Slashdot Mirror
World of Starcraft? Not So Much
The rumours have been swirling since last night, when MMOG discussion site F13 posted the surprising news that Blizzard plans to make MMOGs of Starcraft and Diablo. Turns out that while the possibility still exists, that's not exactly accurate. The CessPit has some of the slides from Vivendi's presentation, (courtesy of SirBruce). The last of these would seem to show the mere possibility (not confirmation) of expansion into the Massive and console markets for the company's intellectual properties. However, this is coupled with a flat denial by lead designer Rob Pardo: "Nothing in that rumor is true in regards to Blizzard. If I had to guess, there was some confusion between what Vivendi has planned for its game division versus what Blizzard has planned. While Blizzard is owned by Vivendi, their game division operates separately from Blizzard." So, while not out of the question, I find it unlikely we'll be hearing about World of Starcraft any time soon.
"Don't keep me vaiting..."
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
Getting Starcraft Ghost out the door first would seem a priorty. Besides, WOW seems to work so well; whould going into MMO competition with yourself (Blizzard) work?
I'm sorry, but "World of Starcraft" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "World of Warcraft." "Sector of Starcraft?" "Suburb of Starcraft?" See, that's why this game will never happen, no good name for it.
Is the software industry in general prone to rumours, or are games primarily afflicted? It must be hard for a news site, having no confirmations to work from, and instead either being left behind, sticking their neck out, or getting a lucky tip from an insider.
Pssst, I heard that the Star Control sequel will feature Duke Nukem caught in a world of Orcs, blasting his way out in a massive Counterstrike against the enemy. Better still, it will run on Windows Vista when it's released too.
Oh You POS
I want it NOWWWWW. Oh man... would I be a Zerg Hydralisk?... or Maybe a Terran Medic?... ohhhh a Protoss Zealot! Yes, stabby psionic blades for me, please!
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
I am really glad there will be no "world of Diablo". Trying to fit all games into an online model forces them to be basically all versions of the same game (all the same run around-kill-collect-level model of game play). Much of the variety in the single player experience for example can't be carried over into multi-player because it would be too unbalanced (just to name one example).
Philosophy.
... could attract a diffrent crowd. Make the game a little less cartoony, a little darker, and you could have yourself something unique.
Last thing we need is another horde of thirteen-year-old boys running around a virtual playground dressed up as hot female zerg hydralisks.
I was hoping for a Rock 'n' Roll Racing MMOG. And don't you dare tell me to try Auto Assault. I was in beta for it, and I got a few free weeks after it was released. And now I see they're giving the box away for free with a purchase of Guild Wars Factions. I was not impressed at all, and it seems nobody else is, either.
Oh well. Here's hoping for a Lost Vikings MMOG.
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
Just because one game works so well does mean they should start mass producing/converting all their IP into mmorpgs (even if you are blizzard)
I for one will be surprised if no WoSC or WoD appears within a few years. After all, the hardest part of the development is over. To re-use the platform for other games and improve graphics a notch doesn't sound too hard. Both of the worlds (Diablo and StarCraft) have great potential. StarCraft includes many planets, ships and alike while Diablo is basically as endless as WoW is. In other words, costs of developing this project would be far from as significant as developing World of WarCraft, simply because the experience and the technology is already there.
Additionally, I am not too optimistic on a StarCraft II strategy title, mostly because huge parts of the SC team left Blizzard after it was completed. I bet they will release a sequel, but perhaps not as a strategy game type.
If I happen to be wrong, there's only one thing I could think of that would stop World of StarCraft: the fact that it may split Blizzard's market in two pieces instead of doubling it. As for Diablo, this world is actually far too similar to WoW. It's all ancient stuff, wizardry and monsters. So maybe Blizzard wants to stick to what it has done before.
Anyway, selling a game for 50 bucks and then milking its customers on monthly fees is probably Blizzard's new thing. Imagine how much more money they make on WoW than on SC and Diablo.
