanted to get back into consoles, where they started. Besides, it's being developed for MULTIPLE PLATFORMS.

      I hate you for being so elitest. I hate myself for writing in caps.

    3. Re:Damn it! by Disevidence · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Dude, i was kidding. Thats why i said insert blah blah blah. I honestly don't believe microsoft did shit. Your the one who's overreacting.

      And im writing this one on Win ME. SO BLOW ME!

      --
      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    4. Re:Damn it! by thewheeze · · Score: 0, Offtopic



      then you should've put a

      [ /sarcasm ] tag

      and I mean, someone else agreed with you, so it wasn't clear.

      You could write it on Win 3.11, debian, X, or bsd, I wouldn't care.

    5. Re:Damn it! by fluor2 · · Score: 2, Informative
      OK: Here's an article for you: "Vivendi Universal has hit hard times in the market and may end up selling its "US focused video game software business". Should Vivendi make this move, Blizzard will be one of the companies effected. As of this moment Vivendi is $19 billion in debt and will have another $9 billion by the end of this year. VU's stock market has also lowered to a all-time low of 13.36 this month, while the high was 59.35. At the moment to which company IF it should be sold is unknown, Although the main interest are coming from Microsoft, Sega, and Sony. What will happen to the free battle.net is yet to be determined, all we can do is hope it stays free. "

      You hear me? ;-)

    6. Re:Damn it! by Disevidence · · Score: 1

      I was just saying, in a immature way, that im not a linux and/or anti-microsoft zealot.

      --
      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    7. Re:Damn it! by thewheeze · · Score: 1

      and here's the one from the FAQ

      Q: On what platforms will StarCraft: Ghost be available?
      A: We are currently developing the game for multiple console systems. Further details regarding platform/country specifics will be released in the months ahead.


      Your quote also mentions Sony, another big name down at the cracker factory. You're chosing an evil that incites a slashdot mob. Troll

    8. Re:Damn it! by cicatrix1 · · Score: 2

      From the FAQ posted above:

      Q: Will there be a StarCraft II? When?
      A: Although we have not made any announcements and do not have a development or release timeline, we do fully intend to revisit the world of StarCraft on PC at some point in the future.


      --------
      They are developing Starcraft: Ghost for the PS2, XBox, as well as the cube. It's not really a Microsoft conspiracy then, is it? It's better than their normal games which are released only to Windows PCs and Macs (2 architectures 3).

      --

      I know more than you drink.
    9. Re:Damn it! by TheLostOne · · Score: 1

      Insert Microsoft payed them off conspiracy here

      Seems to me an odd approach... the FAQ so kindly posted above clearly says it will be released for mulitple (read.. not just xbox..) consoles. Whereas.. a 'PC' version almost unilateraly means a 'Windows' version...

      I don't have statistics... go look them up if you need them.. but common sense tells me MS has quite a large portion of the desktop/gamer PC market... and not quite so much of the Console gaming market (I don't keep my ear to the ground in such things but this is true is it not?).

      IOW a PC only version would likely fit more into MS's niche then a console version... if it were going to be an X-Box exclusive this wouldn't be the case.. but quite clearly it won't be.

      (*note.. yes.. I realize a mac version is possible, and i've heard of winex.. but if SCG is released on PS2 and GC.. how will that help XB in anyway whatsoever?)

      --


      '..that kernel panicked like a nun in a crack house!'
    10. Re:Damn it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      He probably didn't do a [ /sarcasm ] tag because that tag is gay.

    11. Re:Damn it! by TheLostOne · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      mod parent Troll +5!!! *G*

      heh.. and while your at it you can make both of my posts Redundent -1 :)

      --


      '..that kernel panicked like a nun in a crack house!'
    12. Re:Damn it! by Low2000 · · Score: 1

      Even if it is being developed for multiple consoles it is all part of Microsoft's vision. They want to force gaming off of the PC and into console markets. They want to force a lot of things off of the PC. If there is a specialized device for all sorts of applications that's a lot more devices that need operating systems. And there will be Microsoft with an embedded solution for all of them. Look at all the titles being moved from the PC to consoles. Grand Theft Auto franchise will now be console only. Halo was originally a PC game. Then they made it Xbox only. Or at the very least Xbox first. Serious Sam will have a better looking counterpart on the Xbox. ID is even developing for the Xbox now. How soon do you think it will be until all the major franchise games are on consoles? It really does make good business sense though. Console games sell much better then most PC games and you need to provide the same level of support. Also, in the console market the big players (Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft) are less willing to endorse innovative "risky" games and game ideas. So where do they go for new ideas? The computer market where everyone and anyone has a game out. The PC gaming community is usually always innovative so there is little "risk". I just hope I'm wrong about some of this. (Low)

    13. Re:Damn it! by Xenex · · Score: 2

      "Also, in the console market the big players (Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft) are less willing to endorse innovative risky games and game ideas."

      You're right. There was nothing at all risky about games like Pikmin or Animal Crossing, was there? They're both just your typical gaming fare, aren't they?

      Insult Microsoft and Sony all you like for taking no risks. Like them or not, like the games or not, but Nintendo put out a lot more "risky" games then most companies.

      Accusing Nintendo of not trying new things is ludicrous.

    14. Re:Damn it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door"

      Think differently. Think outside the square.

      If you knocked the whole thing down, it'd be slammed.

    15. Re:Damn it! by spyderbyte23 · · Score: 2
      They are developing Starcraft: Ghost for the PS2, XBox, as well as the cube. It's not really a Microsoft conspiracy then, is it? It's better than their normal games which are released only to Windows PCs and Macs (2 architectures 3).
      If Microsoft buys Blizzard(widely rumored, and alluded to elsewhere in comments), it'll go XBox only faster than you can say Halo.
      --
      -- Support Ometz le-Serev.
    16. Re:Damn it! by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      anti-microsoft zealot

      Will that be a new Protoss unit in the game, I wonder? :-)

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  3. No comments...yet Slashdotted. by chill · · Score: 1

    Someone please mirror some of the content of the post here. You'd think Blizzard would know a little about handling large spikes in traffic.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:No comments...yet Slashdotted. by kasek · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the site was loading really really slow earlier, and i was one of the many to submit the story to slashdot....i got the FAQ and press release to load before the pages went down, check my other posts for them.

      -chuck

    2. Re:No comments...yet Slashdotted. by thewheeze · · Score: 1


      Are you kidding me? Did you ever try and play Diablo II within the first few weeks of release?

  4. Re:ouch by danny256 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Here is a repost for you then: Q: What is StarCraft: Ghost? A: StarCraft: Ghost is a tactical-action console game set in the StarCraft® universe. Q: How will StarCraft: Ghost be different from other tactical-action console games? A: StarCraft: Ghost will be different from other tactical-action games in many ways. Taking on the role of Nova, the game's elite Ghost operative hero, players will be able to: Utilize a Wide Range of Elite Ghost Abilities Outmaneuver your enemies at sonic speed Infiltrate bases and sneak past guards using the cloak ability Lock down vehicles and electronic devices to immobilize them Engage in both face-to-face firefights and planet-scale warfare Leverage the Resources of an Entire Army Call down massive Battlecruiser and Siege Tank strikes Take control of familiar StarCraft vehicles Wield a variety of familiar weapons, such as the Gauss Rifle and Perdition Flamethrower Join your allies in battle and do your part to ensure mission success Experience the World of StarCraft in 3D See the world of StarCraft on a personal level Visit familiar planetary settings Explore 3D environments designed for strategic interaction Use the camera to find unique strategic possibilities As Nova, players will be able to scale fences, hang from wires, climb poles and scale walls, and negotiate tightropes Unveil the Next Chapter in the StarCraft Saga Experience story-driven missions complete with multiple plot twists Play a crucial role in the rich StarCraft history Engage in combat with a variety of fully rendered units from the StarCraft universe, including the Terran, Zerg, and Protoss Q: Is this StarCraft II? A: No. Q: Will there be a StarCraft II? When? A: Although we have not made any announcements and do not have a development or release timeline, we do fully intend to revisit the world of StarCraft on PC at some point in the future. Q: Why is Blizzard Entertainment® entering the console arena? A: We began our early development efforts in console gaming, and we have always been excited about returning to this arena. Additionally, we've wanted to revisit the StarCraft universe for some time. With StarCraft: Ghost, we are able to do both. Also, due to the game's control interface and tactical-action nature, developing this title for the next-generation console systems makes the most sense. In addition to expanding StarCraft's rich storyline, the game gives players a chance to experience the sci-fi universe from an all-new perspective. Q: Does Blizzard plan to develop any other console games? A: While we have not made any announcements, we are considering future console development plans. Q: What is the relationship between Blizzard and Nihilistic Software, Inc.(TM)? A: Blizzard and Nihilistic are co-developing StarCraft: Ghost. Q: Why did Blizzard choose Nihilistic as a development partner? A: Nihilistic Software, Inc. is made up of a talented group of developers. We chose them because they share our vision and focus in developing games. Their team members have worked on several great titles, and we are very pleased to be expanding the StarCraft universe with them. Q: What is the relationship between Blizzard Entertainment and Capcom? A: Blizzard and Capcom are co-publishing StarCraft: Ghost in Japan. Q: Why did Blizzard choose Capcom as a publishing partner in Japan? A: Blizzard has a longstanding relationship with Capcom. We chose them as our publishing partner because we have a great deal of respect for the company and their products. Q: When will StarCraft: Ghost be released? A: We expect to ship StarCraft: Ghost in late 2003. Q: What rating do you expect for StarCraft: Ghost? A: We expect StarCraft: Ghost to receive a Teen rating from the ESRB. Q: On what platforms will StarCraft: Ghost be available? A: We are currently developing the game for multiple console systems. Further details regarding platform/country specifics will be released in the months ahead. Q: Will there be a PC and Mac version? A: No. StarCraft: Ghost is only being developed for console systems. Q: How many copies of StarCraft have been sold? A: To date, the StarCraft franchise has shipped over 6 million copies.

  5. sweet... starcraft rocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it is as good as starcraft, it will be another classic. I'd say something witty about the game, but blizzard's webserver has been /.-ed. Anyone wanna karma whore the press release?

  6. and heres the press release.... by kasek · · Score: 3, Informative

    Blizzard Entertainment® Announces StarCraft: Ghost(TM)

    Blizzard unveils plans to bring the legendary franchise to console gamers

    MAKUHARI, Japan - September 20, 2002 - During a press conference today at the Tokyo Game Show, Blizzard Entertainment®, a studio of the games division of Vivendi Universal Publishing, unveiled StarCraft: Ghost(TM), a tactical-action console game set in Blizzard's epic StarCraft® universe. StarCraft: Ghost is currently under development and is scheduled for a worldwide release on multiple console systems. The game will be co-published by Capcom and Blizzard Entertainment in Japan; further announcements regarding platform/country specifics will be announced in the months to come.

    In StarCraft: Ghost, players take the role of Nova, a lethal Ghost operative skillfully trained in the arts of espionage and tactical combat. Twenty years of ruthless physical conditioning and techno-psychological instruction have made Nova a being of terrifying potential. With the help of a determined group of allies, players follow a series of story-driven missions, engaging in a deadly mix of planetary battles and dangerous solo operations. To complete their mission objectives, players must execute intelligent tactical decisions while mastering an advanced arsenal of sophisticated weaponry.

    "We're very excited about returning to the StarCraft series," stated Mike Morhaime, Blizzard Entertainment president and co-founder. "Our roots are based in console gaming, and we look forward to developing this universe for the next-generation console systems."

    Key features in StarCraft: Ghost include:
    Revolutionary new style of gameplay featuring enhanced physical and psionic abilities
    Hostile Environment Suit designed to magnify strength, agility, and speed
    Over-the-top special effects offer stunning visuals and unparalleled tactical realism
    Immersive 3D environments showcase rich textures and highly stylized character models
    Unique Calldown abilities allow players to target large-scale attacks from the ground
    A deeply evolving storyline set in Blizzard's gritty sci-fi StarCraft universe

    As the story unravels, players find themselves traversing uncharted terrain and battling adversaries never before seen by followers of the series. Bold 3D graphics give players a new, in-depth perspective on familiar planets and former battlefields from the legendary universe. A dynamic 3rd-person camera view displays dramatic lighting, startling detail, and a blend of realistic and fantastical design. Co-developed by Blizzard Entertainment and Nihilistic Software, Inc.(TM), StarCraft: Ghost is scheduled for release in late 2003. Since its debut in 1998, the #1-selling StarCraft series* has won industry acclaim and has shattered sales records worldwide with over six million copies shipped. Blizzard continued the series with the critically acclaimed StarCraft: Brood War(TM), which won multiple Expansion Pack of the Year awards and is still considered by many critics to be one of the best add-on products to date. Best known for blockbuster hits including the Warcraft®, StarCraft,and Diablo® series, Blizzard Entertainment (www.blizzard.com), a studio of the games division of Vivendi Universal Publishing, is a premier developer and publisher of entertainment software renowned for creating many of the industry's most critically acclaimed games. Blizzard's track record includes seven #1-selling games and multiple Game of the Year awards. The company's free Internet gaming service Battle.net® reigns as the largest in the world, with millions of active users.

    1. Re:and heres the press release.... by phriedom · · Score: 2

      "Over-the-top special effects offer stunning visuals and unparalleled tactical realism"

      Aren't "over-the-top" and "realism" contradictory?

      When I think third-person viewed tactical, I think Metal Gear Solid. It absolutely sounds like cashing in on a good name with an almost unrelated game, but I guess it could still be a good game.

      --
      Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
    2. Re:and heres the press release.... by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2

      I dunno - Hiroshima was "over-the-top" but "tactically realistic"

      --
      Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
  7. What week is this? by fo0bar · · Score: 3, Funny

    I forget, do we like or despise Blizzard this week?

    1. Re:What week is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to bnetd.org, the complaint still hasn't been settled. Therefore, I think it's fair to say, that the slashdot party line is still: hate.

      bnetd

      boycottblizzard

    2. Re:What week is this? by Jugalator · · Score: 2

      PC Users: Hate
      Console Users: Love

      Like that? :)

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  8. slashdotted, before slashdot! by skt · · Score: 2

    Well, I'd say this should be the nail in the coffin. The site was basically unusable about 30 minutes ago and they had to shut down the forums completely. I'm guessing this story making the front page of slashdot isn't going to help too much. oh well, Ghost doesn't sound that great anyway, a metalgear-like game from Blizzard?

  9. Don't fret, PC fans. by 403Forbidden · · Score: 1

    Q: Will there be a StarCraft II? When? A: Although we have not made any announcements and do not have a development or release timeline, we do fully intend to revisit the world of StarCraft on PC at some point in the future.

    So fear not, though THIS game is not for the PC, there will be another. I think that the type of game they describe will work very nicely on a console.

    1. Re:Don't fret, PC fans. by SysadminFromHell · · Score: 1

      Whould this version play on my linux console? No need to run X ever again!!! Now i can play both nethack AND startcraft. Nice.

  10. stark-raft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When everything is lowercase how do you know where to split? If this is not Starcraft 2, then what is it, a stark raft game?

    1. Re:stark-raft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did those ks come from?

  11. can't wait... by ashot · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll make sure to tell my grandkids..

    --
    -ashot
  12. The last time by TheOnlyCoolTim · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The last time Blizzard tried to make something with another group of developers, it turned out to be such crap that they canned it...

    Tim

    --
    Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
    1. Re:The last time by Manes · · Score: 1

      What was this?

      Signed, curious :)

    2. Re:The last time by cicatrix1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Warcraft Adventures or something like that. It was supposed to be an RPG/Action type of game featuring a young orc. They ended up using a lot of the storyline in WC3.

      --

      I know more than you drink.
    3. Re:The last time by robson · · Score: 2

      The last time Blizzard tried to make something with another group of developers, it turned out to be such crap that they canned it...

