News are starting to pop up everywhere about changing game directors, new jobs and so on. What are they planning?
Maybe we could use this thread to gather information and stuff on Blizz new project?
Dustin Browder, director of 'Heroes of the Storm', have just confirmed that he is leaving the game to join a new project from Blizzard. The announcement came from the director himself and explained why he had to make the decision. It is believed that his decision is effective immediately. Browder Explains His Decision to Leave According to reports, Browder announced the news on the forum of Battle.net and explains he had already started with the transition process and has transferred his responsibilities to Alan Dabiri, the former technical director. In his post, he shares it is not every day a good opportunity comes and says "I'm going to take one of those chances to try something new at Blizzard." It was not disclosed what the new Blizzard project is about but he says it is something new that Blizzard is working on. It can be remembered that the director of 'World of Warcraft', Tom Chilton, also decided to give up his position to do another project. Reports claim Browder's new project has something to do with 'Overwatch' single-player mode. Director Could Be Assigned to Do a New 'Diablo' Game In one of the recent announcement of Blizzard, the company revealed they are working on various ideas with different groups to make the decision process faster and easier. This led fans to believe the two directors are working on separate new projects which could be announced anytime soon. Both 'Heroes of the Storm' and 'Blizzard' have not released a statement about the issue but fans are assuming they will do anytime soon. Some fans are anticipating that one of the two director is assigned to work on a new installment for Diablo video game but everything is still a rumor until confirmed. Some news claims that Chilton could be the director assigned to the game. It could be a 'Diablo 4' or a remake of 'Diablo 3' which was announced earlier but no updates has been given since then.
The game developer behind World of Warcraft, Hearthstone and Overwatch has begun work on an as-yet unannounced first-person game, according to job postings made to Blizzard's US careers section.
The postings refer to an "unannounced project that utilizes a robust first-person engine," and call for two software engineers with experience working on first-person games.
Right now, the super-popular Overwatch is Blizzard's only first-person game. Given how notoriously cagey Blizzard is with new intellectual property (2016's Overwatch was the company's first new franchise since the 1990s), we could well expect a follow-up to one of Blizzard's long-running properties.
Blizzard have previously recruited for unannounced jobs, with key roles in the next Diablo project advertised earlier this year and the year before, reports Gamespot.
Don't hold your breath. Blizzard won't release anything until they are good and ready. They also like to use Blizzcon to mention new franchises, but since nothing was mentioned during this year's Blizzcon, than I suspect we would have to wait until next year for an announcement.
Makes sense to use the Overwatch engine for something. Just hope nothing F2P. And I think I could use a game thats not QWE. Seeing how Dawn of war 3 will be all about those Moba style skills.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
DB designed RA2. It still has a multiplayer community with a competitive scene and community made ladder. RA2 is one of the few non-Blizz RTS games to have long term sustainability in the face of ZERO publisher support.
On December 11 2016 02:55 FeyFey wrote: Makes sense to use the Overwatch engine for something. Just hope nothing F2P. And I think I could use a game thats not QWE. Seeing how Dawn of war 3 will be all about those Moba style skills.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
It is still the best RTS since AoE 2 and RA 2 which is kind of sad and maybe a bit biased by me. The only real competition in my mind was Supreme Commander, not the biggest fan of Dawn of War or Company of Heroes. Think this shouldn't be a discussion about SC2 or a specific person at Blizzard being good or not. This seems to be an FPS and not an RTS (though it might contain RTS elements as a few FPS games has done in the past). Leaving that out of the thread seems the better idea.
On December 11 2016 02:55 FeyFey wrote: Makes sense to use the Overwatch engine for something. Just hope nothing F2P. And I think I could use a game thats not QWE. Seeing how Dawn of war 3 will be all about those Moba style skills.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
Not many people would play BW in Korea if the BW pros stopped playing.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
But yeah, recent developments is quite interesting.
The Director of Heroes of the storm, the director of World of Warcraft, and the director of Hearthstone are now on different projects.
I'd guess Diablo 4 is being developed, the unnamed fps, and I'm gonna guess they have at least 1 mobile game in development. Blizzard recently announced that Allen Adham, co-founder, returned to the company after 10ish years. And one of the things he said was he excited about, was the future of mobile titles. (I know most of you groaning reading that, but they're probably working on big core stuff too)
Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Which means nothing. Being the best=Says nothing without context. Has any rts games the last 10yeras been good? Nope they have been total crap.
If everything kills the planet and then this thing that comes around kills the planet 0.5% less, its still not a good thing. The best thing? Sure but its still crap.
Have you looked at the rts games? The controls are just total crap, the micro vs micro is total crap, the interaction is total crap. No rts designer is good at making an rts game. People will see this when an actual good rts game comes around which will happen but probably not anytime soon.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
Not many people would play BW in Korea if the BW pros stopped playing.
No you are wrong the pros came back to bw because people wanted bw they followed peoples demand.
Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Which means nothing. Being the best=Says nothing without context. Has any rts games the last 10yeras been good? Nope they have been total crap.
If everything kills the planet and then this thing that comes around kills the planet 0.5% less, its still not a good thing. The best thing? Sure but its still crap.
Have you looked at the rts games? The controls are just total crap, the micro vs micro is total crap, the interaction is total crap. No rts designer is good at making an rts game. People will see this when an actual good rts game comes around which will happen but probably not anytime soon.
Exactly. And that should make you appreciate when something great come along. Especially when you crave for something new in a genre you really like.
It's a very difficult genre to make anything decent for.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
according to you. i'd say RA3 is slightly more "pure fun" than SC2, however, publisher/studio support is so horrific i play SC2. SC2 is extremely well supported and it made a difference in my decision to adopt SC2 and move away from RA3.
Greg Black was on the C&C3 and RA3 teams and guess who is a game designer on the SC2 team now? Tim Morten was on the C&C team and guess who is the lead producer guy for SC2?
i mean.. "Co Op Commanders" is basically C&C Generals Single Player Version. The Commander Powers of SC2 Co-op are basically Generals Powers and RA3 Suepr Powers. SC2 has Tim Morten's finger prints all over it and the game is all the better for it.
SC2 is pretty damn good man.. and furthermore, the game is in good hands.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
according to you. i'd say RA3 is slightly more "pure fun" than SC2, however, publisher/studio support is so horrific i play SC2. SC2 is extremely well supported and it made a difference in my decision to adopt SC2 and move away from RA3.
Greg Black was on the C&C3 and RA3 teams and guess who is a game designer on the SC2 team now? Tim Morten was on the C&C team and guess who is the lead producer guy for SC2?
i mean.. "Co Op Commanders" is basically C&C Generals Single Player Version. The Commander Powers of SC2 Co-op are basically Generals Powers and RA3 Suepr Powers. SC2 has Tim Morten's finger prints all over it and the game is all the better for it.
SC2 is pretty damn good man.. and furthermore, the game is in good hands.
I have always thought why you worship so much at Blizzard?, it is quite annoying, and SC2 in fact is the best RTS by far in the last 10 years of crappy RTS games.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
Yeah dood, that's why CnC3 did so well, and why its competitive ladder and esports scene is the envy of the world.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
according to you. i'd say RA3 is slightly more "pure fun" than SC2, however, publisher/studio support is so horrific i play SC2. SC2 is extremely well supported and it made a difference in my decision to adopt SC2 and move away from RA3.
Greg Black was on the C&C3 and RA3 teams and guess who is a game designer on the SC2 team now? Tim Morten was on the C&C team and guess who is the lead producer guy for SC2?
i mean.. "Co Op Commanders" is basically C&C Generals Single Player Version. The Commander Powers of SC2 Co-op are basically Generals Powers and RA3 Suepr Powers. SC2 has Tim Morten's finger prints all over it and the game is all the better for it.
SC2 is pretty damn good man.. and furthermore, the game is in good hands.
I have always thought why you worship so much at Blizzard?, it is quite annoying, and SC2 in fact is the best RTS by far in the last 10 years of crappy RTS games.