I would personally want a sequel to StarCraft out sooner than Diablo, while I still remember the superb story that it and Brood War offered.
Do not look
As no one seems to link to the true source:w ow-general&t=8703206&p=1&tmp=1#post8703206
s px?ForumName=wow-general&Author=EnoYls&Cluster=Wow
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=
And if you want to see Rob's post on it:
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread-search.a
Its not what it is, its something else.
Personally, I think that MMO's are draining way too much focus from the other gaming genre's. Right now they're a big cash-cow, which unfortunately makes them more attractive Vs other games.
I'd much rather see a proper Starcraft sequel... full 3d environments, and all the coolness of an in-space RTS that Starcraft introduced. Warcraft III has been fun, but I find that the races tend towards being a bit too linear, especially in terms of special abilities. In Starcraft, the mix was awesome... with zerg being your massive-rush force, protoss being brute-force, terran being in-between, and the technological aspects mixing all three together (protoss carrier rush=massiveness) and all the cool techs such as the arbitor abilities and the nastly little zerg devourer slime. Combined with the strategic elements such as invisibility, scanning, shields, etc... the strategic element of Starcraft far exceeded Warcraft III, and would make for a much more worthy sequel if done right...
But for Aiur's sake, please don't wash all that out with an MMORPG. It works for some things, but it's a good way to absolutely murder good games from other genre's.
If you look at the "World of Warcraft: What is it?" page in the Vivendi presentation there is a graphic with the WOW customers - they seem to have had over 6 billion customers in Q1-2006 (6000 milions). Nice market share, WOW!
I already have enough trouble yelling "We require more Vespene Gas!" when I am short of money in WoW, now I'll have to deal with it for real in WoS.
Given the number of rogues on my server, I think everyone would roll a Protoss Dark Templar - battlefields would look awfully empty!
While it could be interesting to see World of Starcraft, there is still one version of Starcraft that is reaching Duke Nukem status: Starcraft: Ghost.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Seems this rumour was an April Fool joke
Reduce, reuse, cycle
My favorite part from TFA is slide 12 where the graph shows over 6 Billion WoW Customers by Q1 of this year.
*linky*
I'm obviously in the wrong business.
---k--
</stupid>
'World of Starcraft' sounds a little limiting for a space-based adventure game. Like calling your mmorpg bass fishing simulator 'desert strike'.
Ooh... mmorpg bass fishing...
Kevin Fox
Auto Assault is a bit like StarCraft crossed with WoW (I would imagine, never played WoW...). 3 Races, 4 types of characters. If they do make a StarCraft MMOG, I hope at the very least they don't do what AA did, and actually test it so it doesn't launch with missions that don't work, buggy AI, and missing features. But if they're not planning on a MMOG version of StarCraft, I'd settle for it on the NDS, or maybe PSP. :X
(\(\
(=_=) Bani!
(")")
DoD :D
" Trying to fit all games into an online model forces them to be basically all versions of the same game (all the same run around-kill-collect-level model of game play)."
Not really. MMO games also include stuff that's pretty different from WoW. Mind you, not _completely_ different, but still. E.g.:
1. Planetside.
It's really a MMO-FPS. Think UT2004 with 200 players in each team. Think battles where a SF fortress is attacked by waves of a hundred infantry (ranging from unarmored infiltrators to the massive mechanized exo-skeletons) and tens of tanks, artillery vehicles, AA vehicles, bombers, gunships, giant transport ships paradropping whole squads on top of it, and even about a lance of mechs in most fights.
It also has absolutely _zero_ grinding, farming, etc, as the game has no money (you're a soldier, so your equipment is provided to you based on your certifications) and levels don't give anyone an unfair advantage in combat (being higher level gives you more flexibility, as it allows you to be certified in several different things, but you still have the same health, do the same damage and can use the same weapons as someone half your level.)
