LoneWolf16 Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Just a question....but....when, if ever, would be a logical estimate on a release, or even the beginning/continuation of development, for Starcraft 2? Blizzard even thinking about it? Or are they too busy toying with WoW support and fixes? I had thought that some of nature's journeymen had made men and not made them well, for they imitated humanity so abominably. - Book of Counted Sorrows 'Cause I won't know the man that kills me and I don't know these men I kill but we all wind up on the same side 'cause ain't none of us doin' god's will. - Everlast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Child of Flame Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Just a question....but....when, if ever, would be a logical estimate on a release, or even the beginning/continuation of development, for Starcraft 2? Blizzard even thinking about it? Or are they too busy toying with WoW support and fixes? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Right now they're extremely busy fixing the WoW servers, I seriously respect them for the way they put all things aside to make sure their paying players got a good experience, they're a real class act. I dunno a possible date...but I'd say 2006 early estimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 I predict a 2006 announcement, shortly after the WoW expansion is released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B5C Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Check out http://www.blizzard.com/ They have alot a job openings. SO some of them could be for SC2 or all those jobs are for the Korean WOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerslave Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Warcraft 3 SHOULD HAVE been StarCraft 2, but that's a completely different point for a debate. It will come out sooner or later. The rule of successful games getting sequels will be proven right once more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darque Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Warcraft 3 SHOULD HAVE been StarCraft 2, but that's a completely different point for a debate. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No... just no... WC3 sucked... hopefully SC2 won't... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llyranor Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Starcraft Ghost isn't following FOBOS or Xcom Enforcer's route AT ALL! (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan the Terrible Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 It'll happen. We just don't know when. With Starcraft II, Blizzard simply can't afford to screw up. They could make out like bandits financially no matter what, of course, but if there's one thing you have to respect Blizzard for, it's that they never intentionally release crap. I think Blizzard will try to equal or even surpass the original, especially in the Multiplayer game. In order to do that, it's gonna take blood, sweat, and tears by the bucketful, not to mention lots and lots of time. If I were a decision maker at Blizzard, I would be scared out of my wits at the prospect of following up a game which has enjoyed such immense popularity; how do you top a game which had it's own television channel for Championship matches in Korea? So we'll see a Starcraft II, but probably not soon....hopefully not soon, unless they've been working on it in secret for god only knows how long. I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you But I get the feeling that you don't like it What's with all the screaming? You like monkeys, you like ponies Maybe you don't like monsters so much Maybe I used too many monkeys Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mEtaLL1x Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 WC3 sucked... hopefully SC2 won't... I assume you are not very familiar with progaming, eh? Well, WC3 stands EQUAL with SC as a cyber-sport game. Well, I mean WC3-TFT - the original was crap in terms of balance. But TFT is *really* well balanced (far from perfect, of course, but what's not?). Plus, it's much harder to balance WC3TFT than SC, because WC3 has so many nuances and additional features like heroes, items and the like. I've played it quite seriously for enough time to judge. But if we are talking single-player-wise, story-wise, then it's truly a matter of taste. I love both of them, but I have deeper love in SC story, of course. It's much more touching and strong. 2 Ivan the Terrible Yeah, I agree. It's real hard to surpass the predecessor. SC is truly one of the GREATEST games in human history, along with chess and others. But I have complete confidence in Blizzard. They are truly the greatest developer out there, so they are bound to succeed. And don't look at the SC: Ghost - Blizzard does not develop it, they are publishing it, and cooperating just a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf16 Posted February 2, 2005 Author Share Posted February 2, 2005 If development hasn't even begun, then were talking another 2 to 4 years until a release is even probable. That'd make, how long since the original, and even Broodwar? Almost a decade...yet, I suppose it will be worthwhile, after all, up until recently, I still played SC off and on. I have confidence in Blizzard, they've shown themselves to be dedicated to quality gaming, and...well, they're one of the few developers I actually have any faith in (No offense Obsidian, or Bioware). Hope it's soon, but I'd wait another 6 years to get a game as good as the original. I had thought that some of nature's journeymen had made men and not made them well, for they imitated humanity so abominably. - Book of Counted Sorrows 'Cause I won't know the man that kills me and I don't know these men I kill but we all wind up on the same side 'cause ain't none of us doin' god's will. - Everlast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mEtaLL1x Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 In recent interview Sams and Metzen told us that Blizzard will not do solely MMORPGs, it will be just a part of their company. So, they'll continue creating games like StarCraft. So I'm sure that SC2 WILL be. But for now, they gotta stabilize the WoW, because it's a whole new genre for them, so it's kinda hard to adjust to its complexity. Once they get pretty comfortable with WoW, they'll put a lot of effort into SC2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazis Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 Starcraft:Ghost might be a nice "trailer" to SC2. But SC2 cant best SC. Or it has to be like HL2 to HL1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mEtaLL1x Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 tarcraft:Ghost might be a nice "trailer" to SC2 Yeah, like a lil intro movie, no more. ^_^ Anyway, I don't even consider Ghost at all, since it's not a Blizz project But SC2 cant best SC Everything is