Because if you like RTS, there is one company that actually puts out quality RTSs and that's something praiseworthy.(Not to say that we shouldnt criticize it) If SC2 did not exist, it would look extremely grim to fans of the genre.
I just don't expect them to release a completely new game IP so soon after Overwatch. Should be a sequel.
Starting to work on wc4 seems like a good time, maybe it could be released in 4 or 5 years. By then sc2 will have been around for more than 10 years and people will be ready for the switch.
Although a new MMORPG was always on the horizon, maybe it's finally time, after Titan has been scrapped. Would make more sense if they need people for first person.
An Overwatch RTS could be really cool. The brief shots of the Omnic War in the Bastion short was breathtaking, and it would be interesting to see it fleshed out into a full game. Then again, a full sci-fi setting like Starcraft or a full fantasy setting like Warcraft gives them the most flexibility with game design, so perhaps a near-future setting for Overwatch would have a few more lore-based limitations, though this might not end up being the case since the character and gameplay design in Overwatch proper is already very creative and varied.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
Not many people would play BW in Korea if the BW pros stopped playing.
No you are wrong the pros came back to bw because people wanted bw they followed peoples demand.
BW is popular in Korea because everyone played it back in the day and it past on TV and all, doesn't mean it's a better game, and there is still a lot more people playing SC2 in the world in general. If I go to COD MW2 right now I can find a game within 1 minute that doesn't mean it is particularly better then any other COD game, its just that there is nostalgia about it.
On December 12 2016 10:48 eviltomahawk wrote: An Overwatch RTS could be really cool. The brief shots of the Omnic War in the Bastion short was breathtaking, and it would be interesting to see it fleshed out into a full game. Then again, a full sci-fi setting like Starcraft or a full fantasy setting like Warcraft gives them the most flexibility with game design, so perhaps a near-future setting for Overwatch would have a few more lore-based limitations, though this might not end up being the case since the character and gameplay design in Overwatch proper is already very creative and varied.
As awesome that would sound, with how long RTS takes to make, I think it would be kind of a spit in the face towards the communities that will want a new game for the next generation. But then again, with starcraft focus on macro, warcrafts focus on micro, maybe there is a new emphasis in an RTS that they could explore, so they wouldnt alienate fans of the other rts franchises. (Like putting heroes, experience, neutrals in Starcraft 2 or 3 would completely alienate Starcraft 1 fans, even if you can make a great game out of it)
And here it comes again! Every freaking thread! An everlasting discussion of SC2 being a failure or not with mandatory comparison with C&C! I love you guys! I always liked tiberian dawn and Ra1 (Ra2 was fun in multiplayer), but overall c&c games only delivered in terms of atmosphere/story. While BW (and SC2) triggered completely different feeling. The moment you play you first 1v1 you are just hooked up (btw something similar i felt with WC2). You fall in love with it.
What's up with ppl weird obsession with WC4 D4 CAC4... I mean ppl complain about bazilion CoD version but here we go we want more numbers... honestly even name Warcraft 4 and Diablo 4 sounds retarded enough to throws me away...
Like yeah oh there is WarCraft... wait you want from me to buy 4 different games?! Nope...
On December 12 2016 16:14 PharaphobiaSC wrote: What's up with ppl weird obsession with WC4 D4 CAC4... I mean ppl complain about bazilion CoD version but here we go we want more numbers... honestly even name Warcraft 4 and Diablo 4 sounds retarded enough to throws me away...
Like yeah oh there is WarCraft... wait you want from me to buy 4 different games?! Nope...
except the different blizz rts games are actually completely different games that are worth playing separately. the main complaint about cod is that they just release the same basic game again every year, with minor tweaks.
On December 12 2016 10:48 eviltomahawk wrote: An Overwatch RTS could be really cool. The brief shots of the Omnic War in the Bastion short was breathtaking, and it would be interesting to see it fleshed out into a full game. Then again, a full sci-fi setting like Starcraft or a full fantasy setting like Warcraft gives them the most flexibility with game design, so perhaps a near-future setting for Overwatch would have a few more lore-based limitations, though this might not end up being the case since the character and gameplay design in Overwatch proper is already very creative and varied.
As awesome that would sound, with how long RTS takes to make, I think it would be kind of a spit in the face towards the communities that will want a new game for the next generation. But then again, with starcraft focus on macro, warcrafts focus on micro, maybe there is a new emphasis in an RTS that they could explore, so they wouldnt alienate fans of the other rts franchises. (Like putting heroes, experience, neutrals in Starcraft 2 or 3 would completely alienate Starcraft 1 fans, even if you can make a great game out of it)
The interesting thing is that neutral creeps, shops, and inventories were planned features sometime during the development for SC1, but they were scrapped along with a lot of other fancy features to create the leaner, more refined game that we ended up getting.
It will still be interesting to see where they would hypothetically take WC4. SC1 and WC3 both took different directions from the WC2 formula. As you've mentioned, SC1 became macro-based, with large-scale engagements and low unit durability. WC3 became micro-based, with a much smaller scale and very high unit durability plus a focus on spells. Perhaps WC4 could be somewhere in between where there is still an emphasis on heroes and spells but with games on a much larger scale than in WC3.
On December 12 2016 16:14 PharaphobiaSC wrote: What's up with ppl weird obsession with WC4 D4 CAC4... I mean ppl complain about bazilion CoD version but here we go we want more numbers... honestly even name Warcraft 4 and Diablo 4 sounds retarded enough to throws me away...
Like yeah oh there is WarCraft... wait you want from me to buy 4 different games?! Nope...
???? What are you talking about? The last warcraft rts was in 2002. That was before the first call of Duty. There have been THIRTEEN Call of Duty games from then to now. Sequels aren't bad, but rushed sequels where they don't change anything is bad.
On December 12 2016 16:25 graNite wrote: I wish sc2 would get the same work put into like dota2 got :/ new hud, rework models, new animation are all side notes to the huge gameplay changes
To be fair, you're kinda ignoring that Dota 2 had to deal with really bad stuff for many years. Like the really really bad Slardar model.
Is the Starcraft 2 HUD as bad as the Dota 2 hud? I never quite compared them before.
But yea, Dota 2 is a different game. Like they kinda embrace those huge radical changes new units, new heroes, but I don't think that's what people want for an RTS, they want a good balanced game that stands the test of time.
On December 12 2016 16:25 graNite wrote: I wish sc2 would get the same work put into like dota2 got :/ new hud, rework models, new animation are all side notes to the huge gameplay changes
To be fair, you're kinda ignoring that Dota 2 had to deal with really bad stuff for many years. Like the really really bad Slardar model.
Is the Starcraft 2 HUD as bad as the Dota 2 hud? I never quite compared them before.
But yea, Dota 2 is a different game. Like they kinda embrace those huge radical changes new units, new heroes, but I don't think that's what people want for an RTS, they want a good balanced game that stands the test of time.
There are many things that could be improved, as the minimap or the ingame hud. Thanks to the community we have a replay overlay at least. Also, look at how many statistics are recorded in a ladder game and how many you can actually see after a game. For Starcraft, I dont want new units and mechanics like they did for dota2, but rather improvements to the client:
better replay viewer, statistics, hud, stuff like that. Just show me that work is being put into sc2.
On December 12 2016 16:25 graNite wrote: I wish sc2 would get the same work put into like dota2 got :/ new hud, rework models, new animation are all side notes to the huge gameplay changes
To be fair, you're kinda ignoring that Dota 2 had to deal with really bad stuff for many years. Like the really really bad Slardar model.
Is the Starcraft 2 HUD as bad as the Dota 2 hud? I never quite compared them before.
But yea, Dota 2 is a different game. Like they kinda embrace those huge radical changes new units, new heroes, but I don't think that's what people want for an RTS, they want a good balanced game that stands the test of time.
There are many things that could be improved, as the minimap or the ingame hud. Thanks to the community we have a replay overlay at least. Also, look at how many statistics are recorded in a ladder game and how many you can actually see after a game. For Starcraft, I dont want new units and mechanics like they did for dota2, but rather improvements to the client:
better replay viewer, statistics, hud, stuff like that. Just show me that work is being put into sc2.
