Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Blizzard Confirms New Product, May Be Starcraft 2

Posted by Zonk on from the new-is-always-good dept.

darkhitman writes "According to a Kotaku post yesterday, Blizzard has confirmed that they'll announce a new product at their World Wide Invitation in Korea next month. The statement issued by Blizzard verified that they 'do intend to announce a new product [...] next month" and "plan to revisit [Starcraft] at some point in the future,' but did not confirm the rumor that the new game would be Starcraft 2 — but we can certainly hope."

176 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Zerg Post!

  2. Blizzard announces... by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 5, Funny

    Blizzard announces World of Starcraft... And a feeling as if a million nerds cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    1. Re:Blizzard announces... by Nullav · · Score: 2, Interesting

      [T]hey won't give us a map editor that we can break to near the degree the SC one is.

      I belive that happened with the SC, and WC2/3. Map editors aren't a problem as long as there are tons of fans lined up to contribute their own modifications after the release. And, in my opinion, expandability is the best thing about Blizzard RTS'es (and most other RTS'es). Even if the story is too bland, modders have a new base to work with. If the game mechanics kill the old game, some determined fans will work to make it more like SC1. And barring that, maybe it would be fun to come up with new strategies for a new game.

      Also, who says they're continuing SC? Maybe they're making a new WC RTS. (Just because they have the MMO now, it doesn't mean that all story progression has to take place there. WoW is nothing like the RTS'es anyway. Though this seems unlikely.) Maybe it has nothing to do with WC or SC. It could be based off of Diablo, or something entirely new. Hell, they may actually resume working on SC: Ghost (doubtful). There's a lot they could be working on other than a sequel to SC.

      Although, I must admit, I really want to see another StarCraft.
      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    2. Re:Blizzard announces... by Nullav · · Score: 1

      Just correcting myself on my first point. The SC map editor was actually good.

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    3. Re:Blizzard announces... by sheepweevil · · Score: 1

      I've got a great idea for a new Blizzard project, it might even be the one they will be announcing! It would be set in the Starcraft universe, but would be a first person shooter! It would be guaranteed to sell millions!
      Oh wait, that sounds strangely familiar...

    4. Re:Blizzard announces... by DurendalMac · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I still don't think that it'll happen until Blizzard feels that WoW is waning. They don't want to split their market and wind up losing a ton of WoW players to WoSC.

    5. Re:Blizzard announces... by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Warcraft "story" is completely stagnant in WoW; nothing ever changes. You grind the same old missions over and over again and yet nothing ever changes. That is, unless you count the perpetual next-tier of equipment that Blizzard releases to keep the mindless inhabitants grinding and paying.

      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    6. Re:Blizzard announces... by EonBlueTooL · · Score: 1

      I never did see what kind of map editor WC3 had(I never gave it a chance after I saw the unit cap), but when I talk about the breakability of the SC editor I meant hackability. If you take a look at the original SC editor and then look at what the community did to expand its capabilities it is quite impressive. http://starcraft.org/downloads/MappingDownloads/Ma pEditors/SCMDraft%202%200.6.0%20Prerelease%201 http://starcraft.org/downloads/MappingDownloads/Ma pEditors/StarCraft%20X-tra%20Editor%202.6%20Fix http://starcraft.org/downloads/MappingDownloads/Ma pEditors/StarForge%202.2 You can have games that far exceed ANYTHING anyone could have done with the original map editor. You can place buildings so they're in the middle of the water, you can have units with 1000000 hit points. I've even seen a bnet map in which somone increased the range of the siege tank (I was stunned myself). Anyway, my point with the previous post was that high expecations will lead to dissapointment while low expectations might lead you to be suprised, and most certainly not leave you with the same dissapointment that sc2 would if it sucked. You have to admit SC is a very excruciatingly high bar to top, and I don't think they can do it. I'm setting myself up to be nicely suprised if they do, but the gaming industry has taught me to be cautious.

    7. Re:Blizzard announces... by Hubbell · · Score: 1

      By the time starcraft came out it was behind the times already. Total Annihilation came out in 1997 with 3d graphics, better ai, and already just a better game. To date, albeit I haven't played SupCom, Total Annihilation is the best RTS yet, StarCraft was nothing but a good platform for UMS maps in my mind.

    8. Re:Blizzard announces... by Havenwar · · Score: 1

      So, they have a lot of people who like warcraft stuffing money in their left pocket. They make a starcraft MMORPG, and a lot of people who like starcraft starts putting money in their right pocket. Some of those previously stuffing money in their left pocket now stuff it in the right pocket instead.

      So in the end, they keep the current audience, and gain even more customers.

      Now add to this the idea that someone is tired of WoW and is about to stop playing. They look for another MMORPG that is more fun, and find.... a competitor. Or, they find another game from Blizzard and keeps stuffing blizzards pockets full of money.

      So no, I don't feel Blizzard would need to wait until WoW is waning. In fact it would be silly to do so. But all things considered, no I don't believe this announcement to be in regards to a StarCraft MMO. And if I am wrong, I would expect the announcement to have a release of 2010 at the earliest.

      Most likely this is just StarCraft 2, in a 3D engine. Something that will be a huge hit in korea, and amongst any other fans of the game.

    9. Re:Blizzard announces... by jandrese · · Score: 1

      I don't know. TA had "3d" but it really looked like ass. I played it for awhile, but it never really measured up to Starcraft in terms of online play IMHO.

      Supreme Commander unfortunately has some of the same problems that TA did. Online it seems like tank rushes are generally useless and everybody ends up just spending half an hour econning like mad so they can build one of the grossly expensive superweapons or try to build tons of arty to just shell each other to death. It's just kind of dull.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    10. Re:Blizzard announces... by Wildclaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personally I am of a completly different opinion.

      Graphic wise, Starcraft was far superior to TA. Good 2d art is much better than simple 3d art. I can still look at Starcraft today and enjoy the graphics. It may be outdated, pixel-wise, but it is still art. TA however has aged significantly.

      The custom AI was indeed a weak point of starcraft, but starcraft single player still had its charms with its better campaigns. Custom single player games was interesting also, mainly to see how many AIs you could defeat. You can't claim to have mastered starcraft single player until you have won 1vs7 games with all three races. Terran being the easiest (Bunkers+Siegetanks), protoss medium difficult (photon cannons+shield batteries and a good map) and zerg the toughest. (Quick expansion and tech to Guardians on a map with close expansion and long travel paths). There is no question however, that multiplayer was where Starcraft shined.

      As for the better game. Starcraft and TA had completly different focus. TA was an army management game with the focus on strategy, and it did very well at that. Throwing large armies back and forth. Starcraft on the other hand had a few specific things that made it unique among RTS:s, then and now. This is why I consider it the best RTS of all times. These special attributes being

      * 3 unique, balanced races. Most RTS games have some difference between the different sides, but Starcraft is to date the only game that I know off that pulled it off that well. The actual mindset changes when switching races. You can actually feel the swarm mentality when playing zerg, or the ability to hold ground as terrans, or the pure power of protoss units.

      * Every single unit type matters from start to end. There isn't a single unit in Starcraft that becomes outdated as the game progresses. When it comes to dealing out pure damage, the basic units are the most cost efficent, while more advanced units are used to provide specific advantages. (such as attack range, area effects, health, cloak and flying abilities)

      The only problem I found with Starcraft multiplayer was the insistance to play on the fastest game speed. Fastest game speed is simply to fast unless you are a pro player with incredible reflexes. I have always wished that RTS games would include something like a Max Payne style time slower where any player could slow down the game for a certain amount of time (the ability itself recharging over time). It would allow for a quick initial phase of the game, while still providing ample opportunity to use more complex tactics in the heat of battle.

    11. Re:Blizzard announces... by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      Before blizzard patched it ,there was a exploit to change memory values by creating death counters which are out of bounds.Google: EUD triggers starcraft
      the tank was probably with patched weapons.txt range in memory.normal is 7,and 12 siege.
      it could modify any map data which is variable.

    12. Re:Blizzard announces... by Kesh · · Score: 1

      Kinda like how the Starcraft story is "stagnant?" After all, the game never actually changes, no matter how many times you play it.

      And, let's face it, an MMO that changed after one party completed a dungeon (making it so the quest was over, no one else could do it) would suck. Generally, the story only changes with major content releases (Ahn'Quiraj, Burning Crusade expansion, the upcoming Black Temple, etc.). The only things taken out were the special quests given to actually start the new material, which were no longer relevant once it was open to everyone.

    13. Re:Blizzard announces... by Udderdude · · Score: 1

      Actually, the expansion progressed the lore in some directions. Dreinai, Blood Elves siding with horde, the ultimate fate of the Sons of Lothar, and what happened in Outland. There are still plenty of unknowns to explore.

    14. Re:Blizzard announces... by LordBafford · · Score: 1

      You could do that with warcraft 2, i have a map editor for it to lets boats sail on land units walk on water and through trees turn zeppelins into demos, make anything invisible, give units a range of like 255 have peons shoot dragon fire. it was quite good for the being warcraft2. Also war3s map editor is far more advanced then SC ever was. Go check out a game called DOTA for war3, the people who made that changed so much stuff it's sick, they made tons of their own items and spells. For warcraft 3 knowing scripting is your only limit.