      Don't worry. Nihilistic are a class act.

    4. Re: The last time by Edgewize · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're totally wrong.

      Blizzard developed Warcraft Adventures themselves. It was the graphics that were outsourced to a Russian animation house. Russian. As in, halfway across the world, different language, different time zone.

      There was a requested scene that got mangled in the translation so badly that it ended up with a dragon smoking opium instead of billowing fire. (It was funny enough that they planned on using it anyway!)

      Anyway, when Warcraft Adventures was canned, it was already "release-quality" by some companies' standards. If it had come out a year earlier, it would have been a great game. But Monkey Island 4 had just come out, and it had advanced the adventure genre to a new level. Blizzard's latest-and-greatest didn't look so great anymore with flat 2D graphics and linear playstyle. So they scrapped it rather than get a "That game is soooo last-year" reaction.

    5. Re:The last time by Disevidence · · Score: 1

      WTF? RPG/ACTION?

      Your'e on crack my friend. Warcraft Adventures was a animated adventure game, ala monkey island. You were meant to control thrall on a quest to unite the scattered orc tribes. Blizz got in russian animaters and everything before they mysteriously canned the whole thing, saying in no uncertain terms, it was getting sucky.

      --
      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    6. Re:The last time by Plutor · · Score: 1

      And the time before that, they liked the "other group of developers" so much that they became "Blizzard North". One sample point does not indicate a trend.

    7. Re:The last time by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      Are you guys thinking of World of Warcraft?

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    8. Re:The last time by Lazaru5 · · Score: 1

      World of Warcraft, a MMORPG.

      --

      --
      My comments and opinions completely reflect those of anyone and anything I am remotely associated with.
    9. Re:The last time by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      Maybe not. Hmm. INGORN thsi POAST!!!

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    10. Re:The last time by cicatrix1 · · Score: 1

      No, that game is under way. A few years ago Blizzard was working on an... *cough* animated adventure *cough* game that got canned, called Warcraft Adventures.

      --

      I know more than you drink.
    11. Re: The last time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...Russian animation house. Russian. As in, halfway across the world, different language, different time zone."

      And this game?

      Japanese. As in, halfway across the world, different language, different time zone.

    12. Re:The last time by Not+One+Of+Us · · Score: 1

      Warcraft Adventures: Lord of the Clans, to be exact.

    13. Re: The last time by wuice · · Score: 1

      What really happened is that a bunch of 14 year olds hammered every gaming message board on the internet going "this sux not even 3d wtf bs" and Blizzard got cold feet. Which is really sad, because I was absolutely salivating over that game. But, the 14 year olds have spoken, and a game that isn't 3d isn't worth making.

      I have them to thank for the piece of crap that Warcraft III became. Every time I build up to full food capacity and run my little band (you can't rightly call anything in warcraft III an army, or even a squad) up against their little band, and watch my computer try to keep up, I think back to having dozens of soldiers and tanks running down scores of zerg and I weep.

      God, I wish I could've played Warcraft Adventures. Forget bnetd, I'm bitter with Blizzard about THAT.

    14. Re:The last time by zatz · · Score: 1

      I believe Diablo was basically complete and looking for a publisher when Blizzard merged with the developers, so that doesn't really speak to the potential quality of a collaborative effort.

      --

      Java: the COBOL of the new millenium.
    15. Re: The last time by tmark · · Score: 2

      So they scrapped it rather than get a "That game is soooo last-year" reaction.

      You mean like Diablo 2? No, wait, that game got a "That is soooo 1997" reaction....in 2001.

  13. Screenshots by MagPulse · · Score: 5, Informative

    Screenshots and the press release are attached to the story at Shacknews.com.

  14. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Disevidence · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up! Blizz's sites have been hammered and down for the last 2 hours or so, before the slashdot post. Its almost impossible to get there.

    --
    Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
  15. I remember that game... by Burgundy+Advocate · · Score: 2, Troll

    Sounds a lot like Command & Conquer: Renegade to me.

    I just hope they do a better job with the storyline. God, that sucked. A few missions in and suddenly... what? I'm done already?!? LAME!

    Even Unreal Tournament had a better story arc, and that's really saying something.

    --
    Dragging people kicking and screaming into reality since 1996.
    1. Re:I remember that game... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      yes, the faq is almost one to one with c&c: renegade specs.. (change star* with c&c, and ghost with commando and you're set).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:I remember that game... by Antos700 · · Score: 1

      I'm glade I'm not the only one who read this and thought "Renegade has been there, done that". It's probably the only reason Blizzard is doing this anyway. Westwood leading the way again.

  16. Wow. by DemonicAngel · · Score: 0, Troll

    Goodness me. Who would have guessed. A Starcraft game. How unexpected. *heavy sarcasm*

    --
    Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
  17. Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goodbye Blizzard, it was nice knowing you...

    Ahh, who am I kidding... the game will rock, like all of Blizzard's games... I'm not going to play it, like any console game... I will be really bitter at Blizzard, and feel that they're forgetting, even betraying, the legions of obsessive fans who made them the company they are today... and still... when the next Blizzard game for PC comes, I'll be right there buying it within a week.

    I feel like someone just told me there is no Santa Claus.

    1. Re:Sigh by Dehumanizer · · Score: 1

      I still can't understand why people are so religious about using only one platform.

      These days I play games only on the PC, but years ago I bought a PSX, at about the same time Final Fantasy 7 came out. Bought that game (and loved it), bought a lot of "party" games, played it a lot with my friends, then gave it to my younger brother.

      And I had a lot of fun with it.

      I'm thinking of buying an X-Box until the end of the year. Doubles as a second DVD player, has fighting games (which I miss on the PC), and will have games like Molyneux's Project Ego and now Starcraft: Ghost (I actually predicted that name yesterday, during the countdown... but nobody will ever believe me. :) ).

      Anyway, a console is not so expensive. It doesn't have to REPLACE the PC, it's just a way to have more choices. And you can play much more "sociable" (or "party") games in a console... Get some friends, a big couch and some dozen beers, and... :)

      --
      The Tlog - a technology blog
    2. Re:Sigh by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "I still can't understand why people are so religious about using only one platform."

      Me, personally, I'm only willing to buy one console shortly after release. Other consoles come about when the price dips to around $100, interesting games permitting. So it's in my interests to have the games I want on the console I want. I dun wanna pay $200 for a game system so I can pay $50 for a game. :)

  18. Release Date by Disevidence · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Starcraft Ghost will be out late 2003"

    So we can expect it sometime in 2006.

    --
    Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    1. Re:Release Date by shoptroll · · Score: 1

      Why do you think they said "Multiple Platforms"??? Maybe they're planning for something down the road in case of delays....

      --
      Insert Sig Here
    2. Re:Release Date by Disevidence · · Score: 1

      It was a joke son.

      And i suspect your kidding too.

      --
      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    3. Re:Release Date by broken · · Score: 1

      Of course. It's supposed to come out for the PlayStation 3, YBox and GamePenta.

    4. Re:Release Date by kuiken · · Score: 1

      Will that be before or after duke nukem ?

      Anyway all i want is Elite4

      --

      42
  19. 3rd person + console = suck? by Manes · · Score: 1

    Ok, i'd really like to be convinced otherwise, but i really can't see how this can't suck compared to what
    it could have been like if it was a fps PC game.

    I mean, i tried The Thing and i was screaming "I want
    first person perspective!" at the damn thing for 20 minutes before giving up. :)

    The background story is great, but without a mouse to aim..

    1. Re:3rd person + console = suck? by Jacer · · Score: 2

      FPS games generally don't have a very good story and the game play is boring, unless multiplayer. with a 3rd person view, you get access to all sorts of special moves and such, much more fun. think metal gear

      --
      --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
    2. Re:3rd person + console = suck? by _ganja_ · · Score: 2

      One word: Halo
      And another one word (although should be two)
      : Goldeneye

      And then there's daikatana.. DOH!

      --

      A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security

    3. Re:3rd person + console = suck? by Jacer · · Score: 2

      The story wasn't bad, but look at average story, quake3, UT, RTCW(atleast this one had a story.) Anyways, you get guns, then bigger guns, and tougher bad guys, and more bad guys. with 3rd person you have much more interaction with the enviroment around you. the player charcter have more movements, and combinations. platform games, generally speaking, have the opportunity for much better gameplay, and being less repetative than a fps

      --
      --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
    4. Re:3rd person + console = suck? by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      I dunno, 3rd person shooters really suck. It's like trying to drive a car while standing on the trunk (a common view in racing games). In a racing game I want a windshield or bumper view (to feel the speed), and in a shooter I want to see the game from eyeball view, not from 3rd person.

      As far as your "more movements" theory, name one move that you can do in 3rd that you can't do in first with practice...

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  20. Bleh by dswensen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A couple years ago or so, when many were heralding the imminent doom of PC games when the next-generation consoles (X-Box, PS2, Gamecube) came out, I sneered and jeered along with the rest of them. PC games, affected at all by these upstart consoles? Ha-ha, ho-ho, it is to laugh!

    Now comes Starcraft Ghost, and I'm no longer laughing. Sure, they may turn it out for the PC at some point (maybe), but it's obvious the console gamers are now getting first pick at Blizzard's new titles. And this isn't some new Mario title or kart-racing game that I couldn't give a tinker's damn about -- this is Starcraft. That's a big deal.

    Not that it will be a selling point for me -- unfortunately, the disposable income to keep up with the technology curve on both the console and PC front is not a luxury I have right now. And so I find myself reacting to the release of a new Starcraft title not with the excitement and joy that I'd hoped, but with mixed disappointment and dread. Gee, thanks, Blizzard.

    1. Re:Bleh by CrasHUV · · Score: 1

      ...is not a luxury I have right now.

      Its not due out for over a another year, add on another 6-9 monthes to work out the bugs (typical Blizzard style) and you have ample time to save for the nameless *cough* X-Box console. Skipping a couple meals a month, over 18 monthes should do it. Besides, by then the price will have fallen even more!

      --
      Its all just smoke and mirrors.
    2. Re:Bleh by autocracy · · Score: 3, Funny
      *Fires up WarCraft III on his laptop*

      Yeah, you're right - it's all gone to the consoles. Nothing left for us PC people anymore - even Blizzard has dumped us in abandon. Alright, back to the latest edition of WarCraft.

      --
      SIG: HUP
    3. Re:Bleh by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      add on another 6-9 monthes to work out the bugs (typical Blizzard style)

      Thats where your argument falls apart. Although with PC games a software company can release patches to their hearts content, on a console the rules change drastically. One can no longer release a patch, without sending a new game CD (DVD/GD/Proprietary MiniDisc) to each and every person that bought the game, which really isn't a viable solution.

      If Blizzard is going to get this right, they are going to have to get it right the first time.

      Although Warcraft 3 is (seemingly, at least from my perspective) without bugs, and this is a first for Blizzard, I don't think they can pull it off in a year...

      Don't get me wrong, I still can't wait to play it... but right now I'm only concerned about GTA3: Vice City (due for release in the next month or so)

    4. Re:Bleh by shut_up_man · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not sure Starcraft Ghost is a first-tier title though, it sounds more like a bit of an experiment. I feels like Blizzard are licensing the Starcraft brand, and getting Nihilistic to do all the work. I won't be buying a console system just for this game, unlike if it was... Warcraft 3. Or Starcraft 2.

    5. Re:Bleh by drainbamage · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time with some of the console versions of PC games. After all the Doom and Duke Nukem versions were just flat out pathetic. Blizzard is just doing this for the almighty dollar. They can reach more people by just releasing it on X-Box and PS-2 then they can with PCs. I am suprised that Microsft hasn't jumped on this one so they could have exclusive rights to the game so they can have that killer game that makes everyone run out and by an Xbox. After all how many people ran out and bought an X-box after seeing HALO. Its the whole killer app thing again.

      --
      The bank called.....your reality check bounced again
    6. Re:Bleh by Baldrash · · Score: 1

      Why condemn Blizzard's efforts to reach an entirely new group of gamers? Those who stick to console-only gaming finally have a chance to enjoy a new Blizzard game, not a port that's vastly inferior to the PC game that it's based off of (Diablo on the PSX, StarCraft on the N64). Although we'll be lucky to see it by 2005, given Blizzard's track record, this could be one of the best decisions they've made as a company. I look forward to their first real attempt to get some fans on the console side of the gaming fence.

    7. Re:Bleh by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      Patch 1.02:
      Fixed an issue that allowed players to abuse dragons with Devour.
      Fixed an issue with dragons that could cause them to divert attacks.

      Patch 1.01c:
      Fixed an issue with copy protection for certain DVD drives.

      Patch 1.01b:
      Fixes a problem where players were disconnected from a game as it was starting and thus getting a loss.

      Patch 1.01
      Fixed an issue with control group selection.
      Fixed an issue with Observers On Defeat option causing games to end when an observer would quit.
      Fixed an issue with preselection events and Fog of War.
      Fixed an issue with spacebar events working when the game was paused.

      I do agree with you though, it does seem quite a bit better than some past releases. The 6-month beta probably helped quite a bit.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    8. Re:Bleh by PortWineBoy · · Score: 1

      PC games and console games usually appeal to different markets, albeit with some significant crossover. I have very little experience with console gaming but much on the PC side. The two console ports I've played (GTAIII and Resident Evil)were decent games but lacked a certain richness and immersion that a good PC game can provide. For Blizzard to succeed with a console game they are going to need to draw on more than just the Starcraft name. They are going to need to design something that is unique yet appealing to console gamers. A pretty big task if you ask me. I don't think PC games are going anywhere soon. Consoles are sold at a loss, many games don't cross the platforms and even hard-core console gamers really can't run out and slap the newest video card in their system for an instant boost in graphics.

      --

      this sig deleted by another sig

    9. Re:Bleh by necrognome · · Score: 1

      There's this game called World of Warcraft coming out, only for the PC. Look at the screenshots and imagine how immersive and beautiful it will be. You can start laughing again...

      --


      Let's get drunk and delete production data!
    10. Re:Bleh by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      Not to say anything against you, dswensen, but I can't happen but wonder, when do we get to stop referring to the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube as "Next-Generation" consoles? I mean, they've been out for like a year or more (depending on the system), and they're still being called by a name that was used when they were still being designed. Are we going to call the PS3 the "next-next-generation" console?

    11. Re:Bleh by dswensen · · Score: 2

      Oh, touche, another Blizzard title exists for the PC -- my airtight argument undone! Curses!

      Yeah, I have Warcraft 3, I like Warcraft 3 -- yet, I am more interested in Starcraft than I am in Warcraft, and so I am disappointed that the next Starcraft game is not available for the PC (yet). That's all I was saying.

      I never said there was nothing left for PC owners. Obviously that's not the case.

    12. Re:Bleh by dswensen · · Score: 2

      I only used the "next-generation" term because it was in the write-up, and a convenient shorthand for "X-Box, Playstation 2, Gamecube." Sheer laziness.

    13. Re:Bleh by dswensen · · Score: 2

      I don't condemn them for it -- I'm disappointed I don't get to play the game. Big difference.

      If Blizzard came out and said Starcraft Ghost could not be played on anything less than a Pentium IV 2 Ghz with a GeForce5 and a 100 GB hard drive, I'd express very similar disappointment, because that would also be outside the boundaries of what I am willing to pay / go through to play it. (In fact, I will probably be making this very bitch about Doom III when it comes out.)

      I mean, yes, I hope Blizzard makes lots of money, but I can only be so happy about a game I won't be playing.

    14. Re:Bleh by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 2

      unfortunately, the disposable income to keep up with the technology curve on both the console and PC front is not a luxury I have right now.. Yes, it is. If you skip gaming on your PC, then your PC will last your 2 more years before obsoletion - possibly even more. Consoles are relatively cheap. If you do the math, you will find that gaming on console and computing on PC is a cheaper solution than gaming and computing on PC.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    15. Re:Bleh by TeeWee · · Score: 1

      If Blizzard is going to get this right, they are going to have to get it right the first time.