Patch 3.7 added in-game income advantage and army size line graphs to the WCS Gameheart observer overlay extension mod. There have been more subtle improvements to SC2's UI over the years, but the community in general is much more conservative about any bigger changes. The main menu UI at least has gone through a few significant changes across the expansion packs.
It also helps that Valve's corporate structure probably allows them to iterate content and changes far more frequently than the vast majority of other game companies (at least for some of their games).
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
Not many people would play BW in Korea if the BW pros stopped playing.
No you are wrong the pros came back to bw because people wanted bw they followed peoples demand.
BW is popular in Korea because everyone played it back in the day and it past on TV and all, doesn't mean it's a better game, and there is still a lot more people playing SC2 in the world in general. If I go to COD MW2 right now I can find a game within 1 minute that doesn't mean it is particularly better then any other COD game, its just that there is nostalgia about it.
He could be working of the Starcraft project for their anniversary. Since they realeased Diablo 1 in D3 for anyversary maybe it's just a "new project" that is BW campaign DLC for Starcraft ?
Overwatch arose from the remnants of a cancelled MMO. won't it be ironic if the currect retail version of Overwatch ends up creating demand for an Overwatch MMO because people so badly want to flesh out the stories behind the characters
Yes, I definately want to fight a raid boss with 15 XxNinjaxX Genjis and that one poor guy who has to reinhardt to tank for them, while i play the mercy to ress them!
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
Not many people would play BW in Korea if the BW pros stopped playing.
No you are wrong the pros came back to bw because people wanted bw they followed peoples demand.
BW is popular in Korea because everyone played it back in the day and it past on TV and all, doesn't mean it's a better game, and there is still a lot more people playing SC2 in the world in general. If I go to COD MW2 right now I can find a game within 1 minute that doesn't mean it is particularly better then any other COD game, its just that there is nostalgia about it.
Oh look, another nostalgia bullshit argument. Its really difficult to accept, that some people may actually sincerelly think the older game is just better, right?
On December 13 2016 00:30 daemir wrote: Yes, I definately want to fight a raid boss with 15 XxNinjaxX Genjis and that one poor guy who has to reinhardt to tank for them, while i play the mercy to ress them!
LOL like vanilla WoW where Warriors were the only tank, all healers were only healers (no dps class high enough in damage to compare to the mage). Speaking of mage, 15 mages
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Sale numbers for sc2 and hots dont agree with you.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Sale numbers for sc2 and hots dont agree with you.
While I don't blame Dustin Browder as much as most people, and I believe HotS is a completely unskilled, casual, mediocre moba for people who can't focus for longer than 10-15 minutes, I also believe at this point a Blizzard employee could literally shit in a box, Blizzard could publish it, and it would sell in the millions of copies and be one of the best releases of 2016/2017. Literally a turd in a box for 60$.
At this point I'm hoping for an action RPG. What I mean is StarCraft:Ghost but with a leveling system and skill/attribute points for Nova or whoever it will be, maybe a random unnamed ghost. Kinda like the 1st Mass Effect's RPG/FPS system.
On December 12 2016 18:47 Foxxan wrote: BW is superior to SC2.
User was warned for this post
I'm honestly just shocked that this got a warning. I mean, okay it might be there just to stir up controversy. But to think that such a warning would happen on a forum that was a BW only forum for years.
Ontopic -- We have no info available to know what they're making atm, so let's come back to this in some 3-4 years. Everything we can possibly know is already in the OP and there's not really anything else that is possible in any way to get, so discussion kinda has no real basis.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Sale numbers for sc2 and hots dont agree with you.
While I don't blame Dustin Browder as much as most people, and I believe HotS is a completely unskilled, casual, mediocre moba for people who can't focus for longer than 10-15 minutes,
But wasn't that the whole point? (except mediocre part, I dont think they planned that )
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Sale numbers for sc2 and hots dont agree with you.
While I don't blame Dustin Browder as much as most people, and I believe HotS is a completely unskilled, casual, mediocre moba for people who can't focus for longer than 10-15 minutes,
But wasn't that the whole point? (except mediocre part, I dont think they planned that )
Thought so too, which is why I didn't get why they started to host tournaments.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Sale numbers for sc2 and hots dont agree with you.
While I don't blame Dustin Browder as much as most people, and I believe HotS is a completely unskilled, casual, mediocre moba for people who can't focus for longer than 10-15 minutes,
But wasn't that the whole point? (except mediocre part, I dont think they planned that )
Thought so too, which is why I didn't get why they started to host tournaments.
They've been hosting pokemon tournaments, too. Anything and everything they're going to hold tournaments for, even if its something like rock paper scissors or divekick or whatever.
Esports is just a very effective marketing tool and instill a lot of brand loyalty to the game. What's why companies nowadays spend millions of dollars every year to promote their game, regardless of how casual or hardcore it is.
Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
On December 11 2016 02:36 Harris1st wrote: I hope for a First person Diablo 4 (Dark Souls style) or a Third person Diablo MMO
Good joke, Blizzard has forgotten how to make dark atmospheric games, now a days its all bright and and cheerful and shallow.
The majority of Blizzard's work is actually bright and cheerful. They have a very brief time-frame of gritty dark work (fittingly during the 90's, where that was all the rage) aided by a lack of graphic processing that necessitated darker environments and "dirty" textures.
And this is nestled right between the warm, cozy 2D cartoon sprites of the SNES era (with the likes of Lost Vikings and R&R Racing) and the bright and cheerful 3D polygons of Warcraft III and WoW. (Which is also ignoring how much brighter and colourful Warcraft II is than I)
On December 17 2016 17:26 Harris1st wrote: I feel it's overkill to redirect 3 (THREE!!) game directors just to make a Diablo Mobile game or sth along those line
On December 17 2016 17:26 Harris1st wrote: I feel it's overkill to redirect 3 (THREE!!) game directors just to make a Diablo Mobile game or sth along those line
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
Overwatch is hard to watch. Even worse than CS:GO due to its constant action. You have 4 people dying in 3 seconds and then again in 30 seconds. You can't capture that on camera with first person view. They need to tell stories with their chosen viewpoint more than follow the overall game due to that I think.
CS:GO has the advantage that it usually have long slow periods where you can realise what is happening and what should happen next. In Overwatch something is always happening and thus the constantly changing viewpoints make it jarring.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
What studios DO you like? What studios are you going to be interested in their next big game? What studios do you think make the best multiplayer games since apparently Blizzard is terrible and can't outdo the best games of all time so they belong in the trash.
Also Is your argument really that # of viewers dictate the quality of game it is? I guarantee you, the top of Twitch is not going to reflect anyone's favorite games of all time.
While maybe if I don't think the games are as amazing as the games they released in 1998-2004, they're still amazing games. and they're the most likely company to make a game I'll really enjoy. Most people probably feel this way hence this thread. Unless you want to argue how you think Sega/Capcom/Gearbox/iD/Epic make way better games and we're just fanboys.
The question is, what's the next big 'hit' genre? Because that's what they are aiming for. They've done this with their previous 3 games (HS - card game market, HotS moba market, OW - whatever shooter market). Or a sequel, but that's unlikely, at least certainly won't be Diablo or Starcraft.
On December 18 2016 04:09 valaki wrote: The question is, what's the next big 'hit' genre? Because that's what they are aiming for. They've done this with their previous 3 games (HS - card game market, HotS moba market, OW - whatever shooter market). Or a sequel, but that's unlikely, at least certainly won't be Diablo or Starcraft.
Why wouldnt it Diablo? Diablo is the most likely, although its highly doubtful its the ONLY thing in the pipeline.
A genre they haven't really touched on would be fighting games, i think Riot Games is currently making one.
Other than that, FPS & RPGs are always going to be lucrative.
the next big hit genre ... That could be something VR. There they would just have to make a game where you don't have to puke. But VR availability is still to low for Blizzards taste I think.