      --
      Today's Tomorrow is Yesterday's Future! --- "Where Ever You Go, There You Are" -- Diablo 1
    15. Re:Blizzard announces... by ajs · · Score: 1

      The Warcraft "story" is completely stagnant in WoW; nothing ever changes. Are you ignoring the Opening the Dark Portal storyline, which is being played out as new Caverns of Time events are opened, and looks to be aiming to culminate with a return to the Battle of Mount Hyjal?

      Are you ignoring the return to Outland and the revelation of how events have been progressing there since the portal was unavailable?

      Are you ignoring the fact that players finally get to meet and interact with some of the most powerful characters in the Warcraft Universe (both Horde and Alliance get to save Thrall for their own reasons; Illidan Stormrage is defeated; etc. etc.)

      I think the problem is that some players get into a "grind" to get gear, and ignore the story that they're interacting with. Stand back, take a look. Go explore new content that's being added all the time, don't just try to beat it. Read the quest text. Check out the dialogs.

      World of Warcraft is expanding the Warcraft lore base all the time.
  3. It's just like running for president by ween14 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Blizzard Announcement: "We will be having an announcement soon announcing when we will have an announcement about when we will announce a new product."

    --
    Java has no friends.
    1. Re:It's just like running for president by Vrallis · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and the announcement will be:

      "We will soon be announcing that we will not be announcing a new product." /Just quit WoW after 30 months of raiding 5 days a week //I already have a job, thanks

  4. Who writes these story headlines? by RobertM1968 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Really... take half a statement, add another (irrelevant to the first) half statement, and you have a totally irrelevant headline for a /. article.

    --
    StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
    1. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by garcia · · Score: 1

      Netcraft confirms it, Slashdot's editors may suck.

    2. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by darkhitman · · Score: 1, Informative

      That would be me (yeah, check the names).

      Following this potentially awkward silence, I would suggest that you RTFA and attempt to discern what Blizzard is saying behind the marketing double-speak. Look closely, and you'll see that Blizzard doesn't rule out it being SC2... but doesn't promise anything. The two quotes I made were from nearly consecutive sentences.

      I didn't exactly synthesize information here; the post was basically a summary of the Kotaku article. Not, however, that you read said article in the first place.

      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
    3. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      We do intend to announce a new product at the Worldwide Invitational next month in Korea, and we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest in getting an advance look at what that will be, but players will have to wait until May 19th to find out more. Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

      Which brings it down to speculation. Especially since Blizzard makes a lot of games. It seems more like they are dropping two probably unrelated teasers into their little statement to drum up interest in both - with possibly no relation (other than fans wishes) between the two... either that or they did a poor attempt at ambiguity in their statement.

      Inotherwords, drum up interest for their upcoming product announcement, and let the Starcraft fans know SC2 is in the works as well. Doesnt seem "double-speak" to me - except perhaps to get people to connect the two in an attempt to drive up more interest in their upcoming (probably unrelated) announcement on the 19th.

      Oh, and yes, I read the article.

      --
      StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
    4. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by darkhitman · · Score: 1
      Since one month is both the present and the future, the announcement could be an announcement for SC2. Semantics, yes, but this is PR-speak we're talking about.

      From the article:

      So that's a yes on a StarCraft 2, eventually, and a yes to a product announcement next month. The only question now is are they one in the same.
      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
    5. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      From the article:

      So that's a yes on a StarCraft 2, eventually, and a yes to a product announcement next month. The only question now is are they one in the same.

      Which means the guy who wrote the article (not Blizzard) is questioning/hoping the announcement is one and the same as a new StarCraft being made.

      Yeah, it is all a matter of semantics... and only time will tell. If Blizzard has nothing in their upcoming pipeline (except StarCraft 2) then I could see the reason for the ambiguity - it does make it seem like they may have a lot more to announce (depending on how you - or I - read it). I for one am hoping it's a StarCraft 2 announcement, but the statement made by Blizzard doesnt necessarily say that. Or even imply it.

      --
      StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
    6. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Especially since Blizzard makes a lot of games

      Uhhh..huh? Since when? Blizzard is notorious for making very few games. Their success mostly comes from the fact that they'd rather spend the time getting a game right than pumping out as many as they can.

    7. Re:Who writes these story headlines? by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      OK, perhaps not "a lot" especially in comparison to other game companies... but with (A) all their sequels, add-ons, expansions, etc... and (B) the possibility of a game that isnt Warcraft, Starcraft or Diablo branded, what I was trying to point out was that this upcoming announcement could be something "entirely new" or the next Warcraft/Diablo version/add-on/etc.

      --
      StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
  5. They've said the same thing about SC for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Literally... years, since Warcraft III at least. I'm thinking it'll be Galaxy of Starcraft or some such, because they need something to keep the cash cow going.

  6. This is just in! by scenestar · · Score: 4, Funny

    A certain company is Releasing "FOO" somewhere set to Release at a yet uncertain date.

    No details are as of yet released, but rumour has it that it *might* be the highly anticipated s equal to their previous bestseller "BAR"

    More details at eleven.

    --
    perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
    1. Re:This is just in! by Machtyn · · Score: 1

      Does that mean we can purchase BAR now and get the FOO later? I love BAR FOO!

    2. Re:This is just in! by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      No, no, "FOO" is a prequel.

  7. Not far from the truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://blizzard.com/jobopp/

    Job Update 4/26/07
    New Position - Lead Engine Programmer Next-Gen MMO

    1. Re:Not far from the truth. by drix · · Score: 1

      That doesn't really come as a surprise considering they're absolutely minting money with their current-gen MMO. The question is, will it be Starcraft?

      Starcraft was the last computer game I played regularly before school and life got in the way. Now that I'm a little older and have some disposable income, I'd be seriously tempted to throw down in an Alienware or something or WoS came out.

      --

      I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
    2. Re:Not far from the truth. by Siberwulf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dumb question:

      Why can't that be a position for their current MMO?

      WoW has been running on the same engine since release in late 2004. Many MMOs (Dark Age for example) are constantly updating their game engine. Maybe this is just a new engine for the same MMO.

    3. Re:Not far from the truth. by Morlark · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's worth noting that Blizzard have recently renewed their trademark on Blackthorne. Trademarks on other Blizzard games from that era appear to remain untouched.

      --
      Santa's suicide mission go!
    4. Re:Not far from the truth. by Aereus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Blizzard telling us that they are announcing a new game in *South Korea* next month almost guarantees that it is Starcraft-related IMHO. Starcraft is/was absolutely huge in Korea, so I can't see them choosing that spot for an announcement for anything else. A Starcraft MMO also makes good market sense right now, even if I would also love to see a new Starcraft RTS. There has been a distinct lack of quality mainstream Scifi MMOs so far. Starcraft could fit into that area quite nicely -- and by the time the game was ready for release, WoW would also be around its 5th anniversary.

    5. Re:Not far from the truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, the logical thing to do is pull a Warcraft 3. Announce Starcraft 2 in Korea, with a new 3D engine. Use this release to lay additional groundwork (in particular, any new story elements needed to create an MMO from it), while beginning serious work on the implementation of the MMO. Then release an expansion to the RTS 1-2 years later, then announce the MMO 1-2 years later, and release 1-2 years later.

      That way, you get the franchise revitalized and updated, making the expected shedloads of money, while also setting things up for the MMO to follow. And if they really are working on Ghost in-house, then if the MMO is delayed, there's another entry in the Starcraft franchise to keep interest in the brand up.

    6. Re:Not far from the truth. by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

      They're probably going to release it for one of the download services on one of the new consoles.

      --
      This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
    7. Re:Not far from the truth. by Robocoastie · · Score: 1

      gawd I hope not. WoW's engine actually scales up or down well based on the system its running on. It runs and still looks purty on my Dell Inspiron 5150 with only a 32 MB video chip without stuttering, on my desktop I have more options turned on obviously due its beefier graphics. Other MMO's are a slideshow or freeze on anything less than a 128MB video.

  8. Good Locale by bstorer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where better to announce Starcraft 2 than in Korea? Kekeke!

    1. Re:Good Locale by DanielG42 · · Score: 2, Funny

      In South Korea, only old people wait for the next release of Starcraft.

      --
      Daniel
    2. Re:Good Locale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Actually, when I spent some time in Korea a couple years ago, Starcraft was still a national obsession. I even saw it on the evening news. Although, I admit, I didn't know what they were saying.

    3. Re:Good Locale by Xtravar · · Score: 1

      ^_^ kekek

      SOJS SOJS SOJS ME GIVE BABY 4 SOJS

      - And now for some random text about lameness filters not letting me post what I want to.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
  9. Reminds me by Grashnak · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of an old saying... Ask her if she'll go home with you BEFORE you spend $50 on drinks....