      The console environment is easier to develop on though: a stable end-user configuration drastically reduces complexity. Less complexity, less bugs. Bug free software is of course a myth, but consoles have a certain advantage when it comes to quality upon delivery.

    16. Re:Bleh by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Thats where your argument falls apart. Although with PC games a software company can release patches to their hearts content, on a console the rules change drastically

      I think the 6-9 months referred to the fact that almost every Blizzard game is delayed about that long for the reason stated. No need for patches. Hopefully they can get the game part done properly if they don't have to focus on the various hardware platforms.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    17. Re:Bleh by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I have Warcraft 3, I like Warcraft 3 -- yet, I am more interested in Starcraft than I am in Warcraft, and so I am disappointed that the next Starcraft game is not available for the PC (yet). That's all I was saying.

      In my opinion, this game is quite a departure from what Blizzard's been doing (since they changed their name to Blizzard practically). I'd expect that if it were another RTS game, they'd release it on PC first and maybe port to console later, like they've done with many of their other games. Perhaps we'll see it on the PC sometime, but I'm not particularly worried about this becoming a trend for Blizzard, nor am I thinking of it as anything other than a StarCraft spin-off.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    18. Re:Bleh by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time with some of the console versions of PC games. After all the Doom and Duke Nukem versions were just flat out pathetic. Blizzard is just doing this for the almighty dollar.

      I think the differences in games that are really suitable for the console vs. the PC (mainly available controls and what needs to be done to make a type of game work on one vs the other) is exactly why they've chosen to put this game on a console instead of the PC. It's not an RTS game, or an FPS game (the two hardest genres to do right on consoles from looking at past games, also part of the reason Halo was so cool, they did a great job getting that to work on a console).

      Then again, Blizzard sells 7 million copies of any game just by releasing it in Korea, I'm sure they really need the money that comes with their stellar name in the console industry.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    19. Re:Bleh by guran · · Score: 2
      consoles schmonsoles


      Them console thingies don' even have a decent roguelike on them.

      --

      All opinions are my own - until criticized

    20. Re:Bleh by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

      Not that it will be a selling point for me -- unfortunately, the disposable income to keep up with the technology curve on both the console and PC front is not a luxury I have right now. And so I find myself reacting to the release of a new Starcraft title not with the excitement and joy that I'd hoped, but with mixed disappointment and dread. Gee, thanks, Blizzard.

      In all honesty, it's much cheaper to keep up with consoles than PCs. A new console is $199. You can pay more than that for a new video card. And consoles have a good 5 year lifecycle, but PC hardware gets outdated much more quickly, though less quickly than it used to.

      The real problem with PC hardware, especially video hardware, is that only a relative minority own the coolest stuff. For example, Dell and Gateway--and others--are still actively promoting machines with fairly bare bones 3D cards. That means no hardware T&L for starters, and that's now a requirement for many major games, like the upcoming No One Lives Forever 2. Now even if you have a card capable of hardware T&L, like the hugely successful GeForce 2, of which there are millions and millions, then you still don't have any hardware support for vertex and pixel shaders. So only a relative few game developers want to touch those features, as spectacular as they are. But if you get an Xbox, then you have these features from day 1, and you can assume all owners have them. The result is that they get used, and used heavily, whereas on the PC we're talking about a minority feature.

    21. Re:Bleh by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      And this isn't some new Mario title or kart-racing game that I couldn't give a tinker's damn about

      Actually, MarioKart (N64) is the best 4 player racing game EVER, and whips any PC racing game for pure multiplayer fun (IMNSHO). The single player was pretty bad, but PC's are better for 1 player games anyway. Console games should all be 4 player (or more), because multiplayer is where the fun is!

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    22. Re:Bleh by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      fair enough. I wasn't directing the comment at you so much as the people in the write up (I know they don't hear any of this, but still...)

  21. A zillion readers?? by Kappelmeister · · Score: 4, Funny

    About a zillion readers wrote in to tell us

    Whoa! Karma inflation!

    I knew I should have gotten in on the ground level. Tomorrow my Excellent is going to be Can't Buy A Stick of Gum No More (mostly affected by moderation done to your comments)

    1. Re:A zillion readers?? by brianvan · · Score: 2

      And you got modded up. How ironic. (in the Alanis Morrisette kind of way)

  22. Blizzard will pay. by Guspaz · · Score: 1

    They just gave a slap in the face to StarCraft fans, adding insult to injury. I think most StarCraft fans are disgusted at this announcement, as am I (And judging from the outcry on sclegacy).

    It was bad enough that this game was not SC2, yet in the SC universe (This means SC2 will be even MORE delayed than had the game been in another universe), but furthermore they're making it console only. I don't know ANY SC fan who would buy a PS2 or an XBOX just to play this game.

    Regards, Guspaz.

    1. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Disevidence · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Its gamecube and X-Box, not ps2.

      But i agree. This will cause a violent reaction among some of blizzard's loyal fans. While i don't begrudge them trying to make different games and reaching a different audience, not developing it for pc is a major, major oversight.

      Everyone who plays pc games knows blizzard, and they would have instant sales in the pc area. Cutting it off to consoles is a slap in the face to loyal fans, and really there is no excuse. Their developing it for x-box, why not the pc?

      --
      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    2. Re:Blizzard will pay. by jmauro · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      How can SC2 be delayed? There is currently just an idea to make one, no plan, no timeline nothing. How can you be late for something when there is no date to be late from? I also don't think Blizzard is actually doing much with this game. It seems (based on the number of FPS that Blizzard has created) that their partner, Nihilistic, is doing most of the work. So you don't get a sequal as soon as you like. Suffer.

    3. Re:Blizzard will pay. by foobar104 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Rest assured I was on the internet within minutes registering my disgust throughout the world."
      -- Comic Book Guy

    4. Re:Blizzard will pay. by xswl0931 · · Score: 1

      Let's see Starcraft is a RTS for the PC, Starcraft:Ghost is a FPS for Console. Somehow I don't think they care what you think since you are not their intended audience.

    5. Re:Blizzard will pay. by cvas · · Score: 3, Funny
      They just gave a slap in the face to StarCraft fans, adding insult to injury

      Are you listening to yourself? It's a GAME. I consider myself a hardcore gamer but damn, lay off the Dew.

      Your post screams "I'm in my parent's basement!" like no other before it.
    6. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! It's always the right temperature here in this basement!

    7. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Alex+Thorpe · · Score: 1

      Not only the PC world, but their recent hybrid mac/pc releases have help make them even more popular in the Mac gaming world. Corey Tamas of MacGamer.com(and the biggest Starcraft fan I know) has already said that he's going off to sulk after this news. Myself, I've never owned a console, and am not a fan of the gamepad as an input device, so I'm hoping they change their mind. Heck, right now, if I bought a console, I'd also have to buy a TV to hook it up to!

      --
      "Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
    8. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know it's not PS2? Noone else seems sure, where does your magical knowledge come from?

    9. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Rayonic · · Score: 2

      Your post screams "I'm in my parent's basement!" like no other before it.

      That's an UNFAIR GENERALIZATION!

      He could be in the attic.

    10. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but Blizzard just sold me on a Gamecube.

    11. Re:Blizzard will pay. by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      They just gave a slap in the face to StarCraft fans, adding insult to injury. I think most StarCraft fans are disgusted at this announcement, as am I (And judging from the outcry on sclegacy).

      Gee, is that anything like StarCraft was a slap in the face to WarCraft fans, who had to wait until very recently to play WarCraft 3 (let's see, I first played WarCraft 2 in 1996...)? Get over it, there's little chance that there won't be a StarCraft 2, it's just a matter of time. Personally, I'd hate to see any Blizzard game rushed, and I'm sure the many WarCraft Adventure fans would hate to see Blizzard dump another possibly cool game just because it isn't another rehash of a previous title, but instead extends the story behind those titles.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    12. Re:Blizzard will pay. by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Heck, right now, if I bought a console, I'd also have to buy a TV to hook it up to!

      Buy a VGA Adapter instead. I played most of my consoles on my 19" monitor until very recently because I only had a 13" TV. Now that I've got a 27" TV I've finally got all of my consoles and DVD player hooked up to that and freed up some of the clutter on my desk.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    13. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Alex+Thorpe · · Score: 1

      Good idea, but it doesn't work with an iMac. And replacing it with a new Mac, even low end, costs more than a TV and console.

      --
      "Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
    14. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      I didn't find StarCraft at all a problem as a WarCraft fan. Had StarCraft been WarCraft 3, the engine would not have been advanced enough to be a real improvement... Cries of "It's just WarCraft in space!" would have been "It's just WarCraft 2 with a new storyline!" instead.

      Instead, I've enjoyed all of them... WarCraft 2 was good fun, so was StarCraft, and I even bought WarCraft 3.

      As a WarCraft fan when StarCraft released, I was pleased because it was similar; the story was different, sure, but it improved on the gameplay of WC2 and felt framiliar yet better.

      Regards, Guspaz.

    15. Re:Blizzard will pay. by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      My room actually. And it's rather hot in here, I'd rather be in the basement.

      But since I'm not legally allowed to live anywhere but my parents home, I think your "insult" has fizzled slightly.

      Regards, Guspaz.

  23. My how the giants have fallen by shoptroll · · Score: 1

    Now I know why I can't get into http://www.blizzard.com, http://www.battle.net or http://www.ign.com.... I feel the suffering of numerous gamers screaming in frustration at not being able to read about the game.... ;) Good ol' /. effect

    --
    Insert Sig Here
  24. History Repeating by sgtsanity · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'm guessing you didn't play Diablo II?

    1. Re:History Repeating by ZaMoose · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      irony
      Pronunciation: 'I-r&-nE also 'I(-&)r-nE
      Function: noun
      Inflected Form(s): plural -nies
      Etymology: Latin ironia, from Greek eirOnia, from eirOn dissembler
      Date: 1502

      1 : a pretense of ignorance and of willingness to learn from another assumed in order to make the other's false conceptions conspicuous by adroit questioning -- called also Socratic irony

      2 a : the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning b : a usually humorous or sardonic literary style or form characterized by irony c : an ironic expression or utterance

      3 a (1) : incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result (2) : an event or result marked by such incongruity b : incongruity between a situation developed in a drama and the accompanying words or actions that is understood by the audience but not by the characters in the play -- called also dramatic irony, tragic irony

      [/Pedantic]

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
  25. ObPennyArcade by ar1550 · · Score: 1

    So, the new game is basically (give or take) this?

    --
    I once shot a man in Reno 'cause they cancelled Firefly.
    1. Re:ObPennyArcade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn! got to it before i did!

      Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.

      It's been 15 seconds since you hit 'reply'!

      If this error seems to be incorrect, please provide the following in your report to SourceForge.net:

      * Browser type
      * User ID/Nickname or AC
      * What steps caused this error
      * Whether you used the Back button on your browser
      * Whether or not you know your ISP to be using a proxy, or any sort of service that gives you an IP that others are using simultaneously
      * How many posts to this form you successfully submitted during the day

      * Please choose 'formkeys' for the category!
      Thank you.

    2. Re:ObPennyArcade by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      or this ;)

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    3. Re:ObPennyArcade by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2

      I'm afraid not. I think it will be one race, you build no structures, in fact I'll be suprised if it is even multiplayer. :-(

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  26. zerg by StandardDeviant · · Score: 5, Funny

    so in this case if the site gets terminally slashdotted, is it a zerg rush?

    1. Re:zerg by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      so in this case if the site gets terminally slashdotted, is it a zerg rush?

      Only if we were all using 9600 baud modems...

      This seems more like my fave tactic... the carrier rush
      There's nothing like seeing 36 carriers each armed with 8 interceptors trawling across the screen in search of their next target...

    2. Re:zerg by huntz0r · · Score: 4, Funny

      Slashdot: News for Zergs. Stuff that matters.

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly affected when you come and go, you come and go)
    3. Re:zerg by StandardDeviant · · Score: 1

      i wonder if anyone has ever thought about using starcraft to represent sysadmin things like people have done with doom. you could represent spam/worm email with zerglings. spam rush!

    4. Re:zerg by tabby · · Score: 1

      News for Zergs. Stuff that slithers.

      --
      I've experiments to run, there is research to be done on the people who are still alive.
    5. Re:zerg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      News for Zergs. Stuff that splatters.

    6. Re:zerg by Drakker · · Score: 1

      Slashdot: News for the nerds. Stuff that mutates.

    7. Re:zerg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There are no circumstances under which a "carrier rush" can be considered an actual rush at all. Highest tier unit? 6 supply each? Please.

      If you actually lose to a carrier "rush" you may want to review the basics of RTS games, which include BUILDING A FUCKING ARMY and NOT WAITING 10 MINUTES TO START BUILDING A FUCKING ARMY.

      Any nth tier "rush" strategy, where n > 1, is essentially a newbie strategy which will only work against newbies.

    8. Re:zerg by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      There's nothing like seeing 36 carriers each armed with 8 interceptors trawling across the screen in search of their next target...

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you have 200 supply max and carriers are 8 each the most carriers 1 person could have would be 25, not counting team games. And to get to 25, you'd have to kill off ALL your other units.

      Just a nitpicky point. :-)

      Signed, Starcraft Addict

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    9. Re:zerg by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      D'oH!

      Battlecruisers are 8 each! Carriers are only 6 each, but that still only leaves 33.333 carriers. (Don't ask about the .333 of a carrier, it's like that .4 of a kid thing.)

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    10. Re:zerg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both carriers and battlecruisers are 6 each. They were both adjusted down from 8 supply in one of the last patches (1.09 or 1.08), during the last major tweak of game balance. For now. :)

    11. Re:zerg by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      Ahh.. Must have been 1.09. I haven't played Terrans since 1.08 or earlier.

      What they REALLY need to do is fix the Scouts, they are WAY overpriced.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  27. AWWWW MAN! by john+barleycorn · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I got an erection when I first glanced at this post! Then I actually saw what it is and...WTF CowboyNeal?!?!?!? Why'd you do that to me?!?!?!

    Seriously though I've always been amazed Blizzard didnt milk the first Starcraft Game more than they did...I mean at least another expansion or two. I mean damn, that game is like 5 years old and I still know like a dozen people that play it everyday.

  28. Which console? by Fractal+Law · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Both the FAQ and the press release fail to mention which console Starcraft:Ghost is being developed for.

    Does anyone have any further information?

    Nothing, not even a Blizzard game, will compell me to buy an XBox.

    1. Re:Which console? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      "Q: On what platforms will StarCraft: Ghost be available? A: We are currently developing the game for multiple console systems. Further details regarding platform/country specifics will be released in the months ahead.
      Q: Will there be a PC and Mac version? A: No. StarCraft: Ghost is only being developed for console systems. "

      Looking at the sales of consoles in Japan makes it pretty clear there is a PS2 version. The PS2 is outselling the GameCube 4:1 and outselling the xbox 20:1 (Most weeks the obsolete PS1 outsells the Xbox!) according to the magic box Actually the PS2 has more consoles sold in each market (Japan, US, Europe) than its combined compeditors do worldwide! Nintendo or MS would have to be doing some big behind the scene deals to keep it off the PS2.

      Nihilistic (which just hired their 18th employee according to their webpage) only has PC experience. My guess is they're making a GameCube and Xfx-box version and having another company port it to the PS2. Development for the GC is almost as nice as Xbox development (My opinion, I've worked with both systems). Development on both systems in parallel is quite possible. The PS2 is a real pain to work with, a small studio like this won't have the resources for all three consoles IMHO. Heck I don't know if they could pull off a quality PS2 exclusive version that looks like other company's 2nd and 3rd gen products. Unless most of those 18 guys are programmers, or they've got one super programmer without a life outside of work.

      And cube.ign.com covered the story in their GameCube and Xbox previews section, not in their PS2 section.

