Kotaku has the scoop on a Battlefield-like prototype that had been in dev for 2 years.
Read the whole story
Read the whole story
Report: Blizzard began making, then canceled, a StarCraft first-person shooter
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Blizzard is really good at cancelling games long in dev it seems :/
Also there is a Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2 in dev? is that official?
Also there is a Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2 in dev? is that official?
Upvote
40
(42
/
-2)
I really don't want to rehash why I think the Blizzard of yesteryear was so much better than the Blizzard of now. The only thing that I am starting to wonder now is how long this company can last without a cohesive vision for what they want to accomplish. I think they need to start listening to the fans (yay classic WoW) and try to get back to their roots as much as possible. Try to seek out what gamers actually WANT not what may benefit their bottom line. If you gain the trust back of the consumers they will love you again and you will become lucrative and not lose your soul in the process.
Upvote
17
(31
/
-14)
Ahh yes starcraft ghost. I didnt think id hear anything about this again
Its blizzards half life 3
Its blizzards half life 3
Upvote
123
(125
/
-2)
honestly while sad to see, if the pve focused overwatch comes out I will be happy.
Upvote
13
(15
/
-2)
I don't disagree that the Blizzard of yesterdecade was better. StarCraft and Broodwar had some amazing writing and dialogue. Whereas it would not surprise me to learn that StarCraft 2 was written by a markov chain trained on action cliches.
But, Blizzard is still crazy profitable and not going anywhere. Overwatch, Hearthstone, even the free to play StarCraft 2 have all been great business decisions for them. It might not have as many fans these days, but they still know how to turn a profit.
Upvote
30
(32
/
-2)
Double edge sword. You lose money because of wasted time. But then by releasing a bad game you lose even more money by making the public mad if it sucks. And then you have to support said game for a few years.
Upvote
34
(35
/
-1)
Good point. Although I do think they can turn a profit and be a bit more respected as a developer again. Unless they just don't care about this at all... I would be lying if I said I havn't written them off as a developer long ago.
Upvote
8
(10
/
-2)
Between Ghost, Warcraft Adventures, and the next-gen MMO to replace WoW, this doesn't really even move the needle. Those were all very public axings, whereas this project seems to have been more in its infancy.
Upvote
17
(19
/
-2)
At least in most publishers' eyes, the cost of "releasing a bad game" comes more from not recouping on marketing costs, not on damage to reputation. Blizzard has always been careful not to launch "uneven" software for its reputation's sake, but I imagine the same marketing-cost issue applies to them, too.
Upvote
45
(46
/
-1)
That's an interesting idea, I have played a couple of game with a friend as Cho'gall in HotS and I can say that it was more fun than what I thought it would be.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Terminating development on games that don't meet quality stanards instead of simply releasing half-assed titles a'la EA , is a good thing.
Upvote
22
(24
/
-2)
You wanna play what ghost was before they canceled it? Go pick up Fire Warrior. Mechanically they are similar.
Upvote
8
(9
/
-1)
Bummed to hear about this. Sounds like it would've been fun. Wonder how Diablo 4 is progressing compared to Diablo: Don't you people have phones edition.
Honestly I'm a little surprised that an Overwatch sequel is coming so quickly. This will fracture the playerbase and I wonder what it will do to their OWL efforts. At least, comparing this to standard Blizz release cycle, a sequel to Overwatch feels awful soon. Diablo 4 is about on the right schedule though, assuming that isn't coming for another couple of years.
Honestly I'm a little surprised that an Overwatch sequel is coming so quickly. This will fracture the playerbase and I wonder what it will do to their OWL efforts. At least, comparing this to standard Blizz release cycle, a sequel to Overwatch feels awful soon. Diablo 4 is about on the right schedule though, assuming that isn't coming for another couple of years.
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
But would you (and millions more) have payed full release price, waited until it it was on sale for 1/4 the price, obtained a pirate copy or just watched a stream/let's play?
That's what (most) companies like Blizzard have to ask about every game in development.
Upvote
4
(7
/
-3)
Naw, man. StarCraft Ghost was publicly executed by Blizzard while the body of Valve's Half Life 3's has never been found. Half Life 3 is more like Jimmy Hoffa. We all know it's dead, but there is no body, murder weapon or even a crime scene.
Upvote
50
(50
/
0)
I literally just played an SC2 4v4 game before seeing this.