    --
    Life needs more saving throws.
    1. Re:Reminds me by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, man... would hate to not be able to buy some new game coming out.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    2. Re:Reminds me by billcopc · · Score: 1

      That reminds me of a not-so-old saying: Let Grashnak buy her drinks, then Billco comes in for the steal :)

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    3. Re:Reminds me by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if you spend $50 on drinks with a girl, you can be pretty sure she'll be going home with you but if she has to take YOU home you'll find out she's a man.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    4. Re:Reminds me by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      That came from Richard Feynman in something he wrote. I don't remember which essay it was, but it was while he was working at Cornell, which is only a range of a few years shortly after World War 2.

    5. Re:Reminds me by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Old saying? Wasn't that one of Richard Feynman's quotes?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    6. Re:Reminds me by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Or better yet convince her she wants to go home with you instead of buying her fucking drinks, why would that help? "Here you have a drink, now can you please sleep with me?!!" "omg i gave you a drink and you don't give me sex?!"

      Thought I'm from sweden and not the USA, maybe it's more common to buy drinks over there, and your dating bussiness is different to ours ;D

    7. Re:Reminds me by Monkey · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a great way to save some money, but what the heck am I supposed to slip the roofie in then?

  10. Korea? Bet it's Starcraft-related by rsborg · · Score: 4, Informative
    Since Korea is the worldwide capitol of Starcraft players.

    Also it's not a total surprise given the hints that Blizzard has been putting out (validity of "hints" left as an exercise to reader).

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re:Korea? Bet it's Starcraft-related by HolyCause · · Score: 1, Funny

      Since Korea is the worldwide capitol of Starcraft players.

      Though it's completely off-topic, I'd like to correct you on your use of "capitol". The correct word you're looking for is capital (derived from the Latin word "caput", meaning "head"), unless Starcraft is somehow very political in nature.

      --
      Visit http://theshrine.ca/ at irregular intervals and you might see something interesting.
  11. Eh by Chiaro+Meratilo · · Score: 1

    I'd rather it be Diablo 3, but whatever...

    1. Re:Eh by Kaleo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I second that. Diablo 2 was, in my opinion, the greatest game ever made. I'm still playing it. Also, Diablo and Diablo 2 to this day are the only non-MMORPG RPGs that I have ever personally seen girls play on a regular basis. How's that for mainstream? Wake up Blizzard. Make Diablo 3.

    2. Re:Eh by osu-neko · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm dreading Diablo III. The Blizzard North that made Diablo/Diablo II is long gone, and I'm dreading to see what travesty the current Blizzard comes up with to slap the Diablo brand name on.

      I'm suspecting Diablo III will be to Diablo II what Master of Orion III was to Master of Orion II.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    3. Re:Eh by Bobo_The_Boinger · · Score: 1

      Damn you for making me remember Master of Orion 3! I had almost forgotten it! I remember starting the game up, playing a few rounds, then I ended up just hitting "next turn" about 50 times because I was completely confused. After hitting it to see what would happen, the game told me I won. I sat staring at it for a few minutes, then quietly put it away and never brought it out again... As I said, damn you!

      --
      --David
    4. Re:Eh by Grant_Watson · · Score: 1

      I'm suspecting Diablo III will be to Diablo II what Master of Orion III was to Master of Orion II.

      This line should open every horror movie made until Diablo III. Even if it does cost them the NC-17 rating.

    5. Re:Eh by Kaleo · · Score: 1

      I didn't know that Blizzard North is no more. That's pretty sad. But maybe we will get lucky. I thought the Thief series was going to disappear or suck horribly after Looking Glass shut down, but Ion Storm managed to develop Thief III into a pretty damn good game.

      Maybe someone at current Blizzard will have what it takes to make a proper Diablo 3...

    6. Re:Eh by GotenXiao · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's something better on the horizon, and it's called Hellgate: London. The company making it are Flagship Studios, led by Bill Roper. Having seen the live demo given by same at i30 about three weeks ago, I can safely say it's going to be good.

      --
      Goten Xiao
    7. Re:Eh by Alystair · · Score: 1

      You will be happy to hear that it is, infact, Diablo 3.
        Sorry to disappoint any Starcraft fans out there,
        there's always Ghost to look forward to, right? ;)

    8. Re:Eh by NayDizz · · Score: 1

      I'm with you folks calling for Diablo 3. I was retarded hooked on Diablo 2 for waay too long. The only thing that would completely prevent me from investing in D3 would be a monthly subscription. It's what kept me away from WoW and Lineage and a handful of others with real promise. I'm sorry, but $50-60 + $180/year is just idiotic for a video game.

    9. Re:Eh by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > How's that for mainstream? Wake up Blizzard. Make Diablo 3.

      Whole heartidly agree!

      I don't understand why Blizzard ignores D2 so much -- I mean, how many 7-year old games are there that are STILL being played actively?!

      It really sucks that none of the bugs in the game will ever be fixed.

      The only thing D2 _really_ needs is:

      a) An option for the game creator to boot any one from games (why am I _forced_ to allow PKs into my public games?!)
      b) Loot Rules (master looter, group, etc) like WoW (along with automatic gold pickup)
      c) Ability to respec both skills and talents. Make it cost something, with a one delay.
      d) Enable the organ set, runewords and Uber Diablo offline for us single players (without having to use a mod like the awesome PlugY)
      e) Option to pay $5 month to play on "perferred" servers where there is NO LAG!!!!

      Rest are just my "wishlist"...

      f) An option to trade items without going into the game! The ability to stack gems would be nice too. Trading 40 gems stinks!
      g) official muling support (Not everyone has 2+ computers and 2+ copies of the game) i.e. a SHARED stash like PlugY is perfect.
      h) Talents above 20, but with the cost being the skill level / 10.
      j) Make Gold actually worth something! Remove the stupid level restriction on characters and stash, and allow me to purchase set items once I have found them.
      k) Fix the Ancients bypass glitch, OR allow us to create mules that are limited to level 9 and can enter any difficulty.
      l) Make the Pali's Meditation aura useful again! When was the last time you ever saw a Medadin? Runewords killed a lot of interesting and unique builds. Not everyone wants a hammerdin or smite-adin!

      I could post a ton more ideas, but that's enough for now... (Yes, I've played FAR too many hours on fine, fine, game)

      Cheers

    10. Re:Eh by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      The developers that made Starcraft are no longer with Blizzard as well.

      --
      Abaddon: An Xbox 360 Indie game
  12. Another expansion pack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I bet they'll introduce the new "World of Starcraft" with an expansion pack for WoW. Just when a new guild is about to take down Kel'Thuzad for the first time, and a voice will come out of no-where and announce "Nuclear Launch Detected".

    1. Re:Another expansion pack by wilsonthecat · · Score: 1

      You can joke, but I'm pretty certain the announcement is going to be about the next WoW expansion. A Blizzard respresentative said they were planning on releasing an expansion every year for the next 5 years. I wish I could find the link, it's on a video game website somewhere.

    2. Re:Another expansion pack by lordSaurontheGreat · · Score: 1

      Actually, Blizzard has been alluding to a "World of Starcraft" game for quite some time. Ever since WoW's mid-2005 patch round, if you turn around really fast you can see a faint glimpse of a Zerg Hydralisk in the bushes right before it buries itself.

      --
      Consider yourself spoken to.
  13. cash cow? by deft · · Score: 1

    what, did a bazillion people stop playing WOW and I didn't hear about it?

    as far as I kno,w blizzard is just fine.

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
  14. MMO by Bo'Bob'O · · Score: 1

    I hope they really make some improvements in the AI, assuming it's still an RTS. As much as I love playing online.. now and again.. sometimes i like to move at my own pace, or don't want to be rude to people if I know I might have to leave in the middle of a game. In too many games single player is just a joke. Sure they can give it perfect accuracy in an FPS, or make it cheat in an RTS, but I'd really like to see something that gives me something at least close to playing with a person. I enjoyed Warcraft 3, but in my opinion at least, single player was awful.

    Obviously it won't ever be perfect, but mutiplayer seems to have made game makers lazy when it comes to single player, if they even try at all.

  15. Please, let it NOT be... by JFMulder · · Score: 1

    Galaxy of Starcraft or any other MMO. Please stay true to the Starcraft roots Blizzard. There are enough MMO right now and besides why would you create something that would take WoW players from you and convert them to GoS players?

    I want the rest of the story. I want to see it all. I need a really good RTS so I can justify buying a new computer. I know there are a bunch of really cool RTS right now, but I'm a console player and nothing less than Starcraft 2 can bring me back to PC gaming.

    1. Re:Please, let it NOT be... by cHiphead · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see a good, fully modernized version of Shattered Galaxy, its like starcraft if it actually required minimal tactical strategy competence.

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:Please, let it NOT be... by __aawkdb2598 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "...starcraft if it actually required minimal tactical strategy competence."

      Hold up there. If you're implying that Starcraft doesn't require tactical competence then perhaps you're dealing with some strange definition of tactics that I was unaware of.
      Tactics: Tactics is the collective name for methods of winning a small-scale conflict, performing an optimization, etc. This applies specifically to warfare, but also to economics, trade, games and a host of other fields such as negotiation.

