Blizzard is taunting us...

[Big Bottom]

It looks like Starcraft is off the list.

 

Why do you say that? I'll be genuinely disappointed if this game isn't Starcraft 2, I mean the announcement is taking place in Korea which is the heart of Starcraft-fever.

[Pop]

Warcraft 3 was terribly, terribly boring. But I was into it for a bit. Back when I got it, my name for all my in-game accounts and such was "Thrall", so when I started the game and my character's actual given name was Thrall it threw me for a loop. So I had fun with it until it started to suck.

 

Up until Warcraft 3 I considered Blizzard to be a creator of genre masterpieces par excellence.

Edited May 14, 2007 by Pop

[Fenghuang]

Aren't the highlighted ones the ones still on the list? Starcraft is now greyed out. I'm just as disappointed as you.

[Tale]

Aren't the highlighted ones the ones still on the list? Starcraft is now greyed out. I'm just as disappointed as you.

The highlighted ones are the ones they've "uncovered" as the cover page. They did Warcraft, then Diablo, Starcraft is tomorrow.

[LadyCrimson]

Whether one likes their games or not, typically Blizzard makes good fast-food games, and usually supports them better than most, even years and years later. Whether they've lost their 'magic touch' or not because of those who left, I haven't decided yet.

 

As much as I might like a well-done Diablo3, I'd like a completely new game even more ... not likely that's their next move tho.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Starcraft was the greatest RTS ever hands down.

 

As for WC3, I DESPISE the main game, but DotA is the greatest custom user map EVER. I found heroes stupid and unneeded in the normal game as it completely threw everything off. But using the heroes system in a bigger way with less micro-management but much more depth is just great.

 

Please, DotA Allstars is terrible. About 10 fun heroes, and 90 other crap and rushed heroes, more on items than the heroes, thousands of noobs and other bad stuff make DOtA the most overrated custom game ever.

 

SC wasn't that good... cinematics were better in Wc3, and not only from graphics point-of-view.

 

 

Anyways, I'm hoping for a new franchise.

[Big Bottom]

Like I said in another thread, one of the bigwigs at Blizzard has already said recently that they'd be revisiting the Starcraft universe sometime before the 10 year anniversary of the first game. I think SC was in 1998 so I'm 99.9% sure this is going to be a Starcraft game and it had better not be another MMO or I'll go and sulk in the corner.

Edited May 14, 2007 by Big Bottom

[metadigital]

The point is that, although Blizzard don't invent genres, they make the defining game for the genre. And they seem to have tapped into a demand.

 

With a bit of luck they will create a popular, critically acclaimed game (that I like... " )

[Accelerator]

I want Warcraft as a single player RPG or RTS again

[Diamond]

I don't understand what is wrong with Warcraft 3. I think it is a good game. And I don't feel any major difference in my interest in either WC2, WC3 or Starcraft. *shrug*

[theslug]

I don't understand what is wrong with Warcraft 3. I think it is a good game. And I don't feel any major difference in my interest in either WC2, WC3 or Starcraft. *shrug*

It's fanboi-ism. I played starcraft a few times, it was nothing special in my opinion.

[Calax]

I don't understand what is wrong with Warcraft 3. I think it is a good game. And I don't feel any major difference in my interest in either WC2, WC3 or Starcraft. *shrug*

it's a good game it's just that it's no longer about armies kicking the crap out of each other.

[Lorfean]

I think the Hero thing was just really hit or miss. I thought it was innovative and added depth to the game, where other people said it sucked. W/e thats cool, I think a lot of people just say that because they were bitter and got destroyed in a long string of games by some unfair hero or unit strategies. Which is kind of why I hated WoW. But there are counters in wc3 whereas WoW you had to reroll and lose all the hours you put into a class.

 

Um... You hated WoW because you "had" to reroll after being destroyed over and over again by players using unfair strategies? What an odd and narrow-minded (not to mention "wrong") way to describe the way that game works...

 

I assume you played on a PvP server and got your chosen class "nerfed" in one of Blizzard's infamous patches? (OMG Blizzard RUINED Priests!! They don't listen to us!! I'm gonna cancel my subscription and will NEVER buy ANY game from them again!! You SUCK, Blizzard!!!!)

 

Well, in my experience Blizzard has done a pretty good job at balancing the various classes' strengths and weaknesses and actually *preventing* the use of "unfair strategies". If you felt that your character was a victim of unfair play then you should've just switched servers or maybe re-arranged your talents or tried and get some better equipment. Rerolling is never something that you "have" to do. From what I've seen, it's mostly something that players do out of a kind of childish frustration for their class losing a bit of its former uber-powers in the balancing process, suddenly rendering them "useless" in their eyes. It's kinda silly.

 

 

L.

 

Edit: If your reply to this consists of you calling me a n00b and telling me that I should learn2play, I'll laugh at you. Hard.

Edited May 15, 2007 by Lorfean

[Tale]

Aren't the highlighted ones the ones still on the list? Starcraft is now greyed out. I'm just as disappointed as you.

http://blizzard.com/

 

Check it today, the 15th, and don't say I never gave you nothin'.

[Gorgon]

"*

Starcraft was the greatest RTS ever hands down."

 

 

No... No................... No.

