Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

StarCraft, Nothing But StarCraft

Posted by Zonk on from the power-overwhelming dept.

Now that the news has been out for a few days and game journalists have had a chance to chat with the folks at Blizzard, there are a number of new stories detailing parts of the StarCraft II world. A massive press briefing about the game fills in a few more details on the game; only three factions, no new races, the game is built with competitive play in mind, and will run on both XP and Vista. For more nitty-gritty elements, the company held panel discussions on the art design and gameplay elements of the upcoming game. Video from the event is now widely available as well; check out the official trailer, some example gameplay, or the epic 22-minute long developer walkthrough.

6 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. Who cares about XP and Vista? by PygmySurfer · · Score: 5, Informative

    will run on both XP and Vista.

    Like most recent Blizzard releases, it will also ship simultaneously for the Mac.

    1. Re:Who cares about XP and Vista? by Bobartig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Blizzard has said on multiple occasions that one of the primary reasons they release on both Mac and PC is quality. After farming out [I think it was] Starcraft's port to a 3rd party company, and having numerous problems and delays, they developed their own in-house port team for [maybe it was] diablo II. Working on both platforms allows them to find/fix more bugs and make a more solid product on both platforms.

      Some bugs will exist on both platforms, but reproduce easier on a particular one, so developing on PC (which is what I assume they do) while doing a concurrent port for Mac improves the end quality of both products.

      I'm a bit blurry on which game's porting they were miffed about, leading to performing the next major project in-house, so replace the two game titles above with ones that make sense to you.

      At any rate, I'm looking forward to the big collector's edition box, and playing Starcraft II on my mac.

      --
      This is where I get my recommended daily allowance of "Foot in Mouth."
    2. Re:Who cares about XP and Vista? by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mac OS X has a BSD/unix/posix layer, but there's a lot of other stuff (Quartz, Aqua, display PDF, cocoa, carbon, etc) involved.

      A chainsaw and a car both run on gasoline and oil, but I wouldn't ride a chainsaw.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  2. Re:Multiple OS Support by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nice completely uninformed jab. Not only does Blizzard ALWAYS release a mac and a pc version at the same time, they also tend to make the final product compatible with WINE. WoW used to play beautifully in WINE, though I haven't tried it out in a while.

    Say what you will about them, but they take cross-platform compatibility seriously.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  3. Re:Mac version? by Elder+Entropist · · Score: 5, Informative

    If Blizzard conforms to recent form, no there won't be a Mac version.

    There will be one version that works on both Mac and PC. Buy the game and you're set either way.

    As someone who uses both, Blizzard has my undying praise for not making me buy two different copies. I will buy every non-MMS the company makes for this alone. (Not to mention that make awesome RTS games.)

  4. Subscription fees for Starcraft 2 multiplayer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    One thing this article didn't mention: the Blizzard reps were asked whether there would be subscription fees attached to battle.net, and they refused to comment. Not even a peep.

    They were willing to give "tight-lipped" responses to plot spoilers, but this issue they wouldn't comment on at all.

    I can see why they'd want to keep silent if subscription fees are in the works for battle.net, as it would put a damper on the hype cyclone that's been stirred up in gaming news since its announcement. I can't think of any reason why they wouldn't just deny it if the option weren't at least on the table.

    Considering this game's market position (a blockbuster RTS hasn't been released in years and obviously there is great interest), Vivendi's/Blizzard's great post-RTS success with WoW, Starcraft's international appeal (especially in the launch country, South Korea, where subscription-based games across all genres make up the majority of the PC game market) and other previously non-subscription genres testing the waters (e.g. Hellgate: London, the "spiritual successor to Diablo" made by ex-Blizzard employees)... Starcraft 2 seems like the perfect property to add a monthly fee to -- even if it did rouse some negative sentiment, it would likely still be successful.

    I strongly suspect there's some form of fee in the works. If not, it would be nice if Blizzard would make that clear.