      That kind of tactics is essential in Starcraft. Have you ever seen a really good game of Starcraft? It's one of the most fascinating, tactical, and fast-paced games I've ever seen at the higher levels. From micro-management of units (try controlling the individual targeting of every unit in a squad, in real time) to precise maneuvering, ranging and timing Starcraft at its best requires incredible tactical thought. Fine-grain options are weighed out and balanced, opponents predicted or deceived, tens of units of crystal measured against seconds in a struggle against a cunning and relentless adversary (the other guy).If that's not tactics, what is?

    3. Re:Please, let it NOT be... by Mortimer82 · · Score: 1

      Relax, any Blizzard fan knows that Blizzard settles for nothing less than complete excellence, from story to quality to code. And for those who think that WoW is not good coding, consider that Blizzard runs a very smooth network for 8.5 million users running a real time interactive application.

  16. Re:WoW/WoS? by Lord_Breetai · · Score: 5, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our new starcrafting overlords!

    Spawn more overlords!

    --
    "You are only young once, but you can be immature forever." -www.animemusicvideos.org
  17. Please..please.. don't be Glaxies of Starcraft! by Spaztian · · Score: 1

    I really hope Blizzard return to the RTS scene with a good sequal to Starcraft. I can't believe it, almost 10 years ago I finished Starcraft's epic story line and really was hanging out for the next chapter in the series. I just hope it's not a Warcraft 3 type RTS/RPG. I really want something a little more....traditional. I'm not saying leave the Starcraft engine alone - I'm just ready for something new and better. Oh. yeah, I'm not even going to accept the possability that this could be an MMO! Nope. Nah! Sorry - NO! Blizzard wouldn't... even if it would end up making them more money... right? :s

  18. BLizzard said no by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "... and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

    hello? that sounds like it is not SC2

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:BLizzard said no by darkhitman · · Score: 1

      One month from now is both in the future and not the present. While you may be right, the possibility exists that Blizzard does plan to announce SC2 -- but didn't want to say so. We're dealing with PR-speak, you see.

      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
  19. wtf? by sloth+jr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why is a sequel something to get thrilled about? How about a TRULY new game from Blizzard?!?

    1. Re:wtf? by Helios1182 · · Score: 1

      Because it seems that even when they make a sequel or modification to an existing franchise they produce a fantastic game. I wouldn't mind a new game, but I would also love a new version of StarCraft updated to something even better.

    2. Re:wtf? by Guuge · · Score: 1

      Blizzard doesn't do creativity. Their top game is an Everquest clone that continues a franchise based on a setting created by Games Workshop. They haven't had an original title since Diablo in 1996, which is just a simplified dungeon crawler with online play.

    3. Re:wtf? by mmalove · · Score: 1

      Diablo really wasn't an original either - it was just Rogue(the original dungeon crawl, not the fps) dumbed down so the masses could pick it up quickly and yet had just enough depth that you didn't realise you were playing candyland for grown ups. And they added real time, which is what made it all flow, but certainly a game running in real time isn't original...

      Basically, like WOW did with EQ. They didn't create a new game, they just added cruise control for an existing one.

      --
      You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.
  20. Re:Bah! by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What everyone really wants is World Of Starcraft. Actually, I'd rather they didn't make World of Starcraft, because I'm extremely skeptical that they'd be able to pull it off. While the high-fantasy genre works very well because it's fairly limited in scope and "magic" supplies the necessary explanation for the really wacky stuff, I think that science fiction is a victim of its own scope. Sci-Fi tends to be really big, as evidenced by that cut-scene in Starcraft when the marine is about to get chewed up by Zerg as the massive battlecruiser flies overhead. Unless players were entirely restricted to ground and near ground-level stuff, and had some non-twitch combat system like WoW, I just don't think WoS would work.

    Now, what I would like to see is all of Blizzard's creativity and energy put into Starcraft 2, utilising all of the lessons learned thus far and drawing heavily from the wonderful work that was Company of Heroes. The day I see high-resolution Protoss Zealots taking cover behind a lumbering Reaver while Dragoons skitter between the piles of wreckage in the Terran base I just destroyed will be a wonderous thing. RTS games have come a long way since Starcraft came out and I think it's a shame that we haven't seen another game in the series yet.

    Here's hoping we'll be bitching about the system requirements of Starcraft 2 in the near future!
    --
    P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
  21. Re:Starcraft 2... but it's an MMO... by Presence2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The RTS genre that SC pioneered is pretty much dead. C&C and all the (many, way too many) clones beat that horse to death. Blizz probably knows making another RTS, even a very sexy next-gen RTS, will never have the market impact that a new StarCraft MMOG would.

  22. Could it be a new diablo instead? by ShadowHywind · · Score: 1

    Didn't blizzard just look for a new leader to lead the diablo team not that long ago?

    1. Re:Could it be a new diablo instead? by RandomPrecision · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They let all of Blizzard North go several years ago, so I doubt it. Blizzard North has since essentially reformed as Castaway Entertainment, and they're currently working on Hellgate: London, if I'm not mistaken.

  23. I hope SC2 isn't like WC3... by RichPowers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I loved Warcraft I and II, but I lost interest when Bliz started emphasized the cartoony fantasy elements instead of the all-out war between the Alliance and the Horde. The RPG-esque elements of WC3 never appealed to me and the lower unit count drove me nuts. I loved the fast-and-furious RTS experience provided by the first two.

    In doing so, Blizz set the groundwork for the successful fantasy world that is WoW, but it still doesn't make me happy :)

    I will be somewhat disappointed in they take the same route in the next Starcraft.

    1. Re:I hope SC2 isn't like WC3... by Prien715 · · Score: 1

      I loved Warcraft I and II, but I lost interest when Bliz started emphasized the cartoony fantasy elements

      Which version of Warcraft 2 are you playing that didn't look cartoony?

      The RPG-esque elements of WC3 never appealed to me and the lower unit count drove me nuts.

      SC drove me nuts precisely because you had so many units and that interface wasn't built for it. Templars were useless except to turn into archons since with 200 units, you can't even bother to cast spells. Like WC3, you could only select 24 units at a time, despite the possibility of having over 300 units at once (zerglings cost 1/2 food each). Also, most good players who play SC use a cheese strategy, just building one thing, and this works reasonably well. I liked how units complimented one another in WC3, and building only one unit type, was almost certainly suicide.

      To each his own. If they do another SC, the only thing I can honestly say I liked better about SC was the more diverse factions (WC3 factions are too similar), human nuke fun, and carriers.

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
    2. Re:I hope SC2 isn't like WC3... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      SC drove me nuts precisely because you had so many units and that interface wasn't built for it. Templars were useless except to turn into archons since with 200 units, you can't even bother to cast spells.


      Playing the game on "fastest" is not a built-in feature of the interface. Play at a slower speed and you'll find you have time to cast spells.

      Chris Mattern
    3. Re:I hope SC2 isn't like WC3... by Prien715 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, playing on fastest is a built-in feature of the ladder system=) I like playing with humans in RTS games since their tactics are unpredictable, adaptive, and they quit when they're losing (killing every last AI building is annoying).

      Yeah, I'm in the minority who loved playing smaller maps (mmm...blood bath) on normal speed, but like I said earlier, by reducing unit numbers, interface feature like autocast, and reducing the "standard" speed, WC3 is much more playable on ladder in my experience.

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
  24. Re:WoW/WoS? by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

    "World" of Starcraft? Please, Starcraft spans multiple planets. Worlds of Starcraft, maybe, but that interferes with their title for World of Warcraft, so maybe Starcraft Universe or something cool like that.

  25. What this proves... by Phase+Shifter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is that any sufficiently rabid fanboi will see what he wants, regardless of whether it flat-out contradicts the obvious.

    To paraphrase Blizzard: "We're about to announce a new game, and we really want to do something with the Starcraft franchise, but this ain't it."
    Rabid fanboi writing article: "Woohoo! Blizz said Starcraft! Blizz said new game! This is it, Starcraft 2 next month!"

    It's a shame, because I would really like to see another Starcraft. Unfortunately the fanbois are probably scaring Blizzard away from actually doing it, since they know the first screenshots or videos released from beta will set off a torrent of bad press from people saying "What is this crap? They were saying this was ready for release like two years ago, and this is all they have?"

    1. Re:What this proves... by darkhitman · · Score: 1

      Blizzard fanboy? Me? Hah, right. I suck at Starcraft :P

      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
    2. Re:What this proves... by themildassassin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why paraphrase when you can just copy and post the quote?
      "We do intend to announce a new product at the Worldwide Invitational next month in Korea, and we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest in getting an advance look at what that will be, but players will have to wait until May 19th to find out more. Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

      Now let me paraphrase, the first part is saying "We have a secret.", the second part is saying "and we really like Starcraft.", and the last part, "but we can't tell you anything yet."

      I think you are missing something or I am. This is ambiguous PR talk, but nowhere does it state that they are defiantly not going to do Starcraft, in fact they seem to be suggesting that it is in fact a Starcraft game, or they are a bunch of serious teases.

      Also, "fanboi"? Is your disdain of the English language so great that you need to strike out at all of us like that?