Or a space sim. No one will try anything there after no mans sky for some time, so Blizzard would have no big competition. Which is their thing.
Oh coop platformer could be something as well. Vikings 3D ! But platformers are popular right now, so they might be late to the party.
Anything roundbased would probably not work with Blizzard 20 minutes limit.
Diablo announced the addition of seasonal dungeons, so Diablo is super unlikely. Unless there will be just one seasonal dungeon every year for one month lol.
On December 18 2016 04:26 FeyFey wrote: Diablo announced the addition of seasonal dungeons, so Diablo is super unlikely. Unless there will be just one seasonal dungeon every year for one month lol.
Are you talking about Challenge Rifts? Cause those will be on like a weekly basis. It's just more things to do to prevent people from getting bored so quickly after the season starts.
meant the d1 thingie, which will be there every january or so. I really didn't pay alot of attention to the d3 pannel though. But Necromancer dlc, also indicates that they aren't done with d3. We can guess alot ... but we won't see anything till next Blizzcon. So this thread will not get to much furhter a year.
I like being a Blizzard fangirl. It gets really funny when people try to hate on Blizzard.
"Blizzard games have been bad, at some point ... before they fixed that for free" , "Blizzard games aren't first spot in everything, everywhere !" "Wow was bleeding subscribers and died after everyone came back for big expansion. Atleast until Legion where Blizzard decided to bind subscribers for all eternity to them without breaks" (I miss my WoW friends, no more breaks for em) "Heroes wasn't number 1 from the start and is only slowly climbing the Moba Ladder and Dota2 only" "Blizzard puts evil microtransactions in B2P games, because the fans demand those." (I dont get that though, farming in Blizzard games is so fast)
Valve fans have it a bit tougher, since there is always this "lets talk steam" topic heh. Still hope Steam can hold against Microsoft. Still can understand why people like Valve or EA for the things they do. I probably would like EA if i had the money for it.
I don't think it's vr, they have always been about releasing games that most of everyone can play including old hardware.
Since they have just released overwatch, I don't think its a massive big game but a spin off or a cheap to develope game like hearthstone. IMO overwatch is more likely because they definitely need more ways to bring in plots and backgrounds. Comics and animations are just not a profitable way to expans.
I am thinking an overwatch or another Warcraft spin off. Diablo franchise is a possibility but I think they are going to play safe for a while. They need something bigger done for the franchise.
All these of cause is assuming they are developing a game from sketch right now and releasing soon. Might be that we are going to see the game in ten years and it's Warcraft 4 :p
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
He did fine with HoTS.
The bigger problem with HoTS is that it missed the MOBA rush in 2011
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
What studios DO you like? What studios are you going to be interested in their next big game? What studios do you think make the best multiplayer games since apparently Blizzard is terrible and can't outdo the best games of all time so they belong in the trash.
Also Is your argument really that # of viewers dictate the quality of game it is? I guarantee you, the top of Twitch is not going to reflect anyone's favorite games of all time.
While maybe if I don't think the games are as amazing as the games they released in 1998-2004, they're still amazing games. and they're the most likely company to make a game I'll really enjoy. Most people probably feel this way hence this thread. Unless you want to argue how you think Sega/Capcom/Gearbox/iD/Epic make way better games and we're just fanboys.
I did not only like, but loved, the old blizzard that developed warcraft 3 tft and brood war. I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. Then I got suckered in by the moba hype and started playing Heroes of Newerth, which was an excellent moba until making money got more important than releasing proper new heroes and balancing the old ones.
Am I obliged to follow other studios? I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing. The deathball phenomenon, the forced macro mechanics, the horrible maps, frustrating game play such as forcefields and reapers, the list goes on really. So I went back to playing Heroes of Newerth for a year or two after which I took a break from gaming during the final years of university. After I graduated, I wanted to play an RTS game again but I didn't want to go back to warcraft 3. As amazing a game it was, I realized I didn't want to deal with some of the less fun mechanics again (Cyclone, ever lasting slow,...). Besides, I was ready for a new challenge, so I started looking into brood war. Haven't looked back since
And yeah, you misunderstood me. Maybe I didn't make my message clear enough. I don't think viewer numbers or even player base correlates with a successful or good game. I'm playing brood war after all, which I believe to be the best RTS ever, which only gets about a peak of 450 players on iCCup nowadays (Korea's still going really strong though). My argument was that Hearthstone can be seen as a success when you look solely at viewer numbers. But when you actually start to look at gameplay, maybe it can't hold up (have never played it to be honest, so I won't make any statements about it!).
Finally, I'm not needlessly bashing blizzard. What prompted me to write my previous response was someone claiming blizzard's track record is still (as) great (as ever), which it obviously isn't. The period of 1998-2005 was their golden era in terms of producing quality games, as far as I can tell.
On December 18 2016 21:43 B-royal wrote: .... I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. .... I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing...
sounds to me like you're just bored of video games. you basically don't like video games and its impressive Blizzard got you to play their games.
i'm 29. i love playing Overwatch but it does not mean nearly as much to me as my favourite games did when i was 15. its the cycle of life. kittens play ... adult cats hunt. at 29 real life is more satisfying than video games and i'm not expecting Blizzard to change that for me.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
What studios DO you like? What studios are you going to be interested in their next big game? What studios do you think make the best multiplayer games since apparently Blizzard is terrible and can't outdo the best games of all time so they belong in the trash.
Also Is your argument really that # of viewers dictate the quality of game it is? I guarantee you, the top of Twitch is not going to reflect anyone's favorite games of all time.
While maybe if I don't think the games are as amazing as the games they released in 1998-2004, they're still amazing games. and they're the most likely company to make a game I'll really enjoy. Most people probably feel this way hence this thread. Unless you want to argue how you think Sega/Capcom/Gearbox/iD/Epic make way better games and we're just fanboys.
I did not only like, but loved, the old blizzard that developed warcraft 3 tft and brood war. I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. Then I got suckered in by the moba hype and started playing Heroes of Newerth, which was an excellent moba until making money got more important than releasing proper new heroes and balancing the old ones.
Am I obliged to follow other studios? I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing. The deathball phenomenon, the forced macro mechanics, the horrible maps, frustrating game play such as forcefields and reapers, the list goes on really. So I went back to playing Heroes of Newerth for a year or two after which I took a break from gaming during the final years of university. After I graduated, I wanted to play an RTS game again but I didn't want to go back to warcraft 3. As amazing a game it was, I realized I didn't want to deal with some of the less fun mechanics again (Cyclone, ever lasting slow,...). Besides, I was ready for a new challenge, so I started looking into brood war. Haven't looked back since
And yeah, you misunderstood me. Maybe I didn't make my message clear enough. I don't think viewer numbers or even player base correlates with a successful or good game. I'm playing brood war after all, which I believe to be the best RTS ever, which only gets about a peak of 450 players on iCCup nowadays (Korea's still going really strong though). My argument was that Hearthstone can be seen as a success when you look solely at viewer numbers. But when you actually start to look at gameplay, maybe it can't hold up (have never played it to be honest, so I won't make any statements about it!).
Finally, I'm not needlessly bashing blizzard. What prompted me to write my previous response was someone claiming blizzard's track record is still (as) great (as ever), which it obviously isn't. The period of 1998-2005 was their golden era in terms of producing quality games, as far as I can tell.
If you don't count wc2 into their golden era then you have no idea, sorry. Wc2 was the direct predecessor of sc1 in pretty much everything. And what you describe is the typical "in the time I played a lot back when i was a teen, games were better"-mentality. Diablo 2 and knights of the old republic will forever have a special place in my heart. But I'm not blind enough to think that they'd sell if the companies released them nowadays. Making games was easier back in the day.
On December 18 2016 18:50 bluzi wrote:
WHAT ABOUT WARCRAFT 4!!!! this game is a mandatory 1 week work free I am not looking for anything revolutionary just WC4 !!!!!
With sc2 being dead in the water relatively shortly after LotV, I doubt they are going to touch RTS for a while.