possible. Or it has to be like HL2 to HL1 That's right: just different. THere is no such thing as "best it, or not". It's juist gonna be differnet., and equally great. Just like WC3:TFT and SC2 - both masterpieces, but very different. Although still SC2 must retain that atmosphere, although strategic aspects may vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Early 2006 is wishful thinking. I'd have to say, it could possibly be announced between late 2006 to early 2007. It would have a whole hell of a lot to live up to if it were to surpass the original. I think Blizzard could very much out-do Starcraft... I think Warcraft III surpassed Warcraft II on every level. They know their games, they know how to make them great, and they don't half-ass on any aspect of their games. I was reading some interview that (I think) Gamespot did, and Bill Roper of Blizzard Entertainment said that everytime they get an available team to start working on a game, that Starcraft II is always at the top of the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mEtaLL1x Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Yeah, I agree completely, Mole. Blizzard sure knows how to do their games. And they really respect their fans. I haven't seen another company (no offense), who did SO MANY patches, even long after the release. So I have complete confidense in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Yeah, I agree completely, Mole. Blizzard sure knows how to do their games. And they really respect their fans. I haven't seen another company (no offense), who did SO MANY patches, even long after the release. So I have complete confidense in them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Have you seen how many patches Neverwinter Nights has lately? It's up to what now v1.65 or something? " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosbjerg Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 number of patches just show how unbalanced/buggy a game was to being with .. Fortune favors the bald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 number of patches just show how unbalanced/buggy a game was to being with .. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or at least developer devotion to the game. Just because a game has only one or two patches doesn't mean it isn't laden with bugs/completely unbalanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosbjerg Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 true .. at least the developers should be commended for bothering to make patches in the first place! but I was just saying that it's not always a good sign that a game has 140 patches! Fortune favors the bald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raneforyon Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Starcraft:Ghost might be a nice "trailer" to SC2 Yeah, like a lil intro movie, no more. ^_^ Anyway, I don't even consider Ghost at all, since it's not a Blizz project Yes, it is. It was being co-developed by Nihilistic Software, but for some reason (don't really remember why, i think they didn't meet Blizzard's expectations), Blizzard is now the only developer of SC: Ghost. Check their FAQ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUIX Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 God knows when Ghost is even going to come out. I lost interest in Blizzard after Diablo 2. That was the last game I waited on and was interested. Anyone notice Nova got a total facelift? I didn't even follow the game but they scrapped the realistic looking cgi model for an more anime look. "For ourselves, we shall not trouble you with specious pretences- either of how we have a right to our empire because we overthrew the Mede, or are now attacking you because of wrong that you have done us- and make a long speech which would not be believed; and in return we hope that you, instead of thinking to influence us by saying that you did not join the Lacedaemonians, although their colonists, or that you have done us no wrong, will aim at what is feasible, holding in view the real sentiments of us both; since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percival Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Didnt Blizzard contract some other company to make SC Ghost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mEtaLL1x Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Yeah, the first company - NIhilistic, prolly, - was kinda quick with Ghost and thought it was ready, but Blizzard (they sure know better) said that it ain't done yet, so they dismissed Nihilistic and found another developer: Swinging Ape, just at the time where they were between projects, and now they develop Ghost, under Blizzard's watchful eye. Plus, Swinging Ape's office is about ten minutes from Blizzard's, so it's convinient. number of patches just show how unbalanced/buggy a game was to being with .. Nonsense! Those patches are not for the bugs, really, but for getting rid of imbalance. SC didn't have any major bugs since 1.03. And you can't balance the game enough during beta-tests, imbalance will show up eventually after release. So, patches are a MUST. Blizzard has some of the most RELIABLE and BALANCED games EVER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosbjerg Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 as I wrote: unbalanced/buggy Patches is a sign that a game is unbalanced or buggy (or missing some vital pieces), there's no disputing that .. So, if a game recieves - say 10 patches, it could be a sign that the developers aren't exaclty the best at creating the needed balance/removing bugs etc .. but all due respect for them wanting to correct it! of course .. Now I'm not saying patches are a completly bad thing! it's great that the developers are actually taking an interest in the players needs!! but I would rather just have a perfect game to begin with than patching it 40+ times, because the games was rushed/undone .. whatever .. Fortune favors the bald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percival Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 as I wrote: unbalanced/buggyPatches is a sign that a game is unbalanced or buggy (or missing some vital pieces), there's no disputing that .. So, if a game recieves - say 10 patches, it could be a sign that the developers aren't exaclty the best at creating the needed balance/removing bugs etc .. but all due respect for them wanting to correct it! of course .. Now I'm not saying patches are a completly bad thing! it's great that the developers are actually taking an interest in the players needs!! but I would rather just have a perfect game to begin with than patching it 40+ times, because the games was rushed/undone .. whatever .. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Can't be done. A million players will find something quite unbalancing no matter how hard a dev team tries to balance everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now