    3. Re:What this proves... by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      It's a shame, because I would really like to see another Starcraft. Unfortunately the fanbois are probably scaring Blizzard away from actually doing it, since they know the first screenshots or videos released from beta will set off a torrent of bad press from people saying "What is this crap? They were saying this was ready for release like two years ago, and this is all they have?" Fortunately for you and me, I think there's a strong chance that it might be a starcraft title. They put a lot of development into Starcraft:Ghost ( at one point they had some 100 screenshots of *gameplay* on the website), which apparently was shelved by Vivendi, against the wishes of the developers. Ghost was supposed to be an FPS role-play for gaming consoles. There are also indications, specifically the posting for a job opening for the next-gen MMO, that the new title could be an MMO. It may be that they took all the development for Ghost and repurposed it as an MMO.

      Blizzard is a maverick in the games industry, in that they don't pump out crap title after crap title. They spend a long time developing a solid product. This goes against the wishes of their fans, who want new games now, and also their shareholders, who want new revenue now. They just seem to steadfastly develop quality products -- look at the years they delayed Warcraft III. That's unheard of in the games industry. So I don't think they are scared by fanbois -- fanbois will buy any crap that comes out; certainly they will buy Blizzard's new title no matter what. They waited years for WCIII, and it was successful; they have no choice but to wait the years for whatever Blizzard announces next.
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    4. Re:What this proves... by Phase+Shifter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually et's take those first two parts basically as you state them:

      "we have a secret we'll be reealing next month."
      "We Really like Starcraft."

      the third part, with no reading between lines required, quite plainly says "But the secret we plan to reveal next month has nothing to do with Starcraft."

    5. Re:What this proves... by toriver · · Score: 1

      How does "We can't tell you anything yet" get turned into "it has nothing to do with Starcraft"? You are interpreting in a very strange way. I't like Nintendo who denied the existence of the DS Lite a month before its semi-surprising launch.

    6. Re:What this proves... by Phase+Shifter · · Score: 1

      Since when does "but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard" mean "we're not telling you what we already know" instead of "there's nothing to say?" If you recall, they mentioned something about Starcraft a few months ago, but hinted that it would still be a few years.

    7. Re:What this proves... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I know it's confusing because we're reading an announcement about an announcement, but it's still pretty clear.

      "Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

      They are announcing that they have something in the works they can't say, and they will announce more on May 19th. Then he says that they have nothing to announce about starcraft. You could think that doesn't rule out the possibility that the May 19th announcement is starcraft, but it rules out the possibility that today's announcement is about starcraft, and todays announcement is about the future one. He's saying that he's announcing something, he can't say what it is, but it isn't startcraft.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    8. Re:What this proves... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "...Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

      I bolded the bit you seem to be missing.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:What this proves... by toriver · · Score: 1

      "...Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

      I bolded the other bit you seemed to be missing: at present is not the same as in the next month.

    10. Re:What this proves... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      You need to read what's written. He didn't say "we have nothing to say about Starcraft next month." He said "we have nothing to say about Starcraft *right now*."

      Chris Mattern

    11. Re:What this proves... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      They are announcing that they have something in the works they can't say, and they will announce more on May 19th. Then he says that they have nothing to announce about starcraft. You could think that doesn't rule out the possibility that the May 19th announcement is starcraft, but it rules out the possibility that today's announcement is about starcraft, and todays announcement is about the future one. He's saying that he's announcing something, he can't say what it is, but it isn't startcraft.


      Wow, that's like, Zen, man.

      What's the sound of one game announcing?

      Chris Mattern
  26. I'll go out on a limb with my personal opinion... by alshithead · · Score: 1

    Starcraft 2? Yay!

    I have a big caveat to my first impulse though. Please, please, make sure that the stand alone version is as good, if not better than the original. My game time is limited. I don't play any games online so if there is a new Starcraft, I need there to be an awesome stand alone version.

    --
    I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
  27. Re:WoW/WoS? by bubkus_jones · · Score: 1

    WOW now takes place on multiple worlds (heheh). However, they JUST released Burning Crusade, and they're just about to release a patch that unlocks the final dungeon. I really doubt that they're going to announce another MMORPG. How many people would be willing to spend the time/money on both? How many Starcraft fans aren't also Warcraft fans?

  28. Re:WoW/WoS? by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

    Well I'm not really a Warcraft fan. I like WoW but I don't find it important enough to pay a monthly fee for (don't want to go into why, I know exactly why they do it) but I think Starcraft is much better.

  29. Re:Bah! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    I think that would be good twist on the MMORPG idea. Doing Big stuff right could be interesting. Wargames have been left out because they're too complicated. How you'd manage a fleet of ships and planet/solar system/galaxy wide strategy would be neat. Blizzard is trying to push WoW into massive battles with hundreds of combatants where there's real armies on line and not just playing against scripts. There's definitely a lot of work to make such an idea practical but hard ideas make big profits!!!

  30. Petition by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 1

    There's an online petition designed to get D3 out here, but the petition probably doesn't do much, since I'm pretty sure they've already got something in the works, and its pretty obvious that everyone wants another.

  31. Re:Bah! by Gerzel · · Score: 1

    I could stand to see Starcraft as an MMO (Heck it was Multi Online the first time), but what I DON'T want to see is another single hero based MMO out of it where you have a single character that you "level up" and improve who might summon extra support characters. What I would rather see is that every player take control of a squad or small group of units and have to improve and expand them. Some units will be destroyed along the way while new ones may be recruited. Home base construction ect. Even having players buy ships to move their units from star-system to star system (AKA servers).

  32. It's probably a new MMO by geek · · Score: 1, Interesting

    http://www.blizzard.com/jobopp/

    They posted a new lead engine developer job opening today for a "next gen mmo" which WoW most definitely is not. Count on a new MMO.

    Probably Starcraft but lets hope for Diablo. What I'd REALLY like is something entirely new. Rehashing old stuff gets wel..... old.

    1. Re:It's probably a new MMO by themildassassin · · Score: 1

      Would they really announce a game that they haven't even hired a lead engine developer for?

      They usually have something to show when they announce a new game, especially after not announcing anything for 4 years.

  33. Diablo 3 by gkrat · · Score: 1

    I'd personally vote for diablo 3, bliz already said they're making one eventually. I suppose that would cut more into the WoW crowd though, and end up hurting themselves (i know it'd get me off WoW). That actually might be what the mmo is. Maybe a world of diablo style thing. Rather then morpg, make it an mmorpg.

  34. WoS doesn't make biz sense... by vandezuma · · Score: 1

    Why develop something which can only compete with their biggest source of revenue? If they came out with it, it would mostly just draw people away from WoW. I think they'd be much better off expanding on the Starcraft RTS and making it even more unique and interesting. Then again I could be totally wrong and we will all eventually bow down to our Blizzard overlords.

    --
    "That is the saving grace of humor, if you fail no one is laughing at you." -A. Whitney Brown
  35. Starcraft II by Frozen+Void · · Score: 5, Informative

    Starcraft could be the perfect strategy game if it was more editable and several fixes were applied.
    (applies to Battle.net itself too)
    The map editor sucks(by capabilities,everyone uses Starforge).
    Games start with delay of 5 seconds.
    Ladder was so prone to abuse blizzard closed it on all gateways.
    When someone's client doesn't respond,game DOES NOT drop him,but instead freezees the game,
    shows a non-modal timeout screen,for 40 seconds and then at 0:00 it could just stop if the player uses
    the very popular lag hack.
    Maphack and other exploits are not fixed.Maphack gives an enormous advantage in Starcraft.
    Dragoon(and several other units) AI dances around when used with obstacles.
    Pairs of units start dancing when they can't decide the right of way(heading towards each other).
    All channels on battle.net with exception of 20-30 are not shown in channel list(it probably a crude anti-spam measure blizzard "invented").
    The ability to save games is limited to host(unlike replays).
    The random element of 70% chance firing to higher ground does not belong in this game.
    When connecting to battle.net client opens 7-10 extra connections to the same server,and closes them only after several minutes pass.
    Friendlists are limited to 20.
    ignore lists are stored server side and reset each time you login.
    Ums Map preview is disabled for some reason.
    Maps in singleplayer list are limited to 1024 IIRC,beyond that it just doesn't displays them (batlle.net list works fine).
    Spam bots which spam each 60 seconds are never banned and players who speak too fast are kicked out from the server.
    Replays must be passworded games only.
    The observer glitch:when observer is exactly on center of missile turret, missile turret stops firing and just freezes.
    You need to place map revealers and disable fog of war,but cannot make the map be visible 100% in UMS without this.
    Unit range,cooldown,AI etc are not modifiable by editor.
    lack of math operations and variables in editor.
    Spells/abilities are not modifiable and cannot be cast by triggers with exception of few.
    Direct coordinates and locations are not supported.

    the list goes on and on.

    1. Re:Starcraft II by hansamurai · · Score: 1

      A lot of those issues fall into one of two camps: either the issue was found because the game has been played millions of times and picked apart and hacked to death, that of course bugs are going to crop up; or the issue is with battle.net or the online play in general. The first will always be around because when a game is as popular as StarCraft, people are going to dig into it and find these exploits and bugs. The second will undoubtedly be improved upon as Blizzard has got a lot more experience under their belt with WoW when it comes to delivering an online experience.