On December 18 2016 21:43 B-royal wrote: .... I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. .... I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing...
sounds to me like you're just bored of video games. you basically don't like video games and its impressive Blizzard got you to play their games.
i'm 29. i love playing Overwatch but it does not mean nearly as much to me as my favourite games did when i was 15. its the cycle of life. kittens play ... adult cats hunt. at 29 real life is more satisfying than video games and i'm not expecting Blizzard to change that for me.
Wow, JimmiJRaynor being wrong again. Who could have thought. I'm not bored of video games clearly cause I play brood war quite fervently.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
What studios DO you like? What studios are you going to be interested in their next big game? What studios do you think make the best multiplayer games since apparently Blizzard is terrible and can't outdo the best games of all time so they belong in the trash.
Also Is your argument really that # of viewers dictate the quality of game it is? I guarantee you, the top of Twitch is not going to reflect anyone's favorite games of all time.
While maybe if I don't think the games are as amazing as the games they released in 1998-2004, they're still amazing games. and they're the most likely company to make a game I'll really enjoy. Most people probably feel this way hence this thread. Unless you want to argue how you think Sega/Capcom/Gearbox/iD/Epic make way better games and we're just fanboys.
I did not only like, but loved, the old blizzard that developed warcraft 3 tft and brood war. I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. Then I got suckered in by the moba hype and started playing Heroes of Newerth, which was an excellent moba until making money got more important than releasing proper new heroes and balancing the old ones.
Am I obliged to follow other studios? I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing. The deathball phenomenon, the forced macro mechanics, the horrible maps, frustrating game play such as forcefields and reapers, the list goes on really. So I went back to playing Heroes of Newerth for a year or two after which I took a break from gaming during the final years of university. After I graduated, I wanted to play an RTS game again but I didn't want to go back to warcraft 3. As amazing a game it was, I realized I didn't want to deal with some of the less fun mechanics again (Cyclone, ever lasting slow,...). Besides, I was ready for a new challenge, so I started looking into brood war. Haven't looked back since
And yeah, you misunderstood me. Maybe I didn't make my message clear enough. I don't think viewer numbers or even player base correlates with a successful or good game. I'm playing brood war after all, which I believe to be the best RTS ever, which only gets about a peak of 450 players on iCCup nowadays (Korea's still going really strong though). My argument was that Hearthstone can be seen as a success when you look solely at viewer numbers. But when you actually start to look at gameplay, maybe it can't hold up (have never played it to be honest, so I won't make any statements about it!).
Finally, I'm not needlessly bashing blizzard. What prompted me to write my previous response was someone claiming blizzard's track record is still (as) great (as ever), which it obviously isn't. The period of 1998-2005 was their golden era in terms of producing quality games, as far as I can tell.
If you don't count wc2 into their golden era then you have no idea, sorry. Wc2 was the direct predecessor of sc1 in pretty much everything. And what you describe is the typical "in the time I played a lot back when i was a teen, games were better"-mentality. Diablo 2 and knights of the old republic will forever have a special place in my heart. But I'm not blind enough to think that they'd sell if the companies released them nowadays. Making games was easier back in the day.
I never played wc2, so it would be unfair of me to group it with the rest. Anyway, I did give it a try a couple of months ago but it couldn't really capture my attention.
And again, you're wrong. I am playing BROOD WAR NOW. I never played brood war before, and now I consider it the best game I've ever played! Stop it with the nostalgia argument, gets really tiring after a while.
Anyway, I don't want to keep derailing the thread, so feel free to send me PMs if you care enough.
I tried WC2 after playing BW. Despite how I can appreciate its contribution to gaming, WC2 has not aged well, and I honestly wouldn't recommend people try to play it except for nostalgia.
I think when talking about gaming companies' futures it's important to separate games that are "good" into exactly why they're good: for instance, some games are important to their genre like D1, but haven't always aged well - just like D1. Was it a bad game contextually? Probably not, but since I played it without that specific context, it's hard for me to see any reason to play it.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
What studios DO you like? What studios are you going to be interested in their next big game? What studios do you think make the best multiplayer games since apparently Blizzard is terrible and can't outdo the best games of all time so they belong in the trash.
Also Is your argument really that # of viewers dictate the quality of game it is? I guarantee you, the top of Twitch is not going to reflect anyone's favorite games of all time.
While maybe if I don't think the games are as amazing as the games they released in 1998-2004, they're still amazing games. and they're the most likely company to make a game I'll really enjoy. Most people probably feel this way hence this thread. Unless you want to argue how you think Sega/Capcom/Gearbox/iD/Epic make way better games and we're just fanboys.
I did not only like, but loved, the old blizzard that developed warcraft 3 tft and brood war. I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. Then I got suckered in by the moba hype and started playing Heroes of Newerth, which was an excellent moba until making money got more important than releasing proper new heroes and balancing the old ones.
Am I obliged to follow other studios? I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing. The deathball phenomenon, the forced macro mechanics, the horrible maps, frustrating game play such as forcefields and reapers, the list goes on really. So I went back to playing Heroes of Newerth for a year or two after which I took a break from gaming during the final years of university. After I graduated, I wanted to play an RTS game again but I didn't want to go back to warcraft 3. As amazing a game it was, I realized I didn't want to deal with some of the less fun mechanics again (Cyclone, ever lasting slow,...). Besides, I was ready for a new challenge, so I started looking into brood war. Haven't looked back since
And yeah, you misunderstood me. Maybe I didn't make my message clear enough. I don't think viewer numbers or even player base correlates with a successful or good game. I'm playing brood war after all, which I believe to be the best RTS ever, which only gets about a peak of 450 players on iCCup nowadays (Korea's still going really strong though). My argument was that Hearthstone can be seen as a success when you look solely at viewer numbers. But when you actually start to look at gameplay, maybe it can't hold up (have never played it to be honest, so I won't make any statements about it!).
Finally, I'm not needlessly bashing blizzard. What prompted me to write my previous response was someone claiming blizzard's track record is still (as) great (as ever), which it obviously isn't. The period of 1998-2005 was their golden era in terms of producing quality games, as far as I can tell.
Well OK. You're going to be playing that 1 game until the day you die, and its probably still going to be the greatest RTS we'll ever see. That doesn't mean other games can't be amazing or great.
Blizzard's track record is still fantastic,not perfect, but fantastic nonetheless, especially when compared to other studios. Look at other studios and tell me who you think have the best track records.
And even if they never outdo themselves in Brood War, like you said they peaked at 450 players on ICCUP, that tells me that people moved on and want something new. You can't outdo perfection, but that doesn't mean you can't like the great games that come out. I don't think there should be this attitude of "meh, they'll never outdo their best game, so fuck them for trying, they shouldnt ever bother because you suck so badly."
From what I could gather your stance is every other single game and studio on the planet is terrible.
That's why we're in this thread speculating and optimistic towards new game in the future. If you like RTS and want something new, guess what? Petroglyph and the ghost of Ensemble Studios isn't going to make the next big RTS.
On December 14 2016 05:32 ICanFlyLow wrote: Blizzard dont make quality games anymore who cares, they've completely changed their buisness model from making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons to getting ppl hooked on meaningless crap thats overmarketed to make quick bucks
Feel.free to make a thread speculating about the worthy company's upcoming games, the company you feel makes quality games and have the business model of making quality games that are addictive and enjoyable for all the right reasons.
Shh.. its not like Blizzard created 4 great franchises spanning decades. Of course they make shit games, they've been around for so long they made 4 shit franchises that have garnered billions of revenue.
/sarcasm
I agree, so many here want to trash on Blizz, but their track record has been great and isn't getting worse.
With Overwatch under their belts, they stand to rule the esports scene or at least have a huge presence. Even Storm has quite a lot of players. Not 20 million, but in the millions I would estimate.
So if ICanFlyLow honestly thinks Blizz doesn't care, I would challenge him that they care a lot. In every game they make they care. And if they can't care for it, they will not release it. Look at Titan
Sc2 is disillusioning. Diablo 3 was a disaster at launch. WoW has been leaking subscribers steadily, maybe legion has finally managed to swing this around? Heroes of the storm has less than 1/10th the amount of viewers of LOL or DOTA and that's on a good day. HOTS had a rather abysmally small player base, maybe it's growing though lately?