    2. Re:Which console? by Orii · · Score: 1

      Actually, IGN covered it in their PS2 page too. That said, I hope they don't just do a conversion from one of the other consoles to the PS2. Max Payne was done that way, and the PS2 version was generally agreed to look the worst of all the versions (PC, Xbox). If they take the (admittedly large) time and effort to write it native for the PS2, there shouldn't be a large gap in quality between the various versions.

    3. Re:Which console? by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      There's also an IGN article on cube.ign.com, so if they're developing for every system there's an article for, it's at least PS2 and GameCube. I'd be quite surprised if they didn't make an Xbox version while they're at it.

    4. Re:Which console? by cr_nucleus · · Score: 1

      you surely missed the fact that the official Ghost page directly links to ps2.ign.com for the exclusive preview. also, Gamespot states that the TGS demo was running on xbox. only the NGC is missing here.

    5. Re:Which console? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be quite surprised if they didn't make an Xbox version while they're at it.


      "While they're at it?" All the demos that people have seen so far have been running on the Xbox, it's not some afterthought.

  29. Starcraft: Ghost by sielwolf · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sounds all very... Metal Gear Solid. Hmmm. I've never been a big fan of Starcraft (but most RTS's don't put wind in my sail).

    And now Blizzard is going to go from their gold standard (the RTS) into unfriendly waters (the Tactical Sim)? Of course they can never go long with this dialogue:

    Ghost: "The truck have started to move!"
    Templar: "I feel asleep!"

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
    1. Re:Starcraft: Ghost by Nutrimentia · · Score: 1

      While comparisons with other shooter/ strategy games is inevitable, we've got to remember that there have been some amazing variations on this theme (Deus Ex, Max Payne) and others that really took advantage of the canvas (Rune). Even if this game was just UT shoot-em-up, i think that the screen shots attest that it will be incredible fun to go against the races in this format.

      Given Blizzard's success with the plot of the PC predecessors, I trust that this game will have a compelling story and incredible game play. And the treats that they mention in the release....

      I think this may be enough to drive me to buy a console. Considering that I could get a console and the game for less than the price of a GPU upgrade, I think I could justify it.

    2. Re:Starcraft: Ghost by octalc0de · · Score: 1

      Actually sounds like "Command and Conquer: Renegade". Remember that game? It lacked sufficient detail and/or any great innovation to get anywhere.

  30. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by nachoman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We began our early development efforts in console gaming, and we have always been excited about returning to this arena. Additionally, we've wanted to revisit the StarCraft universe for some time. With StarCraft: Ghost, we are able to do both."

    Translation: We wanted to use Blizzard's name and a great game title to enter into the console market.

    I'm not meaning to flame here... But it looks like that to me. It could turn out to be a great game. However I do question how much it will be starcraft and how much it will be star_based_game_set_in_space_with_aliens_and_human _ghost_character.

    If It's good (which I do hope. I've always supported Blizzard), I guess I'll have to buy a console.

  31. World Advantage by dasheiff · · Score: 2

    So is it just another third person game on the market like Star Fox Adventures will be? (Another game which has changed format) I suppose it has the world advantage and probally a good story line. I'm not sure that's gona be enough to get the better of the other games in the same market.

  32. Starcraft was even good single-player by Skyshadow · · Score: 2
    Starcraft stands out in my mind as having an entertaining single-player mode -- IMO, none of the Warcrafts (or the other clones) had that, so I hope it's something that they continue in this game. The missions made sense in terms of one another, but didn't get too distracted away from the basic gameplay.

    I also liked the cinematics (esp. those in Broodwar); I felt combination of events and score worked really well together.

    So, let's hope we have another winner here -- I need something to play when I'm on a long flight (and as such deprived of a good broadband connection).

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Starcraft was even good single-player by Plutor · · Score: 1

      1) You imply that the Warcrafts are clones of Starcraft. This is erroneous. Starcraft came after WC2, and was clearly a very similar game. The similarities are even more apparent when you look at screenshots of beta versions on Blizzard's history site.

      2) You bring your console on long flights? You must carry around a big battery pack and an lcd screen of some sort. That's awful hardcore of you.

    2. Re:Starcraft was even good single-player by octalc0de · · Score: 1

      Starcraft was even good single-player

      Well, this seems to be an interesting topic. Reviewers of Warcraft III believe that the single-player mode actually hit the mark this time.

      I've beaten Warcraft III. The storyline is immersing, and it's a little better than the starcraft one. Yes, Starcraft had a lot better plot then say, Warcraft II, but Warcraft III has a better plot then Starcraft.

    3. Re:Starcraft was even good single-player by Skyshadow · · Score: 2
      Warcrafts (or the other clones)

      Hm, poor wording on my part. I meant Warcraft or any of the other Warcraft clones (of which I count Starcraft as one).

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    4. Re:Starcraft was even good single-player by Buck2 · · Score: 1

      Since we're tossing opinions around ... I've also beaten both and I liked Starcraft better.

      So, nyah.

      --

      As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
  33. Did anyone happen to notice this? by trana · · Score: 1

    http://www.blizzard.com/ghost/screenshots/ss01.sht ml Is it me? Or is she squatting completely naked with a look of mischief in her eyes?

    1. Re:Did anyone happen to notice this? by morgajel · · Score: 1

      ...dude, you need a woman:)

      --
      Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
    2. Re:Did anyone happen to notice this? by Omega996 · · Score: 1

      naw she's wearing one of those combat-ready leotards...

  34. Starcraft 2 by Vireo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nevertheless, Starcraft2.com is up.

  35. Nobody should really be surprised by this... by Akardam · · Score: 5, Informative

    Blizzard origionally was a console company. What is now known as Blizzard was once Silicon & Synapse. One of their more popular games was Rock & Roll Racing, which, if memory serves, was produced for Nintendo. There have been rumors of them returning to their console roots someday, and with everybody and their brother making consoles these days, it's not surprising that they'd want to "re-expand" into that lucrative market.

    As for me, I'm not excited really, because I'm not a console gamer, and because Blizzard's handling of the BNETD situation left a bad taste in my mouth. But, they do have a rep for making good games, so I guess we'll see how well they do on this one.

    1. Re:Nobody should really be surprised by this... by _LFTL_ · · Score: 1
      One of their more popular games was Rock & Roll Racing, which, if memory serves, was produced for Nintendo

      Super Nintendo

    2. Re:Nobody should really be surprised by this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silicon and Synapse??

      LOST VIKINGS!

    3. Re:Nobody should really be surprised by this... by bezza · · Score: 1
      It was also on the Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) and was one of my favourite games of all time....


      Head out on the highway
      Lookin' for adventure
      And whatever comes our way...


      --
      WARNING: This sig does not contain a joke
  36. STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by pjammer · · Score: 1

    And if you click on your player repeatedly, she will turn around and shout at you "Stop touching me!"

    1. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by mkarpinski · · Score: 1


      Man --- This is killing me....What game is that from?

      --
      As below, so above and beyond, I imagine drawn beyond the lines of reason. Push the envelope. Watch it bend.
    2. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember it from Warcraft II (orc grunts maybe)

    3. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by FigBugDeux · · Score: 1

      Warcraft 2

    4. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by smart.id · · Score: 1

      You could also make the sheep explode in Warcraft II by clicking on them repeadidly. I believe you could also do the same in Starcraft. It's pretty funny.

      --
      blog & fiction: jd87
    5. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by Alex+Thorpe · · Score: 1

      All of the Warcraft/Starcraft games had that to some extent, including Warcraft III. "I'm not that kind of orc!" Thing is, we don't know if it will be possible to click on someone on a console game.

      --
      "Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
    6. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by Bloody+Twit · · Score: 1

      It's from "Baulder's Gate," actually. The character who speaks the line is the crazy (in geek terms: "chaotic evil") mage guy you meet earlier on in the game.

      --
      [Insert pseudo-intellectual anti-Amerikan/pro-socialist sig here]
    7. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Like FigBugDeux already pointed out - it's not.

      It's from Warcraft2 :)

    8. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by TheCyko1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      FOOLS! Know you nothing of the amusment tools created by the god of life beknownst to all as Blizzard? Surely thou hast testified to the very first Warcraft. Where our bretherin fought hard against the green skinned monsters of the dreaded Portal. T'was after a unrelented berating, fom my tool of control, that my lacky, the footman, said to me "stop touching me" and after that, when i commanded the great armies of the Alliance, yet another one of my many loyal men, angered by my constant clicking, boldly stood forth and asked "are you still touching me?" Tis a pity, though, for the tradition wasn't continued by the footmen of the new alliance, rather our forsaken enemies, of whom were were forced to create an unholy alliance to save our very existance. As i recal, after many a prodings at one of my orc underlings, he told me something that took me quite aback "i'm not that kind of orc" he said. I was unsure, of course, as to how to respond to this, i merely just kept touching him. It was wonderful. Alas, a simple straght forward answer to your question, the quote of witch you speak of is from the game that spawned it all, the very first, the classic, Warcraft: Orcs and Humans.

      --
      This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
    9. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude - chill.

    10. Re:STOP TOUCHING ME!!! by theeds · · Score: 1

      If you want to get technical a variation of that is in Starcraft when you click on an observer many times it goes "Stop Poking me!!!"

  37. If you wonder if Starcraft if 3D can be cool.... by JFMulder · · Score: 2

    Check this out.

    I only have one thing to say : Holy mother of god, I want this game!

  38. blizzard's biggest mistake... by sethstorm · · Score: 0, Troll

    All I can really say is, that the only reason they're gambling on console only, is to cut out the bnetd folks from the equation, since they're nearly guaranteed to have some measure of *cough* elitist *cough* antipiracy builtin. I'll revel to see them be forced to make a PC version or die as a company dishonorably, where bnetd'll be the *only* choice for the greater of the crowd.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  39. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Yorrike · · Score: 3, Informative
    I've posted the FAQ, Press Release and as many of the screenshots as I could grab on my site. It'll be faster than Blizzard's for the moment ; )

    Check it out

    --

    Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

  40. Looks like time by _ganja_ · · Score: 2

    To see if this xbox "emulator" is really viable.

    OK, emulator is maybe the wrong word, I guess it's really an implimentation of the xbox libs (XTLs) under win32; ala what WINE is for Linux and the Win 16/32 enviroment.

    The author did mention that he intends to make cxbx open source in the future. OK, there's the info, is it viable?

    --

    A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security

    1. Re:Looks like time by mmacdona86 · · Score: 2

      Not very likely. Xbox games are often statically linked to their libraries for performance. If the emulator doesn't model the hardware at a very low level, most games won't run.

  41. Re:Blizzard will play! by susano_otter · · Score: 2
    I, on the other hand, not being a Starcraft Fan, am looking forward to this game. If it's at least as fun as MG:S, I'll count my money and my hours well spent.

    I'd say "sucks to be you, Starcraft Fan", but then you'd just retaliate with "sucks to be you, Starcraft Hater", and then this would all just degenerate into pointless namecalling and inane arguments.

    Hrm.

    Sucks to be you, Starcraft Fan!

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  42. That's zergling rush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you're going to try and whore some karma, please get the terminology right.

    1. Re:That's zergling rush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "zergling" is a subset of "zerg", you illogical fucktard.

  43. FREQENTLY asked questions? by macrom · · Score: 2

    Uh, how can you have a FAQ when :

    a) They just made the announcement an hour or two ago.
    b) The site is so hammered you can't find out what they hell they announced, let alone frequently ask questions about it.

    I knew Blizzard was high on themselves, but jeez...

  44. disappointing for shore by JW+Troll · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    umm... i think it's quite disappointing that they've exorcised everything I enjoyed about StarCraft while preserving exactly nothing of value. Can you play as the Zerg? Nope. Can you be a Protoss? Nope. Do you get to command whole armies of aliens to run rampant over your enemies?? Hell no. You do, however, get to
    Leverage the Resources of an Entire Army
    -Call down massive Battlecruiser and Siege Tank strikes

    -Take control of familiar StarCraft vehicles

    -Wield a variety of familiar weapons, such as the Gauss Rifle and Perdition Flamethrower

    -Join your allies in battle and do your part to ensure mission success

    which of course means you have an intercom interface with the rest of your forces... hardly a command, you get to "leverage" instead. Gay.

    They even made it into another FPS (like we need more of those for consoles - we already have Halo, thanks) to dilute whatever strategic fun remained. I don't like FPS, and that's WHY I enjoyed SC and Brood War so much. Dammit.
    --
    just like the humble blood clot... turboporsche@telus.net
  45. Oops:FREQUENTLY asked questions? by macrom · · Score: 2

    Ahem -- I suppose I could learn to spell. That would make the Preview button just a tad more useful. Apologies.

    1. Re:Oops:FREQUENTLY asked questions? by FigBugDeux · · Score: 1

      they posted it on their site. he copied and pasted it. thats how.

    2. Re:Oops:FREQUENTLY asked questions? by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      I think the point was that Blizzard only made the announcement a few hours ago, so how could there have been frequently asked questions so soon after?

      In other words, who the hell asked the questions?

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
    3. Re:Oops:FREQUENTLY asked questions? by illogique · · Score: 1

      from the people in the company!
      let's say i'm a blizzard employe (not working on Ghost) and i have question...

      and you can think about stuff that other will question you like "is this starcraft 2" which is a obvious question even if no one ask it in the first place!!

  46. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Translation: We wanted to use Blizzard's name and a great game title to enter into the console market.

    In case you didn't know, Blizzard actually started in the console market. Lost Vikings and Rock & Roll Racing were their first original (and console) games.

  47. Monkey Island 4 "a new level?" by palo0019 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How depressing that bringing down a funny script with halfassed 3D graphics is "a new level." Not necessarily a better level, I guess! Gimme pixelated sprites any day.

    1. Re:Monkey Island 4 "a new level?" by Vesuvius_2 · · Score: 1

      he didn't say it was an improved level, just 'new'...

  48. not this time, though, i would think by fireduck · · Score: 1

    mini-preview for the project at IGN, here.

    their partners in this venture, Nihilistic, seem fairly competent. Besides, one of the founders of Nihilistic was a former Blizz employee who worked on Starcraft (page 3 of the IGN preview). So this partnership should be about as successful as possible...

  49. woulda been better on the PC, too by X_Caffeine · · Score: 1

    This is clearly another game like Halo that benefit hugely from the high-resolution and vivid color that a PC can provide and a "next-gen" console cannot. [i]Bummer[/i].

    Nice to see that Nihilistic is finally producing something new, though... that's a talented crew.

    --
    // I will show you fear in a handful of jellybeans.
  50. Console Systems by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

    Ok, I understand that a good chunk of the slashdot posters only want to play games once and a while, this post is not for you.

    I know there are some of you out there that are self proclaimed "gamers", yet have an extreme aversion to consoles. I am a gamer who really likes both PC and console games almost equally, each having its strenghs and weaknesses, of course.

    I don't buy Doom and Quake or other FPS's for my consoles any more than I would buy Frogger 2 for the PC when I could play a good Mario platformer on my gamecube.

    Why the aversion to consoles on slashdot?

    1. Is it a money issue?

    2. Does it have to do with the companies selling the consoles?

    3. Do you only prefer the genres PC's excel at (FPS, RTS, basically any game that needs a mouse rather than a controller)

    4. Some other reason, and I'm just not thinking of it right now? Multiplayer on a scale larger than 4 maybe?

    Please respond if you have any insight, this has nagged at me for awhile.

  51. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Aerolith_alpha · · Score: 1

    I donno, i just thought that this was very similar to what they did with command and conquer when they turned it into that 3d FPS -- which incidentally i thought was pretty cool. It wasn't 'the best FPS i've every played' by any measure, but it was kinda nifty seeing the vehicles from command and conquer in an fps--and being able to pilot them too.

    --


    mov ax, 13h
    int 10h
  52. You know you've been using computers for too long by da+cog · · Score: 5, Funny

    when you see "Console Only" and think "COOL! Finally, ASCII art is making a come back!"