If I could play as a Terran or Protoss ??
Would absolutely buy that for a dollar - sucks it won’t happen.
As for Overwatch...played a ton initially, but usually opt for Destiny or Unreal Tournament to shoot shit these days.
Playing the Monster Hunter clone Dauntless a little, and it’s fun. Completely done with Division and did not opt for 2.
If I could play as a Terran or Protoss ??
Would absolutely buy that for a dollar - sucks it won’t happen.
As for Overwatch...played a ton initially, but usually opt for Destiny or Unreal Tournament to shoot shit these days.
Playing the Monster Hunter clone Dauntless a little, and it’s fun. Completely done with Division and did not opt for 2.
Upvote
5
(6
/
-1)
I would have played the hell out of that.
Something similar was done with Aliens vs. Predator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliens_vs ... eo_game%29
Three episodes, you play as a marine, a xenomorph, and a predator. Super fun game.
Something similar was done with Aliens vs. Predator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliens_vs ... eo_game%29
Three episodes, you play as a marine, a xenomorph, and a predator. Super fun game.
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
Always wait out a game that offers micro-transactions. Why pay $60 when you then have to pay $0.99 - $5 for other parts of the game?
Upvote
5
(8
/
-3)
Upvote
7
(11
/
-4)
Diablo 4 has been radically simplified due to the negative feedback of Diablo Immortal. Suits decided that the people felt Diablo Immortal was too complicated and difficult for the average user, so most things like items and skills have been removed. Diablo 4 provides an addictive experience where users can buy microtransactions to unlock different skins for the sole button in the game. Clicking this button causes large amounts of screen effects to give the user the required dopamine hit.
Upvote
-9
(11
/
-20)
I wonder if they’re canceling this project to start a never-to-be-complete Diablo tower-defense game.
Upvote
1
(5
/
-4)
Blizzard also was working on a Diablo game for the OG Gameboy back in the 90's. WHY OH WHY DID THEY CANCEL? The screens I seen look great!
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
You know what could be kind of fun/interesting? If Blizzard created an area at BlizzCon called "The Graveyard" and setup some demo stations of their axed games (as long as they could be made playable). Sure, it would take some development time to get a proper game loop setup, but it could be fun and a nifty perk for attendees.
And here's a tagline... "Play the unplayable... only at BlizzCon™"
And here's a tagline... "Play the unplayable... only at BlizzCon™"
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
That sounds awesome. But when I think about it a bit more, it sounds like not a great idea. It would just make people upset about good ideas that didn't make it to the finish line, and, probably Blizzard wouldn't want to get flack over that anyway if there was some demo that people really gravitated to.You know what could be kind of fun/interesting? If Blizzard created an area at BlizzCon called "The Graveyard" and setup some demo stations of their axed games (as long as they could be made playable). Sure, it would take some development time to get a proper game loop setup, but it could be fun and a nifty perk for attendees.
And here's a tagline... "Play the unplayable... only at BlizzCon™"
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
You are the only person in this thread who mentioned microtransactions.
Why?
Let's examine Blizzard's microtransactions, shall we?
1) WoW - Cosmetic pets and mounts. Ability to purchase in-game gold via cash shop (or exchange in-game gold for game time in lieu of subscription fees). Paid character services (race changes, server transfers, etc) in lieu of just rolling new characters.
2) Heroes of the Storm - Cosmetic skins and mounts, new heroes (which can also be earned by playing).
3) Overwatch - Cosmetic skins, sprays, and icons.
4) Diablo - N/A
5) Starcraft 2 - Cosmetic skins, announcers, sprays, portraits, and a number of other items. Co-Op commanders past level 5.
6) Hearthstone - Card packs, arena tickets, cosmetic alternate characters.
Of all these, Hearthstone is the only one where your ability to enjoy the game can be largely determined by the money you spend. Even at that, you can play forever and not spend a dime if you choose, you just have a smaller card collection and might need to save your gold for Arena if that's your thing. SC2 in particular specifically uses their skins to fund ongoing development and esports involvement.
Compare with trash mobile games where you are literally prevented from playing past a certain point unless you pay up, or something like Battlefront 2 where legit player power (in the form of OP characters like Darth Vader) was to be found in paid for loot boxes.