Hearthstone can be considered a success in terms of people that play it, doesn't necessarily means it's a good game. After all, millions of people play candy crush and angry birds and I don't consider those good games.
Overwatch is really bland in my opinion. Let's see how successful of an eSport it becomes.
Compare this to the quality and legacies of starcraft brood war, warcraft 3 the frozen throne, and vanilla wow etc. I know which Blizzard I would choose to develop my next game.
What studios DO you like? What studios are you going to be interested in their next big game? What studios do you think make the best multiplayer games since apparently Blizzard is terrible and can't outdo the best games of all time so they belong in the trash.
Also Is your argument really that # of viewers dictate the quality of game it is? I guarantee you, the top of Twitch is not going to reflect anyone's favorite games of all time.
While maybe if I don't think the games are as amazing as the games they released in 1998-2004, they're still amazing games. and they're the most likely company to make a game I'll really enjoy. Most people probably feel this way hence this thread. Unless you want to argue how you think Sega/Capcom/Gearbox/iD/Epic make way better games and we're just fanboys.
I did not only like, but loved, the old blizzard that developed warcraft 3 tft and brood war. I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. Then I got suckered in by the moba hype and started playing Heroes of Newerth, which was an excellent moba until making money got more important than releasing proper new heroes and balancing the old ones.
Am I obliged to follow other studios? I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing. The deathball phenomenon, the forced macro mechanics, the horrible maps, frustrating game play such as forcefields and reapers, the list goes on really. So I went back to playing Heroes of Newerth for a year or two after which I took a break from gaming during the final years of university. After I graduated, I wanted to play an RTS game again but I didn't want to go back to warcraft 3. As amazing a game it was, I realized I didn't want to deal with some of the less fun mechanics again (Cyclone, ever lasting slow,...). Besides, I was ready for a new challenge, so I started looking into brood war. Haven't looked back since
And yeah, you misunderstood me. Maybe I didn't make my message clear enough. I don't think viewer numbers or even player base correlates with a successful or good game. I'm playing brood war after all, which I believe to be the best RTS ever, which only gets about a peak of 450 players on iCCup nowadays (Korea's still going really strong though). My argument was that Hearthstone can be seen as a success when you look solely at viewer numbers. But when you actually start to look at gameplay, maybe it can't hold up (have never played it to be honest, so I won't make any statements about it!).
Finally, I'm not needlessly bashing blizzard. What prompted me to write my previous response was someone claiming blizzard's track record is still (as) great (as ever), which it obviously isn't. The period of 1998-2005 was their golden era in terms of producing quality games, as far as I can tell.
If you don't count wc2 into their golden era then you have no idea, sorry. Wc2 was the direct predecessor of sc1 in pretty much everything. And what you describe is the typical "in the time I played a lot back when i was a teen, games were better"-mentality. Diablo 2 and knights of the old republic will forever have a special place in my heart. But I'm not blind enough to think that they'd sell if the companies released them nowadays. Making games was easier back in the day.
WHAT ABOUT WARCRAFT 4!!!! this game is a mandatory 1 week work free I am not looking for anything revolutionary just WC4 !!!!!
With sc2 being dead in the water relatively shortly after LotV, I doubt they are going to touch RTS for a while.
LOTV sold 1 million copies in less than 24 hours. It's not dead at all.... there are thousands of people on right now. You people act like we're in double digit player numbers like Grey Goo or something
On December 19 2016 04:48 IntoTheheart wrote: I tried WC2 after playing BW. Despite how I can appreciate its contribution to gaming, WC2 has not aged well, and I honestly wouldn't recommend people try to play it except for nostalgia.
I think when talking about gaming companies' futures it's important to separate games that are "good" into exactly why they're good: for instance, some games are important to their genre like D1, but haven't always aged well - just like D1. Was it a bad game contextually? Probably not, but since I played it without that specific context, it's hard for me to see any reason to play it.
I'd have to agree with this. WC2 was probably a great game, but it isnt a masterpiece like BW/WC3 where the gameplay holds up and theres big communities for it 20 years later.
On December 18 2016 21:43 B-royal wrote: .... I grew up on playing the frozen throne. I was essentially a one-game gamer. I was already playing reign of chaos back in 2002, offline only. And then when the frozen throne came, I bought it and continued playing offline some more before I finally ventured to playing online, probably around the time when I entered high school back in 2003 I believe. I played this game for a solid 9 years or so. .... I don't particularly like any games that come out nowadays. I'm mainly an RTS gamer anyway and have been waiting more than a decade for the next genre-defining RTS. Unfortunately it never came, I grew tired of Sc2 after a mere 2 months of playing...
sounds to me like you're just bored of video games. you basically don't like video games and its impressive Blizzard got you to play their games.
i'm 29. i love playing Overwatch but it does not mean nearly as much to me as my favourite games did when i was 15. its the cycle of life. kittens play ... adult cats hunt. at 29 real life is more satisfying than video games and i'm not expecting Blizzard to change that for me.
He doesn't really sound bored to me, but I think it's all about expectations. I'm 30 now and still love playing games as much as 15 years ago, but of course I've aged and that certainly takes away plenty of the magic surrounding video games, but that doesn't mean games can't push your buttons anymore.
But it's just obvious Blizzard has undergone quite some changes in their development policy over the last 2-3 years as they certainly don't feel like the "ok let's take our time and just do it right"-company they became known for, that's most certainly due to the changes in today's industry and you can't really blame them for doing so, but aside from the brilliant technical polish all their games receive they definitely changed.
On December 11 2016 02:53 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Dustin Browder is returning to his roots.. Blizzard secretly bought the C&C IP off of EA and Browder is working on Red Alert 4.
On December 19 2016 04:48 IntoTheheart wrote: I tried WC2 after playing BW. Despite how I can appreciate its contribution to gaming, WC2 has not aged well, and I honestly wouldn't recommend people try to play it except for nostalgia.
I think when talking about gaming companies' futures it's important to separate games that are "good" into exactly why they're good: for instance, some games are important to their genre like D1, but haven't always aged well - just like D1. Was it a bad game contextually? Probably not, but since I played it without that specific context, it's hard for me to see any reason to play it.
D1 aged pretty well imo but it is a game that won't hold your hand and has fewer restrictions than more modern stuff.
WC2 i can agree it has aged poorly but still for me the music (CD music) for War2 was a masterpiece.The best music blizzard has ever done.Playing WC2 now isn't essential and you probably won't miss much if you skip it but give the music a listen at least.
I like how people correlate sold units to quality.
Yay industry, yay money.
Now please explain to me why I'd rather play street fighter 2 turbo instead of SF V, because of nostalgia right ? But then, why would I rather play Guilty gear Xrd then Guilty gear XX ?
Oh my, what a conundrum.....could it have anything to do with the actual content/quality of the product ?
On December 19 2016 04:48 IntoTheheart wrote: I tried WC2 after playing BW. Despite how I can appreciate its contribution to gaming, WC2 has not aged well, and I honestly wouldn't recommend people try to play it except for nostalgia.
I think when talking about gaming companies' futures it's important to separate games that are "good" into exactly why they're good: for instance, some games are important to their genre like D1, but haven't always aged well - just like D1. Was it a bad game contextually? Probably not, but since I played it without that specific context, it's hard for me to see any reason to play it.
D1 aged pretty well imo but it is a game that won't hold your hand and has fewer restrictions than more modern stuff.
WC2 i can agree it has aged poorly but still for me the music (CD music) for War2 was a masterpiece.The best music blizzard has ever done.Playing WC2 now isn't essential and you probably won't miss much if you skip it but give the music a listen at least.
I mean, D1 probably aged the best, but I don't think it has the depth or action as the later titles. Like compare the amount of people who still go back and play D2 every season, D1 is something more of a novelty.
On December 19 2016 20:50 No Swear wrote: I like how people correlate sold units to quality.