      I'm not saying you shouldn't complain, I'm just saying that when a game has been out for almost a decade and is played professionally by some people, issues will be found.

      --
      Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
    2. Re:Starcraft II by Rebelgecko · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to point a few things out.
      1. Though the ladder is closed on most gateways, it's still available on the European one and in a few weeks players on all gateways will be able to form their own ladders/leagues.
      2. Friendslists aren't limited to 20. I have 22 on mine right now.
      3. The reason that not all the channels are listed is because there are literally thousands of them. Many players use bots so they can reserve certain channel names that they want or where their account has
      4. AI is modifiable via map editors. Most 3rd party editors allow AI modifications and the vanilla version of Staredit allows custom AI scripts to a limited extent.
      5. It is very simple for a mapmaker to make maphacks not work. If the mapmaker places certain unused buildings (such as an independant starport IIRC) that are normally unplacable in map editors in an area that isnt able to be viewed without a maphack, when a cheating player sees it Starcraft will crash.

      --
      CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    3. Re:Starcraft II by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to point a few things out.
      1. Though the ladder is closed on most gateways, it's still available on the European one and in a few weeks players on all gateways will be able to form their own ladders/leagues.
      Its not Blizzard ladder,Its WGtour ladder.
      1.15 leagues are private clan ladders.

      2. Friendslists aren't limited to 20. I have 22 on mine right now.
      The limit is about 25.and its server side.Its should be client-side and have at least 65535.

      3. The reason that not all the channels are listed is because there are literally thousands of them. Many players use bots so they can reserve certain channel names that they want or where their account has

      These channels are not know too noobs/average players.
      Thats why bots spam clan channels.ALl of them are hidden.there is no option to make them public.

      4. AI is modifiable via map editors. Most 3rd party editors allow AI modifications and the vanilla version of Staredit allows custom AI scripts to a limited extent.

      AI is very limited (mainly melle and few actions). only 3-4 spells,and the system is non-customizable.
      You can't run a real AI script without modifiyng the game and distributing it to players.

      5. It is very simple for a mapmaker to make maphacks not work. If the mapmaker places certain unused buildings (such as an independant starport IIRC) that are normally unplacable in map editors in an area that isnt able to be viewed without a maphack, when a cheating player sees it Starcraft will crash.

      There already maphacks with anti-crash protection.IIRC they were available in public for three years.

  36. Actually... by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Actually... I for one, welcome our new Zerg overlords ;)

    Well, now seriously, maybe it's just me, but I've had it up to here with all MMOs being medieval fantasy. Nothing wrong with fantasy as such, but a little variety is good, you know?

    Well, that's maybe not technically true, so let me rephrase it a bit. There are a couple of SF MMOs, but so far they sucked hairy ass. Anarchy Online... well, read the Something Awful review, and know that SA is actually kind to them. It was actually even buggier and less fun than that. SWG... biggest franchise ever, and awaited by every SW nerd like the second coming of the messiah, but it started half-arsed (it was launched literally a SW game without Jedi or spaceships at all), and the various updates turned it into an even bigger joke. E.g., the NGE turned it into a FPS with a bad interface, bad design, and bad balance. Etc.

    Just about the only decent non-fantasy MMO that comes to mind is City Of Heroes, and even that one gets boring due to sheer repetition after a while.

    So I'd very much like a _good_ SF MMO for a change. Blizzard have already shown that they can make a good MMO, so here's to hope.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Actually... by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 2, Informative

      EVE online?

      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    2. Re:Actually... by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Hmm... true, I should try that one too. Didn't sound like quite my thing at the time, but I guess it ought to beat running around with an axe again.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    3. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      EVE isn't even a game; it's an accounting spreadsheet with a 3D engine.

    4. Re:Actually... by ZzzzSleep · · Score: 1

      What about Eve Online?

      --
      Emerald Astrology
    5. Re:Actually... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Definately good, although to be honest a lot of EVE players (including myself) are hoping and waiting for another SF (even better space-and-ship-based) MMO other than EVE.

      Despite being a PvP game, EVE PvP sucks. Hours of escalation with no action, finally ending in a short lagfest fleet battle where the outcome is often decided by pure luck (which side gets the most players in after the node restart...)

      The high death penalty means that no one engages unless they're fairly sure of victory, or at least really hurting the enemy. Once the battle is over, it's over for a hours, if not days before another major engagement in the conflict happens, as both sides rebuild their fleets.

      Compare that to day-long (or even longer) campaigns in DAoC, which often started with one or two groups of eight players taking a few towers, with the conflict escalating to multiple 100v100 battles all over the frontier by the end of a weekend day. The low death penalty meant that after a defeat, reinforcements would quickly return, more angry than ever, and sometimes players would use strategies with extremely high risk/reward (such as Mistwraith's infamous bomb groups, going into a crowd of 100 enemies with 8 players, hoping to take a decent number of them out before dying.)

      As to why I'm playing EVE and not DAoC - Ever since Mythic released the Trials of Atlantis expansion, the game has been hemorraghing players from the more casual ranks, and at this point only the most hardcore are left. Massive campaigns no longer happen, just 8v8 skirmishes where the non-hardcore need not even bother going out. EVE is at least growing, and there is stuff to do other than PvP. (Although while things have improved vastly for industrialists, things still are grim for Gimptaki industrial-oriented characters like myself unless you struck gold without T2 blueprints.)

      A space-based MMOG without giant mistakes like the T2 lottery and a more exciting PvP system would grab my attention instantly. CCP's goals of a "factional warfare" system seem to borrow a little of the flavor of DAoC's RvR system, but the game's architecture fundamentally means they can't really do a good factional warfare system (see DAoC's RvR system for factional warfare done right, or at least in terms of fundamental game architecture but not necessarily implementation of all the details) without decimating their existing playerbase a la SWG NGE.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    6. Re:Actually... by Deaney · · Score: 1

      I guess it ought to beat running around with an axe again

      EXACTLY! I play games to escape reality.
      --
      "I like my sex like my basketball, one on one with as little dribbling as possible." - Lt. Frank Drebin
    7. Re:Actually... by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Hmm... I don't think the faction-vs-faction thing is what decimated the SWG player base. Off the top of my head, other stuff ranks higher. Such as:

      - turning the whole game into a whole other genre (let's face it, it's SF Planetside with a horrible interface now),

      - making most popular skill combinations unavailable as a combination or unavailable at all any more (e.g., ask an animal handler if they can even play the same character any more),

      - turning some races into a fuck-up where they kept the previous disadvantages but none of the advantages that balanced them (e.g., Wookies or Trandoshans kept the equipment restrictions, but none of the racial bonuses that made up for that)

      - making what used to be a prestige class into a common class everyone can get, thereby nuking the whole achievement of everyone who worked and grinded to unlock it (mind you, the grind to jedi was a bad idea in the first place, and made a lot of people quit. But two wrongs don't make a right, and stripping them of their hard-earned achievement made even more people quit.)

      - speaking of skills and combinations, the classes are so uni-dimensional it's not even funny. Whereas previously you could mix and match things like being a scout who also mods weapons on the side, or a jedi who can also play an instrument for fun, or other unique character concepts, now everyone is a member of a class of identical clones. And some became a fuck-up that can't even do the quests any more. (E.g., traders or entertainers.)

      - nuking the economy _had_ and making everyone's crafting useless.

      - the new quests are mass-produced crap, whose only "saving grace" is that they merchandise the main SW characters

      - the devs handling everything heavy-handedly and outright lying to the players. I don't know... I don't say they owe me anything, but at least don't treat me badly and don't outright lie to my face. The whole dev attitude in SWG is, well, like going to a shop and being lied to, treated snottily and seeing the shopkeepers act like you're some bum that should be grateful for the great privilege of being _tollerated_ there. I wouldn't think the shop owners owe me anything either, but that's one shop I wouldn't go to ever again.

      Basically, rest assured that the list of "sins" of the NGE is a mile long. Whatever flaws their PvP system has, pfft, it's lost in the decimals as annoyance factor goes.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    8. Re:Actually... by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Eve-Online is good if you like playing with elitists who think that the clunky, confusing, and unintuitive user interface just makes the game more "complex and deep."

      --
      Abaddon: An Xbox 360 Indie game
  37. Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by Hackie_Chan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Scenario A) The game will not follow the exact same formula, instead taking the original and building upon it. Substantial changes to game play and design are bound, implementing common features available in modern RTS games.

    People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too different from the original.

    Scenario B) The game is a minimalist upgrade. Basically being the original but in 3D, with the intention of not trying to break a tried and true formula.

    People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too similar to the original (see reception of Command and Conquer 3).

    --

    What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
    1. Re:Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by militia · · Score: 1

      Sadly, you're right. :(

    2. Re:Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by twitchingbug · · Score: 1

      Here's a radical idea.... Perhaps they could do both? Have a "classic" mode, with updated 3d graphics and such, and have a new starcraft 2 mode. Of course, it wouldn't be a trivial thing to make sure classic mode entirely mimicked every detail/feature/bug of the original, but it might be interesting to take a stab at it.