[metadigital]

Aren't the highlighted ones the ones still on the list? Starcraft is now greyed out. I'm just as disappointed as you.

http://blizzard.com/

 

Check it today, the 15th, and don't say I never gave you nothin'.

I see why the Goth sub-community might like this game.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

"*

Starcraft was the greatest RTS ever hands down."

 

 

No... No................... No.

 

Besides, these days graphics and other stuff are so much better. SC couldn't beat a good modern RTS.

[Lyric Suite]

Besides, these days graphics and other stuff are so much better. SC couldn't beat a good modern RTS.

 

SC would still run circles around most modern RTS. And graphics? Who gives a [flying kick at a donut]?

Edited May 15, 2007 by metadigital
profanity

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Notice I never said most of the modern RTS.

 

I give a [flying kick at a donut] about graphics. But thats just me.

[theslug]

I think the Hero thing was just really hit or miss. I thought it was innovative and added depth to the game, where other people said it sucked. W/e thats cool, I think a lot of people just say that because they were bitter and got destroyed in a long string of games by some unfair hero or unit strategies. Which is kind of why I hated WoW. But there are counters in wc3 whereas WoW you had to reroll and lose all the hours you put into a class.

 

Um... You hated WoW because you "had" to reroll after being destroyed over and over again by players using unfair strategies? What an odd and narrow-minded (not to mention "wrong") way to describe the way that game works...

 

I assume you played on a PvP server and got your chosen class "nerfed" in one of Blizzard's infamous patches? (OMG Blizzard RUINED Priests!! They don't listen to us!! I'm gonna cancel my subscription and will NEVER buy ANY game from them again!! You SUCK, Blizzard!!!!)

 

Well, in my experience Blizzard has done a pretty good job at balancing the various classes' strengths and weaknesses and actually *preventing* the use of "unfair strategies". If you felt that your character was a victim of unfair play then you should've just switched servers or maybe re-arranged your talents or tried and get some better equipment. Rerolling is never something that you "have" to do. From what I've seen, it's mostly something that players do out of a kind of childish frustration for their class losing a bit of its former uber-powers in the balancing process, suddenly rendering them "useless" in their eyes. It's kinda silly.

 

 

L.

 

Edit: If your reply to this consists of you calling me a n00b and telling me that I should learn2play, I'll laugh at you. Hard.

ROFL l2p nubsauce. You most likely obviously never played a druid for the first couple of months that WoW came out. Feral was a joke back then, and spamming moonfire was pretty much the only way to go. You thought WoW was balanced? rofl. Umm hunters, shamans, paladins? I bet you played alliance or something.

[kumquatq3]

Besides, these days graphics and other stuff are so much better. SC couldn't beat a good modern RTS.

 

SC would still run circles around most modern RTS. And graphics? Who gives a [flying kick at a donut]?

 

I agree with that, except you said "most" when you should have said ALL modern RTS. When you start naming these "modern RTS" you see how thin the list of games that even approach SC really is. It's really a FO situation in alot of ways. Some games may have come up with a nifty new angle on the genre and prettier graphics, but they never got the core game play better than SC. Both Campaign and Multiplayer.

 

www.starcraft2.com

 

^be shocked an amazed where it leads!

[Cantousent]

Whether one likes their games or not, typically Blizzard makes good fast-food games...

 

Give me a break, Lady. Who creates the gourmet dining experience to which you compare Blizzard's "fast-food."

 

In the world of computer gaming, Blizzard is the gourmet chef. That's not because I've enjoyed their every game. In fact, I did not enjoy WC3, never played WC1 or2, and have only a brief memory of SC. What I can tell you about any of the Blizzard games to which I've had even a fleeting exposure is that they are polished. The idea that the games are fast food implies that the folks at Blizzard throw their games together quickly, with a very short development cycle, and that they don't take the time to craft their games with love and care. This is simply not true. Even as a statement in defense of Blizzard, your language is highly prejudiced.

[Tale]

I'm noticing a lot of sickening elitism in this thread.

[LadyCrimson]

Give me a break, Lady. Who creates the gourmet dining experience to which you compare Blizzard's "fast-food."

 

In the world of computer gaming, Blizzard is the gourmet chef. That's not because I've enjoyed their every game. In fact, I did not enjoy WC3, never played WC1 or2, and have only a brief memory of SC. What I can tell you about any of the Blizzard games to which I've had even a fleeting exposure is that they are polished. The idea that the games are fast food implies that the folks at Blizzard throw their games together quickly, with a very short development cycle, and that they don't take the time to craft their games with love and care. This is simply not true. Even as a statement in defense of Blizzard, your language is highly prejudiced.

Give me a break, Cant; nowhere did I say that I didn't like Blizzard or thought they had a terrible programming/tech record re: their games.

 

By fast food I meant the style of the games they tend to be (often) noted for, that many on this forum say they dislike - ie, click-fest no-story action RPG's.

[Tale]

By fast food I meant the style of the games they tend to be (often) noted for, that many on this forum say they dislike - ie, click-fest no-story action RPG's.

That's only one of their 3 most popular franchises. The very one that I've noticed a number of people on this forum express a distinct liking for!

Or maybe it was just Raven and she seemed like several people.

Edited May 15, 2007 by Tale