Yay industry, yay money.
Now please explain to me why I'd rather play street fighter 2 turbo instead of SF V, because of nostalgia right ? But then, why would I rather play Guilty gear Xrd then Guilty gear XX ?
Oh my, what a conundrum.....could it have anything to do with the actual content/quality of the product ?
Gee, I wonder...-__
Isn't that bad example, because Street Fighter V sold like shit because it was a bad game? In fact, I think that's a TERRIBLE example for your point because Street Figher II sold the most out of any Street Fighter game.
But his example with the streetfigher was the nostalgia card people use when ppl like the older games instead of the new. Ex: I like broodwar much more than SC2, therefore its nostalgia 100%.
On December 19 2016 20:50 No Swear wrote: I like how people correlate sold units to quality.
Yay industry, yay money.
Now please explain to me why I'd rather play street fighter 2 turbo instead of SF V, because of nostalgia right ? But then, why would I rather play Guilty gear Xrd then Guilty gear XX ?
Oh my, what a conundrum.....could it have anything to do with the actual content/quality of the product ?
Gee, I wonder...-__
Isn't that bad example, because Street Fighter V sold like shit because it was a bad game? In fact, I think that's a TERRIBLE example for your point because Street Figher II sold the most out of any Street Fighter game.
On December 20 2016 02:21 WolfintheSheep wrote: Isn't SF2T also a terrible example because that game was broken as shit, and has like zero competitive balance?
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
He did fine with HoTS.
The bigger problem with HoTS is that it missed the MOBA rush in 2011
The biggest problem of HotS is that it's 99% team based and individual players don't have much impact which makes it a) frustrating to play solo, b) boring to watch, no "super star" players or really exciting plays, c) bad for solo queue streams. I did really try to like it but the core game design just isn't mine and I'm not alone with this.
@topic There is something in the works but I guess we'll have to wait quite some time for an official announcement, maybe Blizzcon in the next 2 years or something like that. Can't wait .
The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
If they actually manage to fight the player retention over multiple expansions, then there's not that much hurry. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure Blizz is quite aware the game is 12 years old now and isn't going to hold forever. I'm not sure for example if things are still looking that shiny in 3 years or so.
I haven't done any research on numbers though, could be that Blizz is still happy to let WoW do its stuff for now and start worrying only when the numbers are way lower than now.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
If they actually manage to fight the player retention over multiple expansions, then there's not that much hurry. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure Blizz is quite aware the game is 12 years old now and isn't going to hold forever. I'm not sure for example if things are still looking that shiny in 3 years or so.
I haven't done any research on numbers though, could be that Blizz is still happy to let WoW do its stuff for now and start worrying only when the numbers are way lower than now.
Considering most large AAA MMOs take around 5 years to make that is a real concern for them. If they think it will start tanking around 2020 they need to start the new MMO now or already have started with concept ideas and similar content. As far as I know WoW took 4-5 years to make and time has gone up since you are competing with games that have been running and adding content for 10 years.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
its either Starcraft GO, Warcraft The Movie : The Game, Overwatch 2:Rock Band , Diablo 64 Racing with the auction house carrying better tires and transmissions.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
If they actually manage to fight the player retention over multiple expansions, then there's not that much hurry. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure Blizz is quite aware the game is 12 years old now and isn't going to hold forever. I'm not sure for example if things are still looking that shiny in 3 years or so.
I haven't done any research on numbers though, could be that Blizz is still happy to let WoW do its stuff for now and start worrying only when the numbers are way lower than now.
EQ1 and FFXI are still things they develop content and expansions for. WoW's going to last forever.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
He did fine with HoTS.
The bigger problem with HoTS is that it missed the MOBA rush in 2011
The biggest problem of HotS is that it's 99% team based and individual players don't have much impact which makes it a) frustrating to play solo, b) boring to watch, no "super star" players or really exciting plays, c) bad for solo queue streams. I did really try to like it but the core game design just isn't mine and I'm not alone with this.
@topic There is something in the works but I guess we'll have to wait quite some time for an official announcement, maybe Blizzcon in the next 2 years or something like that. Can't wait .
I think thats the point. HOTS is a weird MOBA, which makes sense because I don't think you can out-Dota, Dota, or out-League League. I think they can have that niche in MOBA down. They pursposefully said they didnt want the superstar carry in HOTS, they want it be team based. A lot of the friction/toxicity is when you have all 5 players wanting to be the superstar and nothing gets done.
They seem to be surviving/content on the gameplay side of things. esports is a different issue.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
If they actually manage to fight the player retention over multiple expansions, then there's not that much hurry. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure Blizz is quite aware the game is 12 years old now and isn't going to hold forever. I'm not sure for example if things are still looking that shiny in 3 years or so.
I haven't done any research on numbers though, could be that Blizz is still happy to let WoW do its stuff for now and start worrying only when the numbers are way lower than now.
EQ1 and FFXI are still things they develop content and expansions for. WoW's going to last forever.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
He did fine with HoTS.
The bigger problem with HoTS is that it missed the MOBA rush in 2011
The biggest problem of HotS is that it's 99% team based and individual players don't have much impact which makes it a) frustrating to play solo, b) boring to watch, no "super star" players or really exciting plays, c) bad for solo queue streams. I did really try to like it but the core game design just isn't mine and I'm not alone with this.
@topic There is something in the works but I guess we'll have to wait quite some time for an official announcement, maybe Blizzcon in the next 2 years or something like that. Can't wait .
I think thats the point. HOTS is a weird MOBA, which makes sense because I don't think you can out-Dota, Dota, or out-League League. I think they can have that niche in MOBA down. They pursposefully said they didnt want the superstar carry in HOTS, they want it be team based. A lot of the friction/toxicity is when you have all 5 players wanting to be the superstar and nothing gets done.
They seem to be surviving/content on the gameplay side of things. esports is a different issue.
EQ1 and FFXI still have content being published!?!?! WTF those games are dirt old, and had some serious flaws. Given the options though, they were the best MMO at the time.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
If they actually manage to fight the player retention over multiple expansions, then there's not that much hurry. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure Blizz is quite aware the game is 12 years old now and isn't going to hold forever. I'm not sure for example if things are still looking that shiny in 3 years or so.
I haven't done any research on numbers though, could be that Blizz is still happy to let WoW do its stuff for now and start worrying only when the numbers are way lower than now.
EQ1 and FFXI are still things they develop content and expansions for. WoW's going to last forever.
On December 20 2016 21:21 flyleaf wrote:
On December 18 2016 20:16 thezanursic wrote:
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
He did fine with HoTS.
The bigger problem with HoTS is that it missed the MOBA rush in 2011
The biggest problem of HotS is that it's 99% team based and individual players don't have much impact which makes it a) frustrating to play solo, b) boring to watch, no "super star" players or really exciting plays, c) bad for solo queue streams. I did really try to like it but the core game design just isn't mine and I'm not alone with this.
@topic There is something in the works but I guess we'll have to wait quite some time for an official announcement, maybe Blizzcon in the next 2 years or something like that. Can't wait .
I think thats the point. HOTS is a weird MOBA, which makes sense because I don't think you can out-Dota, Dota, or out-League League. I think they can have that niche in MOBA down. They pursposefully said they didnt want the superstar carry in HOTS, they want it be team based. A lot of the friction/toxicity is when you have all 5 players wanting to be the superstar and nothing gets done.
They seem to be surviving/content on the gameplay side of things. esports is a different issue.
EQ1 and FFXI still have content being published!?!?! WTF those games are dirt old, and had some serious flaws. Given the options though, they were the best MMO at the time.
Yeah, the recent expansion, Empires of Kunark, just came out last month. That's why I think the idea of "WoW is going to die someday" is really silly. If those games are still going, and they PEAKED at 500k subscribers, WoW's going to be around for a long, long time.
Also its not just an idea of "This game is getting old...", the expansions alone still sell millions of copies, and God knows how many years and how much resources they'd need to do another MMO, odds are they'd never replicate WoW's success.