Upvote
27
(32
/
-5)
It's an interesting idea, but aren't the Templars fused at that point? It's not like a big costume filled by two guys, one sitting on the other's neck
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
Do you have any source for this at all, or do you just hate Blizzard and want to shit on them at every opportunity?
Upvote
4
(12
/
-8)
coconutboy
Ars Praefectus
Still remember drooling over those Ghost trailers. I wish some sorta Starcraft FPS made it, but so far most rtfs/FPS blending has been meh. Remember Command and Conquer Renegade? C&C fps that had tons of potential, but failed for many reasons including rts guys not wanting an fps, and (non-c&c) fps players having no clue about how to dominate the field via traditional rts strategy. Too bad really, because there are lots of positives to be found if some developer can just do it RIGHT.
OR larger companies can throw crap at a wall till something sticks and then throw their weight behind that while ditching everything else. Seems to have worked out well for Epic and Fortnite versus their abandonment of Paragon. The MOBA competition field was too crowded for their mediocre attempt, but Epic got into Battle Royale at just the right time.
OR larger companies can throw crap at a wall till something sticks and then throw their weight behind that while ditching everything else. Seems to have worked out well for Epic and Fortnite versus their abandonment of Paragon. The MOBA competition field was too crowded for their mediocre attempt, but Epic got into Battle Royale at just the right time.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
"More games in development than ever before!"
It's kinda sad to see Blizzard being so lost, so angsty, and so desperate.
I would love to see them do smth brave, bold, creative, modern, and original ....but all we get is more sequels or remasters. I mean, when we even get that. Any new game, Diablo:Immoral excluded, could be years away at this point.
It's kinda sad to see Blizzard being so lost, so angsty, and so desperate.
I would love to see them do smth brave, bold, creative, modern, and original ....but all we get is more sequels or remasters. I mean, when we even get that. Any new game, Diablo:Immoral excluded, could be years away at this point.
Upvote
-5
(4
/
-9)
My understanding is that the head creatives behind SC1 were there for SC2, at least in terms of story design.
And personally... I can't even agree that SC1 had "some amazing writing and dialogue". There are just so many random character actions and motivations that make no sense to me. It just never really works.
Raynor and Kerrigan suddenly being hinted at being a couple right before the mission where Kerrigan gets left behind? That came out of nowhere, yet it's a vital piece of motivation for Raynor from that point forward.
Why does the Overmind go through so much trouble to become physically manifest? Being "purity of essence" without form means he cannot be killed. Not only does he decide to become manifest, he does so on the one planet in the galaxy populated by beings who have the power to actually kill him. Why does the Overmind spend so much time trying to create The Queen of Blades, claiming that she's really important, and us spending 8 missions with her... then we leave her on and take the rest of the Swarm on the important mission to Aiur?
(FYI: yes, I know Heart of the Swarm retcons all that into making sense, because the Overmind was trying to get itself killed, and it created Kerrigan to lead the Swarm in its place, but SC1/BW never explains this shit).
And I can keep going, but I hope my point is clear. StarCraft 1 was not some great work of videogame writing. It's passable at best. It has its good points, like some decent character work (particularly in BW). But overall? It never blew my skirt up.
I'd say the difference between the two games in terms of storyline is this this. StarCraft 1 is a good story told badly: talking heads is about the worst way to go about telling a character-focused story like this. By contrast, StarCraft 2 is mostly a weak and cliche story told... also badly: despite now having the technology to tell it well, they still misused it (I could write a book about the abject storytelling failure of the Kerrigan-at-New-Gettysburg cutscene. God dammit, just thinking about that cutscene pisses me off...).
But at least with SC2, you could see that they were getting better at storytelling, since LotV was at least approaching passable.
Upvote
13
(15
/
-2)
I mean, I only played StarCraft Ghost once at a conference, but it was... not great. Ok, worth checking out, but not worth buying or dedicating any time to. That was early of course, but I can see why they axed it.
Upvote
2
(3
/
-1)
Blizzard is rapidly becoming a shadow of its former self, and given how much I loved their past games from OG Warcraft to Diablo III, it kind of hurts to watch it happening.
Upvote
-8
(2
/
-10)
A multiplayer Starcraft shooter somewhat in the style of Tribes 2, where one player could have a "commander" role that let them expend certain resources and issue orders to the others... I could get on board with that.
This sounds like it was definitely not that, though.
This sounds like it was definitely not that, though.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)