    --
    Snarkiness is inversely proportional to wisdom because it emphasizes feeling right rather than being right.
  53. More pix by xswl0931 · · Score: 1

    http://www.nihilistic.com/images/starcraftghost/

  54. interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i wonder if the general hate for blizzard would be the same if it was PC-exclusive? probably not. Only "w00t!" and "Huzzahs".

    Right now its all whining and console-bashing, its too obvious that a lot of people here are jealous that its clouding their minds. you could buy the console you know, besides there are other good games besides this one, that is, unless you have problems before of pride/manly disposition/latest geek book/whatever forbids you, you will definitely be losing out. Don't be fanboys, be GAMERS!

  55. As long as it better than WC3 by halo8 · · Score: 1

    I hope that this dose set back the release date for SC2

    I played and finished WC3.. and what a HUGE disapoint it was.. it was more of a Roleplaying game than RTS Battle Game

    Hope they dont make SC2 into a Roleplaying game.

    --
    The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
    1. Re:As long as it better than WC3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I understand it, the StarCraft series is supposed to remain "true" RTS while the WarCraft series is diverginging into RolePlaying Strategy Warfare (alla WC3)

    2. Re:As long as it better than WC3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee.... d'you think that maybe that's why Blizzard billed WC3 as an RPS (Role Playing Strategy) rather than an RTS (Real Time Strategy)?

      I can't wait to hear your assessment of the UT2003 demo -- "One of the best 2D platformer fighting games ever!"

    3. Re:As long as it better than WC3 by halo8 · · Score: 1

      If its an FPS that aint HallifeII
      or a DOD Mod FPS for HalflifeII

      it aint worth my time.

      Now GTA3 the Miami Add On.. that.. that is worth waiting for

      --
      The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
  56. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Warped-Reality · · Score: 2, Informative

    wow, i remember Rock & Roll racing on the SNES, i never knew it was blizzard

    --
    This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
  57. Read the faq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This gets pointed out every time and a lot of people need to get it through their heads that slahdot is not a single person or point of view!

    Taken from the slashdot faq:

    I thought everyone on Slashdot hated the RIAA, the MPAA, and Microsoft. Why do you keep hyping CDs, movies, and Windows games?

    Big corporations are what they are. They sell us cool stuff with one hand and tighten the screws on our freedoms with the other. We hate them every morning and love them every afternoon, and vice versa. This is part of living in the modern world: you take your yin with your yang and try to figure out how to do what's right the best you can. If you think it has to be all one way or the other, that's cool, share your opinions, but don't expect everyone else to think the same.

    Answered by: CmdrTaco
    Last Modified: 04/02/02

  58. interesting by syrinx · · Score: 2

    Consoles are good for : fighting games, sports games, racing games... that's about it really. Some people swear by Goldeneye and its clones, but.. FPSs are made for a mouse, no console controller will ever be as good.

    As for this type of third person thing.. some people have been comparing to MGS, but I've never played that, so I can't say. I trust Blizzard to make a good game though. (I still would have loved to have gotten to play Warcraft Adventures..)

    As long as they don't fuck up and release only on the XBox. I have a lot of friends with consoles, *none* of them have an XBox, or even remotely considered getting one when they were deciding which to buy. I guess *someone* must be buying them, since games are apparently still coming out, but I don't know who. (Possibly this is the same phenomenon as the fact that no one I know uses anything but AIM for instant messages, but apparently there are lots of people that use the Microsoft and Yahoo ones..)

    Anyway, my personal preference is Gamecube over PS2, but the PS2 isn't too bad either.

    Of course as other people have mentioned, the actual time until it's released will be whatever they've announced times 3 (at least), so by the time it's out, we'll be up to PS4. :p

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    1. Re:interesting by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you've never played Halo.

    2. Re:interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I have, and the controls sucked.

    3. Re:interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and waht else does XBox have to offer?
      Obviously YOU haven't played Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy, Tekken, etc.

    4. Re:interesting by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      Some people swear by Goldeneye and its clones, but.. FPSs are made for a mouse, no console controller will ever be as good.

      It depends on what you are used to, I guess. I can consistently get headshots with auto-aim off using just a pistol and the Solitaire control style (1.2). A joystick never seemed to bother me.

      Consoles are good for : fighting games, sports games, racing games... that's about it really

      Consoles are good for multiplayer games with local friends. Sorry, playing a FPS or racing game on a LAN is not as fun as setting on a couch with 3 friends and talking smack to each other. Sports games just suck in general: why not just go play the sport? ;-)

      Anyway, my personal preference is Gamecube over PS2, but the PS2 isn't too bad either

      I've got both, and on games that are released for both platforms (Burnout) I like the GC version better. The controllers are better, the GC supports 4 players easier (Not on Burnout, unfortunately), and I think the gfx are cleaner than on the PS2.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    5. Re:interesting by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      I have played all those. Surprising fact, but people do buy and enjoy more than one console system at the same time. There's not some rule where you're only allowed to buy one and have to stick to it. Every console has its killer games and every console has its crappy games. Xbox is just taking a little longer to get rolling because they don't have a previous system to just produce sequels for.

  59. Re:Blizzard will play! by DarkZero · · Score: 2

    If it's at least as fun as MG:S, I'll count my money and my hours well spent.

    Give the multitude of Tactical Rip-Off Action games that have come and gone since Metal Gear Solid, there's only a very slim chance that this game will be nearly as fun as its predecessor. SO far, none of the dozens of MGS rip-offs have come close to the original.

  60. Incidently by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2

    this isn't the first Starcraft for a console - they put one out for Nintendo64 before

    that was just a port though

    --
    Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
  61. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Vargasan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Blackthorne also made it to the SNES Console.

    --
    Putting the romance back into necromancer.
  62. Been using Linux too long... by Bitsy+Boffin · · Score: 2

    Man, I think I must have been using Linux for too long, I read that title as that the game is being released for the "Console", I had visions of little ascii space ships on the screen.

    --
    NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
    1. Re:Been using Linux too long... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Man, I think I must have been using Linux for too long, I read that title as that the game is being released for the "Console", I had visions of little ascii space ships on the screen.

      That would be cool too though, in a retrogaming kind of way :) I always thought that spore colonies looked like *asterisks*
  63. Its simple by danny256 · · Score: 1

    The reason's I don't like consoles.

    1. The price is too high.
    2. You can't upgrade them, you have to buy a whole new one, you can't just upgrade 1 part of it like a PC.
    3. Piracy is harder (although not impossible)

    and the biggest reason of all:

    4. I can't convince my parents that I need an X-box to do my homework!

    1. Re:Its simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1, 2. The price of buying a new game system is about that of buying 1 or 2 parts of a pc. A gamecube costs $150. A PC costs $500-$2000. A video card for your games can cost as much as a console system.

      Quit the whining about price....

  64. Its "sure" by SchizoMOFO! · · Score: 1

    I suspect you may have been doing that to be cute. Its not, so don't do that again. And the first Blizzard game I can recall was Blackthorne, it was an action game, not a RTS or some such...and it still rocked. Its unfortunate you can't appreciate a decent FPS - live, and don't try to claim there's nothing of value. I dare you to make the game they're trying to implement and preserve any decent portion of the strategic value of the original. Anyway, the use of the word "Gay" died a year ago. Please move on to better bitching.

    1. Re:Its "sure" by sqlrob · · Score: 2

      Blackthorne rocked?

      You must have ADD. It was fine for a while, but it got repetitive fast.

    2. Re:Its "sure" by JW+Troll · · Score: 0

      You've got problems. Do you get off by telling people what to do and what not to do? Your deprecation of the word "gay" is hardly a reason not to use it, since it's a perfectly valid expression and used in colloquially correct form. It's not unfortunate that I can't appreciate a decent FPS - I can appreciate one, and it seems you missed the point of the post entirely. I've got plenty of FPS in my collection and don't want another. What I want (and since this is an opinion not a dissertation I am completely justified in expressing my views, despite what you, in your pathetic guise of the Speech Nazi, may think)is another game with the playability of StarCraft and the gameplay that made it the best RTS out there. I'm an avid SC/BW fan and I think it's a shame that SC has become a FPS. It's too bad.

      --
      just like the humble blood clot... turboporsche@telus.net
  65. Really? by greatsasuke · · Score: 1

    About a zillion readers wrote in to tell us about all the commotion over at the Blizzard site. Following a countdown, they've announced the latest Starcraft game, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Starcraft 2.


    Starcraft 2?!? Where?!?

  66. oh yah by tabby · · Score: 1

    excellent original background - check
    sexy, tough, butt kicking heroine - check
    great 3d graphics - check
    story driven action - check
    support for the platform I just spent $2000au for - DOH!!!

    --
    I've experiments to run, there is research to be done on the people who are still alive.
    1. Re:oh yah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Made by a company that isn't a DMCA wielding jackbooted thug? - Oops!

  67. meta HTTP-EQUIV="Refresh" CONTENT="1200" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the hell does shacknews want the screenshots to reload every 20 min? Anyone keeping a screenshot in a tab for the evening is slashdotting them. I guess they enjoy it.

  68. Be ready to rush out and buy it! by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

    Vivendi needs the help of every upstanding American to help FUND THE WAR ON FREEDOM!

    --

    Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  69. Starcraft is a rip off of Warhammer 40k by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geez, looks like an updated version of "Space HulK" to me. Starcraft is a total rip off of Warhammer 40k. Humans=Space Marines, Zerg=Tyranids, Elf-Like Race=Eldar, Etc... It's not a bad rip off, but it is. :)

  70. it's ok to buy now.. by DraconicFae · · Score: 1

    since the Blizzard/Bnetd thing is resolved happily.. no wait.. it isn't

  71. Console games make more money. by LordZardoz · · Score: 3, Informative

    One thing that many PC gamers tend to not realize is that a Console game will almost always make more money then a PC game. Even a mostly crappy console game sells more copies then some of the best PC games.

    If you take that into account, there is no reason not to do a Console game. And at least they are doing this the right way. Unless I am severly mistaken, the console ports of Warcraft 2, Diablo, and Starcraft have all sucked.

    END COMMUNICATION

    1. Re:Console games make more money. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One thing that many PC gamers tend to not realize is that a Console game will almost always make more money than a PC game.
  72. another game, another not chick by lingqi · · Score: 2

    I mean, really... I have never seen one single game with like "Hey this looks like my friend's mom" women in them. and they are always lightly dressed and no matter how advanced the the physics engine is, they *always* malfunctions on the chest department...

    Actually I had a friend whose mom looked like a chick in a game... but see -- that's the wrong way around.

    For once, man... somebody make a game with realistic people in them, huh?

    I mean, after all they did such a wonderful job modelling the zerg after the cockroach under my stove and such....

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

  73. The voice won't match! by Nutrimentia · · Score: 1

    *Someone call for a doctor?* just doesn't match her height and build...

  74. Remember bnetd? by Windcatcher · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It doesn't matter. After what they pulled, they're dead to me. I'm through with Blizzard.

    And I've never even USED bnetd. That's how upset what they did makes me.

    1. Re:Remember bnetd? by Oswald · · Score: 1
      Okay, I tried to pay attention, but it never seemed worth all the fuss. So tell me again: how is bnetd within their rights? And, since battle.net is free (of cost) forever with a game purchase, what is bnetd's purpose? I read their feature list, and I was a little put off by "configurability of ad banners"--are you supposed to be able to sell ad space on a server that runs somebody else's game?

      I dunno. I tilt at my share of windmills, but this one just never pissed me off. Call me obtuse (oh wait--this is Slashdot--call me a lot worse than that).

    2. Re:Remember bnetd? by anzha · · Score: 2

      This one pissed me off because one of the developer is a very good friend of mine. We've known each other ten years now and but for the lack of time due to a crappy job, *I* would have been named as part of the lawsuit because I would have been working on it too.

      Being among the original users, we needed it because we kept losing connects to Battle.net. Not just once in a while. Not just once a day. More like just about every frickin game. Rather than whine, bnetd was found and greatly expanded on. We all made a *LOT* of suggestions and some of which was incorporated. Incidently, later additions to regular battle.net followed more than once after they were in bnetd from my recollection.

      What is really, truly irritating about this above all else is that they never - not once! - tried to make a buck off this. They could have, but didn't. Very conscientiously *did*not*. They were just hobbyists goofing around and having fun. They liked Blizzard's games and certainly didn't want the company to fail!!!

      So, until this is all over, I will not be buying Blizzard games and will be contributing regularly to their legal defense. The sad thing is Blizzard is about the best game makers out there right now and I may end up giving up my gaming habit because of it...

      --
      Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
    3. Re:Remember bnetd? by Debillitatus · · Score: 2
      It's kind of funny that something happened which is pissing you off enough to stop you from playing a game and dealing with a company, and, in contrast, I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

      It's a big world out there.

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

    4. Re:Remember bnetd? by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      So tell me again: how is bnetd within their rights?

      The main purpose of bnetd is to allow a private server not on Battle.net. This does not infringe, according to the DMCA.

      And, since battle.net is free (of cost) forever with a game purchase, what is bnetd's purpose?

      I use it to play friends from across the country and hold private ladder games. We all have legitimate Cd's, incidentally. It's nice to be able to play without all the lag from Battle.net, not to mention not having to deal with the 1337 dickweed kiddies out there on Battle.net.

      I read their feature list, and I was a little put off by "configurability of ad banners"--are you supposed to be able to sell ad space on a server that runs somebody else's game?

      I never got this feature to work. I was actually trying to put the logo of the website, a match schedule, and some cool SC artwork in place of the banners. At no point was I thinking of paid advertising, and I doubt that would be feasible on a private server in the first place. The only reason it was included is because the SC interface already has an open spot for the banners to go, and it looks incomplete without them.

      The reason I was so mad about it is because I was legally using bnetd with legal copies of SC and had gotten many other people to buy the game so they could play too. Even though I'm within the law and exercising fair-use, I've now been forbidden to use the software the way I want to.

      It wouldn't be so bad if Blizzard would release approved server software that does the same thing and still checked for CD-keys, but they have no intention of doing so.

      Also of note, bnetd contacted Blizzard long ago about coding in some form of keychecking authorization corroboration to ensure only legal copies could be used. Blizzard, of course, never even tried to acknowledge them.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    5. Re:Remember bnetd? by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      Too bad for you. Bnetd was the best way to play your friends online, certainly better than Battle.net.

      The ability to have a private server and private ladder games adds a lot to the enjoyment, IMHO.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    6. Re:Remember bnetd? by Debillitatus · · Score: 2
      Could be. But I've never had any troubles with battle.net, whether I'm planning to play with a group of people, or just trolling for random matches.

      Is it that people have some problem with non-Windows platforms? The reason I ask is that I have used battle.net on and off for several years. I've never had any troubles except lag, which was fixed when I got cable. I've used it on a variety of computers with different processors. So what's wrong with the good old B.n then?

      Not trying to flamebait, I meanthe question honestly.

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

    7. Re:Remember bnetd? by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      But I've never had any troubles with battle.net, whether I'm planning to play with a group of people, or just trolling for random matches.

      I've had my share, but I know people in Australia, for example, who could barely play because Battle.net was so bad for them. And if I am playing with people from my hometown who have wives/kids and can't leave the house at a whim, it's better and faster to have a local server.

      Is it that people have some problem with non-Windows platforms? The reason I ask is that I have used battle.net on and off for several years. I've never had any troubles except lag, which was fixed when I got cable. I've used it on a variety of computers with different processors.

      I've only ever run it on windows, and I've never noticed a problem on AMD/Intel specifically. I know there are days when it is just plain slow...

      So what's wrong with the good old B.n then?

      No private ladders, no permanent private rooms, lots of smeghead kiddies who like to ruin the game for everyone else... I don't care how hard Blizzard tries, they will NEVER police it as well as a private server.