_And_ it doesn't really need 3 hours of gathering a 40 man group a la WoW or of waiting in a queue for some battleground. Anyone can just jump into any battle and get xp for whatever they can do. E.g., if you're certified as a medic, you don't have to wait until some raid invites you: you can just jump into any battle and get xp for healing the combatants. E.g., if you're an engineer, you can just jump into any fight and start repairing the damaged vehicles, and get xp for it. E.g., if you're certified to pilot a transport, just load up a squad and paradrop them wherever they want to go, and not only you'll be a very popular guy or gal, but you'll get xp for their kills there too. Or, of course, if you can use a gun, you can just get your gun and go join whatever assault or defense is in progress.
Sure, joining a squad or outfit lets you fight more coordinated as part of a team, but that's about it. If you don't want to, you can just go solo in any battle just as well. You'll figure out something useful to do pretty easily. Be it healing, repairing, shooting a gun, being gunner on a tank, laying mines, or jumping into a chaingun turret and laying down the suppression fire.
And, again, any of those you can do from level 1 (though you can gain a few levels first by just doing the tutorials anyway) and have max level people thanking you for it. There is no grinding to level 60 or collecting epic equipment before you can go play with the big boys. You can take part in any battle right after installing the game, and feel like you've made a difference.
So, basically, you know, you can just play the game and let levels and stuff happen on their own. There is no need to focus on collecting anything either.
2. City Of Heroes / City Of Villains.
Well, this is a sorta more standard type of MMO, but it cuts down on pretty much anything that could be seen as a time sink. E.g., travel time is short (SuperSpeed caps at about 90mph, Teleport caps at about 200mph), combat is fast and furious, there is no collecting "loot" in the traditional sense of the word (if you want your character to wear big red pauldrons, you can just paint him that way in the character editor), there is no crafting in the traditional sense (though you can craft devices for your super-hero base or super-villain lair), and there is no farming for gold or resources.
Also, although it does depend on grouping (unlike the loose action of Planetside), missions are automatically instanced for whatever number of people you have. I.e., the same mission can either be soloed or you can find an 8-player group for it. Since groups yield better xp per minute, you rarely have a problem finding random people to group with at any level. (Though whether they can also play well in a group, is a bit of a hit-and-miss issue. Some groups rule, some can make a good point for misanthropy.) But again, any instanced mission can also be soloed if you're not in a social mood.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
"Mom's Basement of Starcraft", to better appeal to the target demographic...
I mean a zergling is weaker than an ultralisk no matter how you slice it, and does essentially the same thing. And while Terrans and maybe Protoss would make sense for choosing their specialization, it doesn't work for Zerg either. And you aren't going to dump one of the alignments.
Instead I think it would make sense to be a commander/cerebrate/executor in command of a squad/platoon/group. Improvement is by upgrading and extending your band of troops, gaining abilities, training, experience, promotion in rank, mining resources, getting paid for missions and so forth. If you did it right you might even be able to accomodate a large range of command levels amongst the players, ranging from individual unit all the way up to general or fleet admiral. Mercenary bands, Heroes, Civilians, Khalai, and Creep could play much larger roles than in regular starcraft.
Of course while you're at it you would want to of course allow preprogramming of troop formation and behavior to be a lot smarter then before (as in Myth), and have unit action and interaction be more sophisticated and terrain sensitive (taking cover should be automatic). And when a unit dies, it's dead (although Zerg cerebrates/torrasques don't stay dead unless dark templar kill them, and protoss can return once as Dragoons). Unit size, cost and power should be more representative (i.e. a Battle Cruiser ought to be way bigger and way more expensive and need way more people).
So if you're human you can start out as a marine for hire and work your way up through the ranks to a Dominion Fleet Admiral commanding others (assuming you aren't backstabbed), or a Protoss Khalai robotics specialist who breaks off and becomes a leader among the Dark Templar, or an sub-conscience of the Overmind that starts in command of a drone and gradually works up to commanding an entire brood, or a Xel-naga gaining power from the shadows.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?