    3. Re:Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by akypoon · · Score: 1

      If there is a Starcraft 2, it is very likely to be Scenario B. The reason is that Korean gamers are the biggest supporters for Starcraft (they have pro tournament every year, which is a lot of money). If SC2 is too radically different from SC1, Blizzard runs into two primary risks: A) risk of losing the Korean gamers support (which is like Blizzard shotting themselves in the foot); B) the new gaming model they introduced may not be as successful or matured than the SC1 model. This could risk losing both SC1 and SC2 gamers base at the same time (which is like Blizzard shotting themselves in the foot together and then swallow suicide pills).

      But then, Blizzard has to do something with SC series in order to keep the franchise alive. The SC-Ghosts didn't go as planned. So Blizzard now has to bite the bullet with SC2.

    4. Re:Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by Snaller · · Score: 1

      "People will complain that Starcraft 2 is too different from the original. "

      It mustn't be too different, I liked warcraft2 but hated warcraft 3 which had totally fuked it up with heroes and all that crap.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    5. Re:Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by LordBafford · · Score: 1

      I loved warcraft 2 it was a kickass game, SC was awesome as hell too. War3 is a great game too. I had my reservations about ti with the new gold system and all, but after i started playing it i learned to love it. But if they do make an SC2 i hope they leave the hero aspect out of it or if they do make heros don't give them all kinds of crazy imbalanced game turning spells. Makes heros like warcraft 2 where they just had more HP and did more damage.

      --
      Today's Tomorrow is Yesterday's Future! --- "Where Ever You Go, There You Are" -- Diablo 1
    6. Re:Can Starcraft 2 ever meet expactations? by Snaller · · Score: 1

      I certainly hope they leave heroes out as well.

      But I suspect their new announcement is Diablo 3 - alas.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  38. only vulcans should have pointy ears.. by Candera · · Score: 1

    please please please please please please please be world of starcraft.. I hate elves.

    --
    ~Candera
  39. Re:Bah! by TorKlingberg · · Score: 1

    You might want to take a look at Shattered Galaxy:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shattered_Galaxy
    I've only played it a little, and it's a few years old. It comes close to what you described, and I like the idea.

  40. World of Starcraft? WTF? by Czaries · · Score: 2, Insightful

    World of Starcraft? Seriously? Why the hell does everyone keep saying World of Starcraft? This naming convention makes sense for Warcraft or Diablo, where all battles are fought on one world, but not for Starcraft!!! There are at the very least three different planets (Worlds) that will have to exist (one for each race), and we know from the original game that there are far more worlds involved in the storyline than just the three homeworlds.

    I can guarantee you 100% that this game will NOT be named World of Starcraft, regardless of what type of game it turns out to be. That would not make any sense to fans for this brand, and Blizzard knows that. Something like Universe of Starcraft or Galaxy of Starcraft (which has been mentioned by a few) would make MUCH more sense. Use your heads instead of being stuck in a naming convention that won't work for this brand for obvious reasons.

    Welcome to the World of Slashdot.

    1. Re:World of Starcraft? WTF? by Dachannien · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm voting for "Sector of Starcraft". It's got alliteration, it doesn't rip off "Galaxy" from SWG, and nerds will dig it.

    2. Re:World of Starcraft? WTF? by lanceblack · · Score: 1

      Actually WoW already has two playable 'worlds'; dimensions really, and the lore implies countless others. Hell, the Dranei crashed to Azeroth in their damage *spaceship*. There's a lot to suggest that the Worlds of Warcraft and Starcraft are not discrete universes...

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." Darwin
    3. Re:World of Starcraft? WTF? by vain+gloria · · Score: 1

      World of Starcraft? Seriously? Why the hell does everyone keep saying World of Starcraft? This naming convention makes sense for Warcraft or Diablo, where all battles are fought on one world, but not for Starcraft!!! There are at the very least three different planets (Worlds) that will have to exist (one for each race), and we know from the original game that there are far more worlds involved in the storyline than just the three homeworlds.

      There's no need for us to need to be so literal, the word isn't a mere synonym for planet is it? One of Terry Pratchett's early SF novels turned on the interpretation of "Joker's World" being something other than it appeared to be. Some people say I live in my own little world. Cross Walter Sobchak and you're entering a world of pain.

      Dictionary.com gives this as one meaning of the word:

      8. any sphere, realm, or domain, with all pertaining to it: a child's world; the world of dreams; the insect world.

      The World of Warcraft isn't a physical place where Warcraft-ing happens. It's (imagine bad fantasy movie trailer voiceover) "a world like our own but different, a world of magic and adventure, a world where dreams^Wgankings come true". By the same token StarCraft is a world of Zergs, Koreans and outer space. World of StarCraft is a perfectly good name for a game like that, especially since it's more clearly part of the same brand than alternatives such as "Galaxy"/"Universe"/"Time"/etc.

      What czaries might say with irony, I say with conviction: "Welcome to the World of Slashdot" ;)
    4. Re:World of Starcraft? WTF? by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Goblin: I got what you--
      Archon: ANNIHILAAAATE!!!
      Goblin: Aauuuagguuuguhghhh!

    5. Re:World of Starcraft? WTF? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      But do they really want the acronym SOS?

      Chris Mattern

    6. Re:World of Starcraft? WTF? by fractoid · · Score: 1

      There's a lot to suggest that the Worlds of Warcraft and Starcraft are not discrete universes... True. Specific examples off the top of my head:

      * Felhounds look very similar to zerglings.

      * Silithids / Qiraji have the same overlord / bug worker system going.

      * Draeni = Protoss. Don't deny it.

      (Draeni speak with Russian accents, so may have descended from protoss who spent a lot of time with United Earth Protectorate fleet commanders, who also have Russian accents. OK, ok, now I'm stretching it... :P )

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  41. Non suspect.... by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

    WORLD OF DIABLOCRAFT

  42. Re:WoW/WoS? by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Funny

    Spawn more overlords!

    We require more minerals.

  43. You know it's gonna be... by cryocide · · Score: 1

    Aww c'mon now, you know it's gonna be League of Rock N' Roll Racing. You'll have five character classes: Driver, pit crew, rocker (think Guitar Hero), announcer, and... Olaf!

  44. No!! Please don't so this by twigles · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just kicked the WoW habit a couple months ago!

    I've been Blizzard's bitch since 1994 and it sucks. I feel like Sharon Stone in Casino....

  45. Re:WoW/WoS? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't it be :
    Starcraft -> Worlds of Starcraft

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  46. My guess... by Kuvter · · Score: 1

    is that it will be some form of online Starcraft. I'm assuming they'll be using some of the graphics for Starcraft: Ghost which nonchalantly disappeared from their "In development" section of their main website with out a word about it.

    --
    "To be is to do." --Socrates
    "To do is to be." -- Aristotle
    "Do-Be-Do-Be-Do..." --Sinatra
  47. Sure Starcraft II by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Blizzard has confirmed that they'll announce a new product at their World Wide Invitation in Korea next month."

    The "Korea" is the key, a country known for its massive amount of current Starcraft players.

    It will be at least Starcraft related.

  48. Re:WoW/WoS? by x-caiver · · Score: 1

    The person that submitted this article+headline was clearly full of hot Vespine gas

  49. Re:WoW/WoS? by holywarrior21c · · Score: 1
    Insert correct cd named "starcraft: Brood war".

    --

  50. Diablo III? by ArAgost · · Score: 1

    What about Diablo III? Seems a fair second choice to me.

    1. Re:Diablo III? by ArAgost · · Score: 1

      do you realize we're on slashdot, right?

  51. What's blackthorne? by Snaller · · Score: 1

    And your link doesn't work.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:What's blackthorne? by fmarkham · · Score: 2, Informative
      From the home of the underdogs:

      Blackthorne is an excellent action/adventure hybrid in the same vein as Delphine's celebrated Out of This World. Probably the most underrated, overlooked game from Blizzard (made before the company became famous with WarCraft series), the game received little attention when it was released (perhaps due to the fanfare surrounding Warcraft 1, released around the same time). Which is a shame, because it is an excellent, addictive platformer that is arguably better than Flashback. The plot is mundane enough: you are the only hero who could stop evil Sarlac from conquering the kingdoms. Armed with a shotgun whose firepower can be increased, and a few bombs and guided missiles, you must break through the Orcish army and kill Sarlac inside his heavily fortified castle.
      Or why not download the abandonware from the above site and see for yourself.
  52. Other games at blizzard by Danathar · · Score: 1

    Does Blizzard DO anything other than WoW (That's been announced)? I went to their site a couple of weeks ago because I had not heard anything in a LONG time other than WoW and the site was basically one big WoW website.

  53. Artanis says... by phoros · · Score: 1

    This is not warcraft in space!

  54. Re:WoW/WoS? by LocoMan · · Score: 1

    Maybe they'll create a starcraft MMO that links into WoW so that Azeroth and Outland are two planets in the starcraft universe... then again that wouldn't go too well with warcraft fans that were whining that the adition of the draenei and their "netherships" felt too sci-fiey.. :)

  55. Re:No!! Please don't so this by Oafed · · Score: 1

    They are just announcing the game. That means it won't actually be out for like 3 more years.