      Not trying to flamebait, I meanthe question honestly

      I know, or I wouldn't have taken the time to reply to you. :-) If you want to play SC sometime on a private server to find out what it's like, email me @ questingknightfig at hotmail dot com.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  75. Great news! by Vanguarde · · Score: 1

    This is excellent news! I have been waiting for a new game set in the StarCraft universe for 2 years. Now loyal fans can finally go back to it! Any true gamer has all the systems and a computer, so I am all set. If it comes out on X-Box, Gamecube, Playstation 2, whatever, I will get the best version. I am going to go play some emulated Rock and Roll Racing to celebrate! Ciao

    --
    Pay no attention to the man behind the curtian!
  76. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by noims · · Score: 2, Informative

    From the looks of releases such as the ign review, it really does look like it's real Starcraft. The characters and vehicles are all from Starcraft, haivng all the Starcraft abilities (eg. Yamoto and seige tank strikes, vulture bikes). Also, the personalities and for the most part voices look like they are straight out of the original.

    Taking just the Ghost herself, her abilities inclue ALL the ghost's abilities from the game including lock-down, the shotgun, and the ability to call in a primed nuclear strike. Yes, she has more abilities/weapons, but without these the options and tactics would severely limited.

    Add to this the history of the Starcraft universe, and what looks to be an appropriate story tying in the large-scale battle background, I don't see how much more Starcraft you can get.

    I personally don't really do console games, but this looks about as promising as it gets at this stage.

    Looks to me like they've done a good job so far.

    Noims.

    --
    This is not the greatest sig in the world. This is just a tribute.
  77. This isn't anything new... by Akardam · · Score: 3, Informative


    [root@mike pts/1 root]# whois starcraft2.com
    *snip*
    Domain Name: STARCRAFT2.COM

    Created on..............: Fri, Sep 24, 1999
    Expires on..............: Wed, Sep 24, 2003


    Blizzard's had this name for over two years. That's pretty standard practice, to grab domains you think you might use.

    1. Re:This isn't anything new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good job... workin' under root. You are too smart.

  78. Oops... by Wes+Janson · · Score: 1

    ...Blizzard did it again. Anyone else notice the Brittany Spears resemblence to the main character?... Unleash the conspiracy theories..

  79. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by cicatrix1 · · Score: 2

    No one ever said it wasn't starcraft. It's a game in the starcraft universe for sure. But it's not "Starcraft 2", which by all accounts should and WILL be another RTS. It's just too soon for them to release another RTS to compete with WC3.

    --

    I know more than you drink.
  80. Wide Screen Format? by waxcrash · · Score: 1

    The screen shots on the blizzard site look like they are in a wide screen format. Does this mean it will play nice with a 16x9 HDTV?

  81. Gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does a HTML tag have a sexuality exactly?

    Also, could you link to diagrams?

    1. Re:Gay? by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      Also, could you link to diagrams?

      Sicko HTML voyeur... You need counseling!

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  82. Console? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who saw "Console" and thought a game for BaSH?

  83. Look at the screenshots.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    In certain shots it looks uncannily like MGS - complete with radar. Check this out..

    Is that Snake climbing down a ladder?

    You know, if it just had two equipment slots on the right that you'd change with the console buttons... oh wait, it has those.

    I guess all it needs is an alert mode on the radar ;)

  84. Doh! Exterminator, not doctor! by Nutrimentia · · Score: 1

    Starcraft Ghost: *Did somebody call for an exterminator?*

    I should have known better than to try to fire off a witty comment. There's no way I'd ever be able to execute.

  85. Pretty, but... by Bloodrage · · Score: 1

    Still waiting for the Diablo 2 1.10 patch.

    Alas I was hoping they would be on to it with the release of WCIII, but no, now they get distracted with some other project.

    More Rune Items!

    --
    i am endorsed for the carrying of dangerous goods, please be giving me your depleted uranium
  86. Not Really Slashdoted... by BlackGriffen · · Score: 2

    Their servers (and ign's) have been busy all night. I couldn't get www.blizzard.com to load for an hour after the announcement (to see what it was), and that was before there was any kind of slashdot effect.

    I imagine that the slashdot effect turned what was already a major server rape in to an all out gang rape.

    www.warcraftiii.net was pretty bad, too. Pretty much anything affiliated with Blizzard was hit pretty hard tonight.

    BlackGriffen

  87. There are console gamers out there.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not everyone wants a PC game i'm quite happy that they are making a console game. I use my PC^H^HMac for work and play games on my consoles.

  88. Not Very Original... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So... this is Blizzard's version of Mullet^H^H^H^H^H^HMetal Gear Solid? Sorry Valenti, Konami beat you too it.

  89. I won't buy... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 3, Troll

    Maybe when they stop trying to kill the bnetd project I'll consider buying from them again.

    I can't help it. I just have a hard time giving my money to a company that is trying to kill a great open source project by using the DMCA.

    So until they stop what they're doing to the bnetd group, I say fuck 'em!

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    1. Re:I won't buy... by thunderbee · · Score: 1

      Anyway, their games suck. Warcraft 3 is still less playable and has way fewer features than Total Annihilation. They have not improved since Warcraft2 (ok, the GFX got better. It's a friggin game, not a movie. We want to play, not watch). Starcraft sucked big time after playing TA. Few units, little control, small screen resolution. Bah.

      --
      In my opinion, Scientology is a cult you should avoid.
    2. Re:I won't buy... by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      There's nothing "great" about this project. Its just a way that allows other unscrupulous folks to interfere and interact with Blizzards IP in a way that they have not authorized. And while you may not like the DMCA, it is the law and must be obeyed. Perhaps the next time someone decides to make an add on for a video game or any existing piece of commercial software they will more astutely analyze the situation to make sure they aren't running afowl of any copyrights or tresspassing on anyone's IP.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    3. Re:I won't buy... by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1

      I have both TA and SC. I honestly like SC better, it feels more polished and balanced. The sequential commands/waypoints definitely worked better in TA though.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    4. Re:I won't buy... by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      And while you may not like the DMCA, it is the law and must be obeyed.

      Bnetd does NOT violate the DMCA since it's priamry purpose is not circumvention. In fact, Blizzard has dropped all mention of it from their suit, IIRC.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    5. Re:I won't buy... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

      "There's nothing "great" about this project."

      I disagree. The bnetd server allows friends to connect and play. You can never tell with the Blizzards server.

      "Its just a way that allows other unscrupulous folks to interfere and interact with Blizzards IP in a way that they have not authorized."

      The folks who developed bnetd are not "unscrupulous" and the software that they developed in no way interferes with Blizzard's IP. Further, while Blizzard has cliamed DMCA violations most agree that their argument is weak to nonexistant.

      "Perhaps the next time someone decides to make an add on for a video game or any existing piece of commercial software they will more astutely analyze the situation to make sure they aren't running afowl of any copyrights or tresspassing on anyone's IP."

      This software isn't an addon and it in no way runs afowl of any copyright law. It it entirely new code not owned in any way by Buzzard software. Does it word with Blizzard's software? Yes. Are may word processors capable of loading Microsoft Word files? Yes. Should we go after them as well?

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  90. Any idea WHICH CONSOLE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Judging from the graphics, it could be X-box.

    X-box...

  91. u know what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuk blizzard

  92. fleh by glwtta · · Score: 2
    one of those concepts that sounds really cool, for about 15 minutes... oh and console only (I won't be surprised if we hear that it's going to be on one console only, fairly soon)

    that and WC3 is beginning to suck only two days after I bought it... not a good Blizzard week all around.

    Just registering my disgust on the internet.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  93. Funny MS Ad by GigsVT · · Score: 1

    Yeah yeah, offtopic, mod me down, but the intersitial ad under the story was from MS...

    "Get Microsoft behind your business"

    Is that so they can more easily fuck you in the ass?

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    1. Re:Funny MS Ad by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod you up.

  94. It's a KeepAlive by X86Daddy · · Score: 1

    Duke Nukem Forever is taking well,... forever, but in the mean-time they released a fully 3-D rendered Duke game, Duke Nukem: Manhattan Project. This game featured the physics and side-scroller play of the first Duke games, but featured killer 3D that beat Duke Nukem 3D's sprites and 2.5D engine.

    A) It was fun for those of us who still enjoy and get nostalgic about those good old fashioned side-scrollers.

    B) It keeps the buzz over the game alive and kicking, so the fan base doesn't forget the excitement. Think about a movie you loved as a kid, but by the time a sequel came out, you just weren't as jazzed anymore. Doom still holds a special place in my heart, but might not impress me much in 5 years. ;-)

    Unfortunately, if a lot of the StarCraft fanbase is like myself, they won't have the right console, or a console at all, and will continue waiting for PC ports or the real sequel...

  95. I anxiously await the best(Gamecube) version by dolphin558 · · Score: 1

    late 2003 is a long time but with Mario, Star Fox, Metroid, and Zelda to keep me busy I think I can wait.

  96. Starcraft: Ghost IM Chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    geekroot: starcraft: ghost is going to be totally homosexual
    Jungalero: That's a long title.
    Jungalero: Oh, wait...
    geekroot: hahahahahahaha
    Jungalero: That is probably the funniest thing I've said all week.
    Jungalero: Call the papers.

  97. X-Com tried this... by Trepidity · · Score: 2

    Anyone remember the X-Com first-person shooter? It basically had nothing in common gameplay-wise with the highly successful X-Com games; it was just an FPS in vaguely the same setting taking advantage of the X-Com name. It was not very successful.

    My tentative prediction is that Starcraft: Ghost will fare similarly.

    1. Re:X-Com tried this... by Niahak · · Score: 1

      The only difference is, this time the company has a larger following... From what I've heard, X-Com Apoc (and UFO, probably put together) sold a LOT less than 6 million copies. If Blizzard gets, say, a 5% "return rate" for Starcraft: Ghost, that's 300,000 copies sold. That's quite a bit... I've barely heard of X-Com: Enforcer... which, I'd imagine, is evidence it wasn't very good. In any case, Blizzard knows how to make action games. Rock 'n Roll Racing was one of my favorites. Too bad I never bought it.

  98. Yeah, only from Nintendo by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Nintendo put out a lot more "risky" games then most companies.

    Pikmin and Animal Crossing are Nintendo brand titles. Are there any "risky" licensed titles for GameCube?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  99. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by IsoRashi · · Score: 1

    If It's good (which I do hope. I've always supported Blizzard), I guess I'll have to buy a console.

    I can't help but imagine that the sales for this game will be heavy, as more people own consoles than PCs (for gaming). Also, I bet Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are paying Blizzard a heap of cash to have the game on consoles in general and their consoles specifically. Sigh. Oh well, this one's not for me I guess.

    --
    This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
  100. *IF* it's out for GBA, it's out for Linux and Doze by yerricde · · Score: 2

    Besides, it's being developed for MULTIPLE PLATFORMS.

    By "multiple console platforms", do they mean "multiple DVD/miniDVD based console platforms, that is, only for PlayStation 2, Xbox, and GameCube" or do they include Game Boy Advance? Because if it's available on GBA, it's available on Windows and Linux: just buy the cartridge, plug it into your Visoly linker, and run it in VisualBoyAdvance.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  101. Re: not what I got out of it by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, the insistence that this isn't "Starcraft 2" should be a strong clue that PC gamers aren't really missing out on "the next big thing" from Blizzard. This sounds much more like a completely different game, trying to cash in on the popularity of the Starcraft name.

    If you were laughing before at the suggestion that the PC game market would dry up with the new generation of consoles, keep on laughing. Unreal Tournament 2003 will be out for the PC before XBox or PS2 has it. Starcraft 2 is still slated to be on the PC first, from every indication they've given.

  102. It's hard to find a publisher on DVD consoles by yerricde · · Score: 2

    If you take that into account, there is no reason not to do a Console game.

    Except that you can't find a publisher. This late in the game, if you're developing for a DVD/miniDVD console system, you need to find a publisher to take your title even before you start developing your game, so that you can have access to development hardware.

    The GBA, on the other hand, is pretty much wide open by now.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:It's hard to find a publisher on DVD consoles by wheany · · Score: 1

      This is Blizzard. Do you think they haven't had development hardware from day one?

      What do you think Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft said? "Blizzard? Nope, never heard of them. What games have they made?"

    2. Re:It's hard to find a publisher on DVD consoles by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Their name is known because of the huge sales and immense fanbase of their *PC* games.

    3. Re:It's hard to find a publisher on DVD consoles by wheany · · Score: 1

      Your point being...?

  103. Ok, was i the only one ... by Niadh · · Score: 1

    to see "Starcraft" and "console only" and think of some half mix between a MUD and bad ascii art starcraft units?

    Game: You NEW level one probe was just producted!
    You: Command Probe 34 to Mine A11
    Game: Probe 34 has now benn sent to mine map coords A11 and will arrive in 13 seconds.
    Game: We have detected enemy troop movement in area e15, Press A to zoom to, B to zoom to unit being attacked or C for a general overview.
    You: C
    Game:
    a: ..........P.P..PPM
    b: ...BB..BM.P......P
    c: ..BG..............
    d: ..ZZZ....Z........
    e: ..BC..*..E.E.E....
    f: BCBC*....eE.EE....

    1. Re:Ok, was i the only one ... by drizuid · · Score: 1

      to be honest, the first thing i thought of was a mud based game when i read console, which is why i had to look real quick at the blizzard site :)

  104. Difference between Russia and Japan by yerricde · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Your comment uses the poetic device of parallelism to equate video game production in Russia with video game production in Japan. The difference here is that the North American console gaming population is much more familiar with Japanese video game culture than with Russian video game culture (excluding one particular Russian game).

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  105. Here's an idea, Blizzard. by Catnapster · · Score: 1

    Instead of trying to go for the UT-type play, why not work with Capcom on a Resident Evil kind of game? Since Capcom's busily catching the Gamecube up to the PS2 for RE, I'm sure they'd be happy to do a game for PS2.

    Zerg can be freakier than zombies (maybe I read the manual wrong, but don't Hydralisks open their chests and shoot spikes out of their ribs?), and the Protoss aren't exactly cuddly, either.

    And whenever Blizzard chooses to make StarCraft II, they'll have to do it right - almost every RTS these days is compared to either Age of Empires II, or StarCraft. In fact, I feel sorry for Blizzard, because StarCraft II will probably have to be perfect to live up to most gamers' expectations.

    --
    The world can be wrong today for once.
  106. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by Guitarzan · · Score: 1

    I'd guess Nintendo isn't paying them a dime, but that's just a guess.

  107. Doom Advance by yerricde · · Score: 2

    After all the Doom and Duke Nukem versions were just flat out pathetic.

    Don't you disrespect Doom Advance. Even though it runs in 120x120 resolution, it preserves almost everything that was good about Doom for PC, and a GBA is much lighter (i'm talking mass not brightness), provides more battery power per charge (even with the Pelican cover/light turned on), and costs a lot less than a typical used late-486 laptop. And you don't have to play on a steenkin keyboard.

    I'll agree that Duke Nukem 64 by 2D Realms was no fun (having to walk through a wall to beat the early "prison" level smacks of trolling for 1-900 hint line revenue), especially when put up against Rare's Goldeneye.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  108. late 2003? yea right Blizzard, console my ass... by ph1nn · · Score: 0

    Late 2003? Blizzard has to realize something here... They are making a CONSOLE game, they dont have the opertunity to delay games 1000 million times and release them "when they are done". Reminds me of that PS9 comercial when PS2 was coming out that was set all in the future, they should have showed the person playing this game :P

  109. Halo Prime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all how many people ran out and bought an X-box after seeing HALO

    And how many will buy a LameCube after seeing Halo Starring Samus Aran?

  110. Oh look! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another sequel!

    YYYAAAAWWWWWNNNNNNN

    One original game. ONE! ANYWHERE IN THE INDUSTRY!?! ANYWHERE?????

  111. I'm a dick by BollocksToThis · · Score: 1

    I own a PS2 and a Dreamcast, yet when I read:

    Note that this game will be console-only

    My first thought was "Cool! A text mode game!".
    I maintained this foolishness, even trying to figure out how they could make a first person 3D game in 80x25. I am ashamed.

    --
    This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
  112. $ MMORPGs $ are $ not $ for $ kids $ by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Look at the screenshots and imagine how immersive and beautiful it will be.

    Look at the FAQ and imagine how expensive it will be, alienating many Blizzard fans who buy games with an allowance from their parents because they aren't yet old enough to circumvent somewhat oppressive child labor laws. Not only will it cost $60 for the software plus more for service^W expansion packs, it looks like at least $10 per month for an account.

    It gets even worse for Final Fantasy XI, which (in addition to a PS2) effectively requires the Linux Kit (for the hard drive and broadband adapter), plus the game, plus a subscription for each character. Imagine paying real money for a Phoenix Down to revive your characters.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  113. Blizzard is more closed than id by yerricde · · Score: 1

    i wonder if anyone has ever thought about using starcraft to represent sysadmin things like people have done with doom.

    I'd bet people have, but Blizzard's parent Vivendi Universal is much more closed about its older game engines than id Software is.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  114. Re:Sell outs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a fucktard.

  115. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    My friend just got that. We used to rent it years ago and spent the time since then looking to buy it. It was probably a 3 year project to find the actual cartridge at a good price (not a full time search though). I loved that game.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  116. Power On, Dude by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 2
    The insane amount of shit I've taken from other people when I tell them about why I'm not buying (or playing) Blizzard products is just insane. Hold the line, we are not their goddamned slaves...


    In my book, Blizzard is no better than the Scientologists, in that both breed cults of ill-manner folk, and then get their dander up when anyone dissents.
    -ChaoticCoyote
    --
    [o]_O
    1. Re:Power On, Dude by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      You might get that amount of "flak" because its just hard for most people to understand why anyone should boycott or even harbor ill feelings towards a company that is legally defending its products which are its IP. Add to that the seeming sillyness of boycotting a video game company for doing just that and well maybe you understand a little better now.

      You're not expected to be their slave its just the company's products are so good in an industry where so many others suck, to purposefully deny yourself the opportunity to play their games seems a bit like engaging in a sort of BDSM in the game playing world.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    2. Re:Power On, Dude by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      a company that is legally defending its products which are its IP.

      The bnetd software is legal under the DMCA and all other laws that I know of, since its primary function is not to circumvent copy protection techniques.

      What's really happening here is that Blizzard is trying to use monetary backing to drive someone under, as is common in supposed IP cases. The accusations are just a smokescreen to cover up the real damage they are trying to cause: legal costs.

      The real thing they are accomplishing is smacking the community of people who love their game in the face, and that is just SAD.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  117. Nintendo can only develop by Xenex · · Score: 1

    Yes, they are two first party titles. Anything Nintendo develops is going to be a first party title.

    I was rebutting an attack against Nintendo's lack "risky" games, not the games others develop for the system.

    Nintendo can't choose what their third parties develop. If third parties keep creating out 'boring' games, it's hardly Nintendo's fault.

    1. Re:Nintendo can only develop by EvlG · · Score: 2

      "Nintendo can't choose what their third parties develop. If third parties keep creating out 'boring' games, it's hardly Nintendo's fault."

      Oh yes they can.

      They can refuse to sell development hardware to a company if they don't like the title.

      And they can refuse to license it, if they don't like the title.

      In practice, this isn't done all that much, but make no mistake about it, a console manufacturer VERY MUCH controls the software on the console.

    2. Re:Nintendo can only develop by Xenex · · Score: 1

      Yes, that is undoubtably true.

      However, Nintendo can hardly say "this game is not new, not totally different, not something creative, so we're not releaing it". Well, they can: they called it "The Dream Team" and the console "the Nintendo 64".

      We all know how good third party support was for it, and how successful it was...

  118. Re:*IF* it's out for GBA, it's out for Linux and D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If was also developed for the GBA it would probably completely different from the other versions, so who cares?

  119. adventure by ndogg · · Score: 1

    Yeah! It's the return of text-based games!

    Oh, that kind of console game...

    --
    // file: mice.h
    #include "frickin_lasers.h"
  120. Re: not what I got out of it by dswensen · · Score: 2

    I hope you're right. And that is a good point -- if they are continuing the Starcraft license, there may be hope for a SC2 on the PC at some point in the future.

    And yes, I am definitely looking forward to UT 2003 on the PC. (I can't understand how anyone can play a FPS on a console. I've tried it, and it's just alien to me.)

  121. Console Game? by Purzel · · Score: 1

    Back to the roots? How does it look like?

    An enemy is approaching at 1453, 345
    # attack enemy(1435, 345) with rocket launcher

    Enemy not dead yet.
    #

    I am not sure i want this game.

  122. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by TheCyko1 · · Score: 1

    However I do question how much it will be starcraft and how much it will be star_based_game_set_in_space_with_aliens_and_human _ghost_character.

    Well, the IGN preview should have your answer, but here's a copy and paste of the actual paragraph that answers your "question" if you don't wanna read the whole article.

    While Nihilistic is doing most of the coding and artwork on the project, the collaborative work on the game between Blizzard and Nihilistic sounds to be pretty well balanced. And if you're worried about Nihilistic keeping true to StarCraft, you shouldn't be. As Bill told us, "one of things that's really nice about [the partnership between Blizzard and Nihilistic] is Rob Huebner, one of the guys that started [Nihilistic], used to work for us. He actually worked on StarCraft, so they are very much into, and very knowledgeable of the way that we like to work on things, the amount of time we take, the amount of iterations we demand, and those kind of things."

    And there's the link to the actual page of where i got that from:
    http://ps2.ign.com/articles/371/371543p4.ht ml

    (sorry bout the poor format, i'm not too good with html)

    --
    This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
  123. Why it wasn't Starcraft 2 by EvlG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Come on guys, it's not that hard.

    Warcraft 3 is the fastest selling PC game of all time. It continues to top the charts since its release. In fact, this week is the first time it wasn't #1.

    With those kinds of numbers, its obvious Blizzard will do an expansion for it - its easy money!

    Now imagine they announced Starcraft 2 would be out next year. That would cannibalize sales of Warcraft 3, and kill any opportunity of an expansion. Everyone would be waiting for Starcraft 2 instead.

    This is why they didn't announce Starcraft 2 today. In fact, the PR guys confirmed several days ago that Starcraft 2 isn't even in development - they are focused on making as much as they can from Warcraft 3 right now.

    Who knows what will come after the Warcraft III expansion - something with Diablo? Something new? But I don't think we will see Starcraft 2 for at least 3 years.

    1. Re:Why it wasn't Starcraft 2 by fluor2 · · Score: 1

      I think you are correct with this statement. Please mod EvlG's post up ppl! :-)

    2. Re:Why it wasn't Starcraft 2 by apt142 · · Score: 1

      Quite Frankly, I don't see this as a problem. The timing between releases is fine with me. I got a good, long play out of Starcraft from the time it was developed to the time Warcraft 3 came out.

      And in all that period of time, it was popular and very well played. You could, at most any time, find bnet loaded with people ready to play. It was relaxing to have a favorite that wasn't just immediately discarded for the "Next Best Thing" like so many other games.

    3. Re:Why it wasn't Starcraft 2 by harborpirate · · Score: 1

      Thats three Blizzard years(TM). Expect to see Starcraft 2 in 9 "regular years".

      --
      // harborpirate
      // Slashbots off the starboard bow!
  124. I mean, yea.. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    Or maybe you're forgetting Rock'n'Roll Racing, done by our good friends at Blizzard a decade ago.

    How about The Lost Vikings?

    Blizzard was doing console gaming long before they were a big PC name.

    "Rock N' Roll Racing may very well be my favorite racing game of all time.
    Created in 1993 by Silicon and Synapse (the guys who also made Lost Vikings
    1 & 2 for the SNES, and who turned out to be Blizzard Entertainment, makers
    of Warcraft I, II, & III, Diablo I & II, and Starcraft for PC),
    "

    Console gaming has always been the arena of true gaming, and will always be so because a dedicated machine engineered to game will always have greater market penetration than a general purpose machine which can play games.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:I mean, yea.. by leadfoot · · Score: 1

      So, CounterStrike isn't a "True" Game?

      --
      "We're gonna need a bigger boat"
    2. Re:I mean, yea.. by PierceLabs · · Score: 1

      So my PC really isn't more powerful than my XBox despite having far more capable hardware?

  125. It's a shame, really. by Inoshiro · · Score: 4, Funny

    You could've made +5 if you'd said:
    "Slashdot: News for Zergs. Stuff that mutates."

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:It's a shame, really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't even rhyme with the original. I think you were moderated to +5 just to prove your point.

  126. Re:If you wonder if Starcraft if 3D can be cool... by jx100 · · Score: 1

    So they got ahold of Voyager's Warp Reactor. So what?

  127. Oh that console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought for a second they're doing something I could play on my text-console, too bad.

  128. Advertising Gimmick by C64 · · Score: 1

    Apparently, Blizzard's planning on gaining more sales by having their female lead not wear any pants. Brilliant!

    It's funny. Laugh.

  129. Re: Nintendo, Sony AND Microsoft? by silvaran · · Score: 2

    Since you mention the three major players, I just hope the rights to console publishing don't get bought out by any particular company. I'd hate to have yet another reason to buy an X-Box, and the target audience for the GameCube just doesn't cut it. It's nice that they're targeting the console from the get-go on this game, as many PC games ported to consoles have been just a shadow to their PC counterparts (with the exception of many of EA's games--including NFS--which have separate development teams for console and PC).

  130. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by adamjaskie · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Screenshots? How do you get screenshots from a console game? Im glad people are finally going back to console games. Now I wont even need to install X to play games!!

    --
    /usr/games/fortune
  131. No for once by QQ2 · · Score: 1
    Slashdot: News for Zergs. Stuff that matters.
    Just this once I think that the comment:

    News for Zergs. Stuff that splatters

    truly is more appropriate

  132. I forget by Gekko · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Is this not the 100,000,000,000 time someone has said that? It's not funny. Never has been. Stop karma whoring.

    As the AC points out nicely it's not a single point of view. Secondly, some of us can seperate art and politics. I can hate a company's tactics and yet still like what the produce. I am not a single state machine.

    --
    I mod down any one who says "I'm sure I will get modded down for this"
  133. Re:If you wonder if Starcraft if 3D can be cool... by JFMulder · · Score: 2

    I think you're missing something.... the awesome protoss in 3D. If you are a Starcraft fan and prefer the Protoss, you can't expect me to believe that you didn't drool all over your keyboard.

  134. I will never buy another Blizzard Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's why.

    1. No Linux ports
    2. Warcraft runs too choppy to be playable on my 350MHz + Voodoo3 2000
    3. my 800MHz + RiVa TNT it WILL NOT RUN AT ALL!
    4. too expensive for something that is buggy.
    5. battlenet people are morons, the other players are assholes , nosupport channels folks are never there.
    6. I am deleting all my win boxes.
    7. The pirated DEMO runs better than the STORE BOUGHT GAME!
    8 CD has to be in the TRAY! wtf!

    I am REAL ANGRY about it not running on the 800MHz.

  135. Milk that cow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about coming with something new for a change?

  136. What all happened... by FortKnox · · Score: 2

    I wrote a bunch about it in my journal. Basically, its started off as a countdown timer on the blizzard site without any background (started at 10hours, I recall).
    Each hour, during odd times, the clock flashed green for a second. People took down the time, noticed all numbers were between 0-25. They translated it to letters, then turned it around, and it made words that terran ghosts said when you clicked on them in starcraft ("Somebody call for an exterminator", etc...).
    Each hour, the picture got more in focus.
    Eventually, people started understanding that it had something to do with starcraft, so it moved to StarCraft2.com.

    Now, everyone started looking at the 'fading in' picture, and trying to determine what it would be (there were two popular ideas, one was kerrigan, queen of the zerg, the other was a protoss-zerg hybrid).

    Eventually, the time came up, found out it was a console shooter, and a million fans turned livid with the disappointment that SC2 still isn't even a thought at blizzard (yeah, they say they are gonna revisit it, but they've said that for YEARS).

    It really puzzels me that Blizzard is putting it off. StarCraft is STILL one of the most popular online RTS's. Its not like they are still making money on SC anymore.
    Why not just make a second one off the WC3 engine???

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  137. somethingawful.com by naChoZ · · Score: 3, Funny
    Does anyone follow this site?

    They poked fun at Blizzard a few months ago.

    Excerpt:

    Warcraft I: Play as humans fighting the Orcs, or fight as Orcs playing the humans, or as a human playing the humans playing the Orcs fighting the humans. Either way it will just end up with you building a really long highway until your serial connection gets yanked out by your college roommate's ugly girlfriend.
    Diablo I: Point and click your way through a world full of monsters... monsters that want to KILL YOU but you must KILL THEM FIRST! Although your character's strength, intelligence, and dexterity stats will increase based on the number of times you repeatedly smash the left mouse button, you will personally experience a decrease in your own strength, intelligence, and hygiene stats based on the number of hours you play.
    Starcraft: It's not at all like Warcraft in space! It's something different! For example, can you perform peon rushes in Warcraft? Yeah, that's what I thought! Also there are no trees or lumber to harvest in space because that would just be silly. Make sure you have a lot of Space Supply Barns because the only way to colonize small square sections of the galaxy is by constructing countless Space Supply Barns. In addition to playing as humans, you can either choose to play as the Zerg (gross aliens) or the Protoss (Egyptian poop-shaped guys who somehow launched themselves into space).
    Warcraft II: This game is completely different from Warcraft I, except in the regard that it is exactly the same (without the road-building part). I think maybe the trees and goldmines look more realistic, but I don't remember. Oh, and there are turtle submarines.
    Diablo II: Point and click your way through a world full of NEW monsters... NEW monsters that want to KILL YOU but you must KILL THEM FIRST! There are also a bunch of new character classes such as the Amazon, Barbarian, Necromancer, Neuromancer, Hamstermancer, and Haberdasher.
    --
    "I can be self-referential if I want to," said Tom, swiftly.
    1. Re:somethingawful.com by The+J+Kid · · Score: 1

      Actually the best part of the page is:
      ----------------------

      Since today's update deals with the wide and wacky world of Warcraft, I think it's only appropriate that we observe some of the finest fan fiction that the Warcraft community has to offer, namely "none." However, there are such gems as "Warcraft Meets Half-Life," an epic tale detailing the saga of Dr. Gordon Freeman versus the Orcs. What a fabulous idea!

      Then suddenly something jumped out of the bushes. Something big. It landed behind Ian.

      "What the fu...!" He didn't finish his sentence as the big thing drew an axe and cut off his arm. Ian screamed in agony and fell to the ground. His hand was clutching to what was left of his left arm.

      "Shit!" Jean drew her gun as well. Both her and Gordon started shooting.

      Apparently the big thing was surprised by the gunfire and screamed something in a strange language. He had already got two bullets both of his legs and three in his arms but his was still standing. The thing raised its axe again.

      "RUN!" Jean screamed. They did so.

      Oh no! Will Dr. Gordon Freeman and crew be able to fend off the evil Orc army and be able to do whatever the fuck they were supposed to do? Will the Orcs build a lumber mill? Will Dr. Gordon Freeman build a lumber mill? Who will build a lumber mill? Will I build a lumber mill? Nobody knows, but perhaps the answer lies in EROTIC Warcraft fan fiction! Quick, somebody out there write a novel about Fruity Elf gangbangs and send me the link to your Geocities page at once!
      --------------

      --
      Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
  138. Re:heres the FAQ in case the page is still hammere by BigJimSlade · · Score: 2

    We wanted to use Blizzard's name and a great game title to enter into the console market.