  56. Re:This post has given me a idea by darkhitman · · Score: 1

    Because I can moderate and post in the same discussion, right? No, someone just agreed with me.

    In any case, the word 'may' is a wonderful qualifier in that it, conveniently, is always right =D

    --
    Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
  57. Re:Starcraft 2... but it's an MMO... by Wildclaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MMO doesn't equal MMORPG, even though the RPG sub-genre is the biggest of the MMO genres. It could be just as possible that they are planning an MMORTS, or maybe a MMOFPS.

  58. Re:I can't believe this is on the front page by Nemetroid · · Score: 1

    Does this list have many spinoff titles on it? Blizzard is one of few companies I believe to be trustworthy.

  59. How about a major Expansion pack? by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Make lots of money with a lot less development!
    Wish list:

    Single player (or just call it slashdot player)
    -Upgraded old engine, still 2D. 3D is a waste of resources for a top-down game. If you watch for variations in character animation then you need help!
    -double or triple size the map limits
    -400 unit limits
    -more units and buildings! fill those empty boxes!
    -a few new tilesets
    -1024x768, don't care about graphics enhancement
    -more unit sounds which play randomly this time (double it, some are dull after 10 years)
    -don't get stuck walking in between buildings...
    -larger transports
    -force fields (warcraft 2 walls) which consume resources when running, especially when hit.
    -human booster shots are replaced with something better (bloodlust?)
    -no critters
    -heroes remain the way they are in SC! please!
    -herd mode: like patrol but units follow the others who are moving to attack
    -patrol mode lets you draw a simple path
    -AI that doesn't give up when I start killing cpus
    -AI that builds defenses when it gets low on money
    -AI selectable mode where it can't move everything in parallel.
    -AI selectable mode where teams of computers fight each other-- so you can fight 8 of them
    -a way to survive the start of a 1 vs 5+ cpu game (I rarely make it past the 1st few attacks with 4 cpus)

    Multiplayer:
    -10 player games
    -No fighting until you reach a threshold
    -Limiting of attack units, no limit on building
    -Pooled Resource Team mode
    -limited "bullet time" to slowdown game speed

    Unrealistic Wishes:
    -python scripting of your units loaded from files you created allowing geeks or motivate players to learn programming. Lets you trigger automatic behavior, giving the player the ability to act more like the cpu does. Optional allow for multiplayer.
    -online contests between players where they submit their scripts and just watch- like computers playing chess against each other (limited market, but educational.)
    -How about a Java port so I can run it in 50 years?? (emulators will probably become an IP crime and your telescreen will enforce it)
    -Port it to the Nintendo Wii (will strengthen your arm...)
    -nice continuation of storyline
    -use h.263 video (hey some people have old computers just for other players)
    -charge $100 because I'd pay double that for something as good and long lasting as starcraft
    -surrender causes mass suicide
    -no subscription fee
    -allow open battlenet back
    -open source the OLD SC (like others do) when the new one comes out (because it will probably mess it up so the rest of us can develop the old one)

    --
    Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
  60. OTOH by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "Also, we have a very strong connection with the characters and settings of StarCraft, and we do plan to revisit that universe at some point in the future, but we don't have anything new to announce in that regard at present."

    says that aren't.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:OTOH by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Not really. They don't have anything new to announce at present. Next month, maybe they will.

      Chris Mattern

  61. Re:Starcraft Ghost? by Omestes · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ghost died, pure and simple. It was Blizzards first attempt at re-entering the console market since the SNES days, and they got beaten by their own characteristically long development cycles. It was supposed to be XBox and Ps2, but then the next gen rolled around while they were still working on it, and eventually they gave up, since it would already be dated (its Blizzard, 5-6 years is a SHORT cycle).

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  62. What makes you think Starcraft? by ADamiani · · Score: 1

    I'd love to see a Starcraft-2, but they've said they're aiming to push out annual WoW expansions. If they're even pretending to stick to that, they'd have to announce the next one pretty soon, right?

  63. SoS by FrozenFOXX · · Score: 1

    Well if World of Warcraft was amazing in terms of popularity perhaps it was due to it being dubbed WOW, meaning surprising.

    If that's true then perhaps a Starcraft MMO would be named System of Starcraft which would lead us to S.O.S. I can't say that'd be good for their business.

    --
    "Just a fox, a whisper."
  64. Confirmation of a possible confirmation by popo · · Score: 1

    In other news, it has finally been confirmed that a company which may be Blizzard will be confirming an announcment regarding a final
    date at which confirmation will be given regarding a game which may be Starcraft, or may not be. Details will be announced after a final confirmation date is
    set -- and an announcement date will be confirmed no later than tuesday during a conference call which may be held at 4 o'clock or may not happen at all.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  65. true true by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 1

    I always call fastest newb speed. The reason being is that newbs don't know strategy as well as pros. Pros want to do more, but the latency restricts you on fastest. So instead of doing more commando style raids on fastest, you end up playing conservative and expanding the entire board, then crashing your opponent when you near 200 supply. I used to be one of the best in the world back in late 90s with a winning record against every person on the planet. I just quit when hacks came out, and I thought invitations to South Korea were spam emails.

    So many people will argue fastest is better because it requires "more reflexes" than fast, but their argument loses when you realize that reflexes still help on fast. Their argument also loses when you say that a more skilled player would make more moves on fast, while a less skilled player would just sit around and wait. The argument goes both ways, but I clearly favor fast as the speed of choice. I'm in the minority though.

    I hope its Starcraft 2, so I can take up arms again in yet another Blizzard game. Command and Conquer 3 is a joke when it comes to balancing and cheese strats. Unless they have a nice patch to that game, I'm done playing it.

    --
    God spoke to me.
  66. The changes of WC3... by Rosebud128 · · Score: 1

    Warcraft 3 was about the BATTLES (using your hero, items, and units precisely in battles) that took precedence over production and holding parts of the map. Warcraft 2 and Starcraft were more about production. If you got good amount of production going, you could just throw your units into the enemy lines endlessly (which was kinda fun).

    I learned to love Warcraft 3 due to the top replays (that taught me how to really play the game and stop getting frustrated that I couldn't play it like Warcraft 2/Starcraft). But a more significant problem was the changing of the lore. Orcs were fun in Warcraft 1 and 2 because they were bad and evil. Humans vs. Orcs were fun. Now, Orcs acted like Native Americans and tried to be 'noble' and all. Sorry, no. And who liked the lore of the Night Elves?

    We'll have to see what direction Blizzard takes Starcraft 2. Hopefully, it will be like the first Starcraft and they won't change the dark themes of the game.

  67. Re:Starcraft: Ghost by LordBafford · · Score: 1

    LOL keep up with your news, that was canceled a while ago. cause it took way too long to make. plus it probably would have sucked anyways.

    --
    Today's Tomorrow is Yesterday's Future! --- "Where Ever You Go, There You Are" -- Diablo 1
  68. Come back to us! by Rowan_u · · Score: 1

    By disavowing pc RTS gaming you're missing out on some of the best RTS titles of all time. Ever hear of this little company called Relic? Lets see, you've got Homeworld 2, Warhammer 40,000, and most recently, Company of Heroes. I'd agree with you that most modern RTS games don't live up to Starcraft (Supreme Commander, Earth 2160, Stronghold 2, and Lord of the Rings were all crap). However, Relic has been surpassing Blizzard for years, especially on the single player side of things.

    --
    only one everything
  69. All about the zoom by jfodale · · Score: 1

    If this announcement does end up being Starcraft 2 (or any other RTS for that matter), please Blizzard, rip a page out of the Supreme Commander book. Tactical zoom is a must for any RTS here on out.

    After playing SupCom, every other RTS makes me cry when I try to zoom out and get the global view.

    --
    Waiting for Warhammer Online.
  70. Obvious by tbannist · · Score: 1

    I'd expect an announcement regarding the 2008 expansion to WoW. They previously promised to do a yearly expansion to WoW and May's about the right time to begin hyping a december release.

    Even if it were Starcraft, I don't have high hopes for it. WoW's customer service and Burning Crusade's grindfest disappointed me to the point where I no longer have any goodwill for Blizzard's name. Just as well, I suppose, it's been hollowed out and worn as a jaunty cap by Vivendi. The designers who built Starcraft don't work for Vivendi. Hell the desginers who built World of Warcraft don't work for Vivendi any more either. I wouldn't be surprised if the Blizzard division of Vivendi does not currently have the ability to produce a Starcraft 2, let alone make a worthy sequel.

    I'm very sure that Vivendi had no interest in Starcraft when they bought it, they were only looking at the subscription revenues of WoW.

    --
    Fanatically anti-fanatical
  71. Re:WoW/WoS? by wikdwarlock · · Score: 1

    When I was in college, we always thought it sounded more like "lesbian gas". We need more lesbian gas!

    --

    "I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
  72. MMORTS? by Stroot · · Score: 1

    Another option could be an MMORTS. That would really be next-gen

    Could be so cool, an always expanding galaxies where millions of players are building their bases and attacking eachother.
    Probably very hard to balance, and what happens with your base when you are not online for example?
    But if any company could pull it off it would be Blizzard.