    I'm not super excited about this title, but if you knew anything about the last generation of consoles you would know that Warcraft II and Diablo came out on a number of platforms, including the PSOne. This is not Blizzard's first console game at all.

  139. Except... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that Metroid Prime had been in development since before Microsoft had even bought Bungie. So when development of Metroid Prime began, Nintendo didn't even have a need for a Halo killer.

    They have one now though. It'll be like Halo, without the "repeat the whole game backwards" bit.

  140. Re:Sell outs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ahh, speaking of linux fucktards, there's one now

  141. Feel justified in buying the game! by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 2

    Why did they have to release bnetd to the general public then? They could have developed it and kept it to themselves for their own use only. That way Vivendi would have never had known and there wouldn't be this big legal matter to deal with.

    And it doesn't really matter if they were trying to profit from it or not. Even for purely altruistic uses you can't just go around screwing around with a company's copywrited and patented IP as if it were your own.

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    1. Re:Feel justified in buying the game! by anzha · · Score: 2

      They released it to the public because they thought that others might be having the exact same problem we were: Battle.net had (still has at times) serious connection problems.

      Besides, Blizzard was very aware of the development of bnetd for years .Besides, there was a precident set with WC2 that Blizzard did not follow up on: WC2 had a piece of software written around that time to allow people to play online instead of just over IPX. Blizzard certainly did NOT react then to try to stamp that out...

      It is only because someone forked bnetd to make their own that supported a pirated copy of the WC3 beta. The original crew did not, afaik, support this.

      --
      Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
    2. Re:Feel justified in buying the game! by acceleriter · · Score: 2

      Geez. Is Vivendi paying you to astroturf for them or what? I've never seen so many IP toady posts in one thread here. If you are astroturfing, it might be a bit more believable to the hoi polloi if you change IDs now and then.

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

    3. Re:Feel justified in buying the game! by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      IP toady posts? I post from two different places. My house and my job. I always use the same ID because its the only one I have. Are you angry that I am not complying with the Slashdot groupthink that all IP laws are bad and that "Information Must Be Free"? If so I am sorry but I will not conform my views to make you happy.

      I like the DMCA and thats that!

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    4. Re:Feel justified in buying the game! by acceleriter · · Score: 1

      OK, so you're not astroturfing, but trolling. That, I understand.

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

  142. Re:Blizzard will play! by salemnic · · Score: 1

    Sucks to be you, Starcraft Hater!

    -Well, you did ask for it!

  143. I was really worried... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2
    that Blizzard would forget about the female character with impossibly large breasts.

    Thankfully my fears have been allayed.

  144. No PC version by tmark · · Score: 2

    Note that this game will be console-only,

    Big deal. After two stinkers (Diablo II and Warcraft 3) in a row for which I ran to the store on the first day they were available, and paid dearly for, I am hardly holding my breath for the next Blizzard release.

    They had my brand loyalty with Warcraft I/II and Diablo, and their associated expansion panks. They lost it with Diablo II and Warcraft 3. Here's hoping that Ensemble Studios doesn't let me down with the new Age of Mythology, or I don't know where my gaming dollars will go.

    1. Re:No PC version by Quinn · · Score: 1

      Diablo II is one of the most successful games of all time. Personally, I consider it an almost perfect game-as-drug. Quick play, a variety of rewards, pure hack/slashing satisfaction. For its genre (which isn't RPG), I'd call it the very best.

      In any case, it's no "stinker" in any objective sense.

      --
      #19845
  145. A quesiton for you by beleg777 · · Score: 2

    Is it possible for a person to get into console programming without a company or large amounts of money? I assume there are necessary devolopment packages, and maybe hardware. Basically, I'm interested in getting my hands on such things, and want to know if it's realistic.

    --

    Science may someday discover what faith has always known.
    1. Re:A quesiton for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the PSX2, not really. You need a Tool which costs something like 15000 dollars and a contract of some sort with Sony. XBox is basically DirectX 8, so you can get a PC and Visual C++ and make something that will convince people to hire you. With GameCube, I have no idea.

      I'm sure there exist unofficial kits for these, but I don't know anything about them.

  146. Tomb Raider anyone? by theeds · · Score: 1

    This has that lara croft feel. Good looking female heroine, 3rd person action, multitude of weapons, 3d environment... makes you wonder.

  147. Console - pc? by malloci · · Score: 1

    Many game vendors do this, hopefully blizzard will/can be pursuaded to do the same thing? I would think any company would want to maximize it's profit on such an endeavor, and as such, leaving out such a huge demographic would be just plain stupidity especially considering the fact that their original fan base for this series is pc based.

  148. WC3 Supply limits by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
    Every time I build up to full food capacity and run my little band (you can't rightly call anything in warcraft III an army, or even a squad) up against their little band, and watch my computer try to keep up, I think back to having dozens of soldiers and tanks running down scores of zerg and I weep

    I agree, if it wasn't for the gimpy limit on the max units, WC3 would have been much better. As it is, it all revolves around the hero character. If they'd have just left the supply cap high and left "upkeep" out of it, it would have been decent. Unfortuantely, that crap killed the game even though they had some nice new features, like auto-spellcasting.

    --
    Murphy was an optimist.
    1. Re:WC3 Supply limits by wuice · · Score: 1

      Of course, because it's all 3d and the models are all so high-polygon, most computers can't even handle the small amount of troops already. I have to imagine that's why the caps are in place.

    2. Re:WC3 Supply limits by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      I run a PIII 700, 384MB ram, and a GF3. I've NEVER had a slowdown, even with everything cranked up.

      Still, if that is the reason, I'd rather have 2D graphics and good gameplay than pretty graphics with crappy gameplay.

      Am I alone in this?

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    3. Re:WC3 Supply limits by damiam · · Score: 1
      I run a K6-2 500Mhz, 192MB ram, and a Voodoo 3. I've NEVER gotten it above 15fps, even with all settings set to their lowest possible values.

      However, given what a lot of people have been saying about WC3, maybe I should be glad I'm stuck with Starcraft (which is still a kickass game).

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    4. Re:WC3 Supply limits by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1

      I'd say you are correct, I still like Starcraft better than WC3 by a long shot. WC3 is pretty, but SC is actually a good game.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  149. Good idea by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

    Blizzards always been console friendly, considering they started out developing for the consoles. It's about time they did another console game but I was hoping for a PS2 port of Diablo 2. I really liked the PSone port of Diablo, good game even with same screen multiplayer. I haven't played the PSone port of Warcraft to see how good it was. Blizzaard did do one thing dumb, port Starcraft to the N64, a console without an RTS fanbase (every other console RTS was on the PSone), a mouse , or a link cable. It always annoys me when PD developers ignore the consoles, take Ion Storm for example. They create what is essentially a console RPG/homage to Squaresoft in Anachronox and they DON"T port it to the PS2, a machine with a huge RPG loving fanbase? That's just plain stupid, Anachronox would have sold a lot more copies to the RPG gamers on the PS2 than to the console hating PC gamers.

  150. Ultimate SC:Ghost goal? by jetsfandb · · Score: 1

    Any thoughts on if Blizzard's goal might be to get console players into the world of SC so they will buy and play SC and SC2 (when available) as opposed to getting SC players into consoles?

    --
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, The hands acqui
  151. Huh... by srvivn21 · · Score: 2

    Point proven.

  152. hey NDPTAL85, ... by univeralifepadre · · Score: 1

    ...who the fuck do you work for? you've got pro-dmca posts all over this thread.

    1. Re:hey NDPTAL85, ... by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      I don't even work for a technology company. Is one allowed to have pro-DMCA thoughts on Slashdot without being suspected of working for a content creator?

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  153. how insulting by Magius_AR · · Score: 1
    They are't even porting this new game to PC, and it looks so cool!
    Talk about letting down their PC audience/fans. What a bunch of dicks.
    Games are more fun to run on PC...the graphics are better, the controls are simpler, among other things. I've pissed off everyone is moving to console and leaving PC behind.

    Magius_AR

  154. Re: Nintendo, Sony AND Microsoft? by IsoRashi · · Score: 1

    The faq on Blizzard's website says that it will be a console game only--so they're not planning on a PC port at this time. The also state that the game will be available on multiple platforms. Of course, this could mean just two. I don't think this is going to be an exclusive though, or at least they're claiming for now that it won't be.

    --
    This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
  155. Re:Blizzard will play! by k0rro · · Score: 1

    you are missing the point totally... it dont matter if its lame.. its Starcraft.. man what dont you understand.. Starcraft owns.. and bascially.. this has its name and so it must own too... im gonna be forced to buy a console now.. go SC

  156. I don't know about all that.... by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

    The word "community" might signify a greater amount of people then were actually "slapped in the face" as you put it. I don't think there was more than a few hundred people involved in this entire Bnetd thing. When you add in the number of SINCERELY sympathetic Slashdot posters who will follow thru with an actual boycott that might bump the number up another 100.

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    1. Re:I don't know about all that.... by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
      Well, I'll be the first to admit that the community was divided about this, but most of what I read was by people who cared. Then again, people who didn't care probably didn't care enough to post about it, either.

      I do not know how many people ran the BNETD software, but if it was that few I don't think da BLiz would have bothered with it. :-)

      I'm weak, I'll admit it, I bought WC3. Now I regret it, though, 'cause the game bites and I still need to contribute $50 to the FSGS/bnetd defense fund to even it out.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
  157. SC2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely you mean Soul Calibur 2?

  158. Read a bit harder next time. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    Gaming != game.

    Gaming, as a user experience, is vastly different between PCs and dedicated gaming machines. The experience (general case) is better with consoles, which is why the gaming industry makes more money than Hollywood or the record labels.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  159. Again, read harder. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    Leaving out the technical arguments about working with a fixed platform versus multiple possible platforms, each bringing its own (incomplete) implementation of a standard (see Carmack's own comments about this), and how you can get such things as Doom 3 running on a lil' ol' Xbox:

    Gaming, as a user experience, is vastly different between PCs and dedicated gaming machines. The experience (general case) is better with consoles, which is why the gaming industry makes more money than Hollywood or the record labels.

    I really don't understand how you could've read my description of market penetration as somehow being a way of saying that consoles are "more powerful" than computers. If you'd like to explain how you made the:
    Step 1: consoles have a better market penetration
    Step 2: ???
    Step 3: consoles are more powerful than PCs
    jump, I'd like to hear it so I can warn other people to not follow a similar jump of logic.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  160. OT to dswensen by boskone · · Score: 1

    Big Doc smith fan?

  161. Re:If you wonder if Starcraft if 3D can be cool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This game is gonna be awesome! Imagine walking on the creep, complete with squishy sounds, wierd atmospheric sounds, and reduced speed. You take cover behind a bubbling spawning pool and focus your laser on the huge living building ahead -- the hive. You must keep aiming for 20 seconds. Suddenly you hear chuh-chuh-chuh sound as a line of spikes rip towards you from the left! Say hello to the lurker. Oh, and look, he brought 20 zergling friends, bursting out the ground like zombies in a bad movie.

    Dammit. I'm gonna have to buy a console. This game will be like Halo, with Doom thrown in the mix, and a decent back-story to boot. I'm drooling.

  162. Re:Blizzard will play! by susano_otter · · Score: 1

    Damn your eyes! Now I'll have to get into an inane argument with you!

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  163. emulation will be what we need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He what's the prob ??

    We will always have the xbox emulator.

    as you might now, the xbox is 99% pc.
    it is even possible to CONVERT xbox
    games to windows games !!!!!!
    ( commercial games do not run YET but it's a long
    time until 2003... and 2003 for blizzard is probaly
    2006 for us )

    having a windows executible means running
    the game on maximum performence.

    So i will be playing "xbox starcraft ghost" happily
    on my pc without ANY problem.

  164. Re:Blizzard will play! by DarkZero · · Score: 2

    you are missing the point totally... it dont matter if its lame.. its Starcraft.. man what dont you understand.. Starcraft owns.. and bascially.. this has its name and so it must own too... im gonna be forced to buy a console now.. go SC

    Actually, I understand that perfectly. I also understand that because it is a horribly unoriginal game with some recognizable characters and elements tacked onto it, it will suck about as much as I expect Starfox Adventures to suck.

  165. Not starcraft 2? by 42forty-two42 · · Score: 1

    Then why's it at starcraft2.com?

    1. Re:Not starcraft 2? by 42forty-two42 · · Score: 1

      Oops, meant starcraft2.com

  166. Re:Blizzard will play! by Guspaz · · Score: 1

    I think you're missing the point. While I am indeed upset it is not SC2, that is not to say this won't be a good game. If this game were to be released on the PC, I'd probably purchase it. But 400$ is too much to spend on a single game, seeing as how I'd have to purchase a console and the game. It's been said before... They're making this game for the xbox, a PC port should be trivial.

    Regards, Guspaz.

  167. Re:Blizzard will play! by k0rro · · Score: 1

    aw c'mon give it a chance ... i mean do it for Kerrigan.

  168. Re:Blizzard will play! by susano_otter · · Score: 2

    Well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that very few games by themselves are worth buying a console for. The only way I could justify my PS2 was because I knew of 4 or 5 games I wanted to play on it, I needed a cheap DVD player, and I was reasonably confident that more worthwhile games would be published in the future.

    But I think you must live on some strange, faraway planet, where people tell you that Starcraft:Ghost (or any other game) is worth $400, and where game consoles cost much more money than they do here.

    Come visit Earth, my friend, where the PS2 is $199, and the Gamecube is $149.

    Finally, don't forget that the article is very vague about what platform they're developing for. As others have pointed out, it's likely to be released for one or more next-generation consoles. Blizzard hasn't even come close to committing to the Xbox.

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  169. Re:Blizzard will play! by Guspaz · · Score: 1

    I live in Canada. A PS2 costs 299$ (And a DVD player goes for 120$, so the PS2 would be an overpriced DVD, not a cheap one). An XBox costs 299$ (If you look at the images of Blizzard's presentation, the xbox logo is quite prominent) A GameCube, which due to inferiority I'd not buy anyhow, costs 229$. These are prices quoted (http://futureshop.ca), not made up. I don't see how I can get any closer to "earth".

    Now, do the math. The console is 299$. A console game goes for ~80$. That's 379$. Now add tax, which is 15.025%. The grand total is the tidy sum of 435.95$. You may now remove your foot from your mouth my friend.

    Regards, Guspaz.

  170. Re:Blizzard will play! by susano_otter · · Score: 2

    Well put.

    But I hold fast to my belief that Canda is, in fact, another planet.

    Let me see... that works out to roughly $250, in American dollars (paying American prices, not converting Canadian money). All things being equal, that's not so bad. However, I don't think SC:G is the game to buy a console for. If you've got one already, then SC:G might help the console work off its debt, but obviously we won't know that for a while yet. I hope so, though.

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  171. Re:Blizzard will play! by Guspaz · · Score: 1

    LOL, I often believe that myself...

    No, it's not that bad. But I don't own any consoles, and I already own a computer. Therein lies my problem.

    Regards, Guspaz.

  172. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    Once upon a time, when I was training to be a mathematician, a group of
    us bright young students taking number theory discovered the names of the
    smaller prime numbers.

    2: The Odd Prime --
    It's the only even prime, therefore is odd. QED.
    3: The True Prime --
    Lewis Carroll: "If I tell you 3 times, it's true."
    31: The Arbitrary Prime --
    Determined by unanimous unvote. We needed an arbitrary prime in
    case the prof asked for one, and so had an election. 91 received
    the most votes (well, it *looks* prime) and 3+4i the next most.
    However, 31 was the only candidate to receive none at all.
    41: The Female Prime --
    The polynomial X**2 - X + 41 is
    prime for integer values from 1 to 40.
    43: The Male Prime - they form a prime pair.

    Since the composite numbers are formed from primes, their qualities
    are derived from those primes. So, for instance, the number 6 is "odd
    but true", while the powers of 2 are all extremely odd numbers.

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...