On December 20 2016 22:04 Bacillus wrote: The combination of Browder leading the thing and part of the Overwatch team probably being available for new project makes me guess it's something sizeable. Maybe there'll be some hearthstonish smaller projects on the side, but I think their available crew is pretty natural fit for a bigger project too.
How good is Overwatch engine considered to be? Is it something they want to be using in the future?
Edit: I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Blizz starts considering some kind of next gen MMO soon. WoW is still milking them money, but I'd imagine they would like to move to a modern engine to make the production pipeline more effective. I wonder how WoW looks 3 years from now for example.
What's the point of making another MMO when theyve already got WoW and the player numbers are going back up after Legion was released?
If they actually manage to fight the player retention over multiple expansions, then there's not that much hurry. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure Blizz is quite aware the game is 12 years old now and isn't going to hold forever. I'm not sure for example if things are still looking that shiny in 3 years or so.
I haven't done any research on numbers though, could be that Blizz is still happy to let WoW do its stuff for now and start worrying only when the numbers are way lower than now.
EQ1 and FFXI are still things they develop content and expansions for. WoW's going to last forever.
On December 20 2016 21:21 flyleaf wrote:
On December 18 2016 20:16 thezanursic wrote:
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
He did fine with HoTS.
The bigger problem with HoTS is that it missed the MOBA rush in 2011
The biggest problem of HotS is that it's 99% team based and individual players don't have much impact which makes it a) frustrating to play solo, b) boring to watch, no "super star" players or really exciting plays, c) bad for solo queue streams. I did really try to like it but the core game design just isn't mine and I'm not alone with this.
@topic There is something in the works but I guess we'll have to wait quite some time for an official announcement, maybe Blizzcon in the next 2 years or something like that. Can't wait .
I think thats the point. HOTS is a weird MOBA, which makes sense because I don't think you can out-Dota, Dota, or out-League League. I think they can have that niche in MOBA down. They pursposefully said they didnt want the superstar carry in HOTS, they want it be team based. A lot of the friction/toxicity is when you have all 5 players wanting to be the superstar and nothing gets done.
They seem to be surviving/content on the gameplay side of things. esports is a different issue.
EQ1 and FFXI still have content being published!?!?! WTF those games are dirt old, and had some serious flaws. Given the options though, they were the best MMO at the time.
Yeah, the recent expansion, Empires of Kunark, just came out last month. That's why I think the idea of "WoW is going to die someday" is really silly. If those games are still going, and they PEAKED at 500k subscribers, WoW's going to be around for a long, long time.
Also its not just an idea of "This game is getting old...", the expansions alone still sell millions of copies, and God knows how many years and how much resources they'd need to do another MMO, odds are they'd never replicate WoW's success.
Would probably cost $250 million or a bit more. They would make the money back but they might cut into WoW numbers for that, making the time for profit much longer since they take from themselves.
I think one interesting question is how much they're willing to rely on Blizzard brand bringing people back. In some ways it may be attractive for them to steal players from WoW rather than bleeding subscribers to other companies and games and then trying to win them over with a new game.
Do I think they're developing a WoW killer right now? Highly unlikely, but I do think the modern Activision Blizzard is willing to kill off WoW at some point if they think they can replace it with something more monetizeable. We've seen pretty greedy and aggressive decisions with Diablo 3 real money auction house and Starcraft 2 trilogy already.
On December 21 2016 05:40 Bacillus wrote: I think one interesting question is how much they're willing to rely on Blizzard brand bringing people back. In some ways it may be attractive for them to steal players from WoW rather than bleeding subscribers to other companies and games and then trying to win them over with a new game.
Do I think they're developing a WoW killer right now? Highly unlikely, but I do think the modern Activision Blizzard is willing to kill off WoW at some point if they think they can replace it with something more monetizeable. We've seen pretty greedy and aggressive decisions with Diablo 3 real money auction house and Starcraft 2 trilogy already.
Why would they? WoW is printing money for them, and even the greediest people in the industry know how hard it is to replicate something like WoW. WoW's pretty monetized at this point, cosmetic pets, mounts, on top of subscription fees, as well as people buying gold for cash. It's completely set.
I get how the D3 RMAH is greedy, but how is the SC2 trilogy greedy?
But not everyone likes wow that can like an mmo. So sure some folks will switch but at the same time, new people will enter their new mmo that doesnt play wow at all or doesnt just play it. Like me, i dont play wow. I have played it but its not a good game for me, so a new mmo CAN BE PROFITABLE, ITS ENDLESS SPECULATION
On December 21 2016 08:44 Foxxan wrote: But not everyone likes wow that can like an mmo. So sure some folks will switch but at the same time, new people will enter their new mmo that doesnt play wow at all or doesnt just play it. Like me, i dont play wow. I have played it but its not a good game for me, so a new mmo CAN BE PROFITABLE, ITS ENDLESS SPECULATION
The thing is, the risk for failure is so high for that. Thats why I' said its hard to replicate. To make a new MMO, but not like WoW, where do you even go? Which is probably why Titan failed. It would probably suck because you have so many factors when it comes to MMOs, its a very dangerous genre to be in.
They're best bet is probably make content for WoW, reap the insane money they still get after every expansion, and have their other development teams strike gold in a genre that is more reliable.
On December 11 2016 01:54 phantomlancer23 wrote: Dustin failed in hots and sc2 i dont expect anything good from him nor i think they ll give him anything difficult and important again.
Oh come, failed at sc2 is quite hyperbolic, sc2 is one of the best selling rts games of all time, still has a large player base after 7 years, has a solid esport scene and is still making tons of money for Blizzard. Calling sc2 a failure in really any respect is rather silly.
Well to do some good selling with blizzards logo on a game isnt something.Nobody in korea cared about sc2 from the beginning and even idra said its a bad game, if the game was good why everyone plays bw now?Isnt this an indication that the game failed.Even as a single player games story was mediocre and childish.
idra doesn't like SC2, that doesn't mean its a bad game. And you're ignoring that thousands upon thousands of people are playing the game right now. Maybe they dont like the game as an esport, but its still a great game overall, best RTS in the last 10 years, and will probably be the best rts of the next 10.
Except that C&C 3 is about ten times more interesting to play/watch then sc2
according to you. i'd say RA3 is slightly more "pure fun" than SC2, however, publisher/studio support is so horrific i play SC2. SC2 is extremely well supported and it made a difference in my decision to adopt SC2 and move away from RA3.
Greg Black was on the C&C3 and RA3 teams and guess who is a game designer on the SC2 team now? Tim Morten was on the C&C team and guess who is the lead producer guy for SC2?
i mean.. "Co Op Commanders" is basically C&C Generals Single Player Version. The Commander Powers of SC2 Co-op are basically Generals Powers and RA3 Suepr Powers. SC2 has Tim Morten's finger prints all over it and the game is all the better for it.
SC2 is pretty damn good man.. and furthermore, the game is in good hands.
Man I loved ra3 I wish ea did not quit supporting it. Like to the point they don't even keep the servers up to play the game online. That's why I'm on the sc2 wagon though. Blizzard has a well deserved reputation for taking care of there games. They patch and suport them for years.
Pretty sure new WoW expansion is being unveiled at blizzcon, that might be one of the things? I don't think Blizzard will be releasing any new titles soon surely? Entering the mobile market makes sense though, at the moment it is literally just hearthstone which is good but i think taking a Warcraft style turn based game might work for them too.
Warcraft Remastered would be the next project too i think. That will too probably be a feature at Blizzcon.
Yeah Blizzard are slacking in the mobile game genre and market as a whole. Guessing they want a piece of that pie, probably be a turn based game like the Star Wars one EA do.
On September 28 2017 00:16 andrewlt wrote: MMO RTS on a phone? RTS seems too fast paced for a phone game. The only mobile games I've played so far are either puzzle solving or turn based.
Might be something along the lines of clash royale
On September 28 2017 00:16 andrewlt wrote: MMO RTS on a phone? RTS seems too fast paced for a phone game. The only mobile games I've played so far are either puzzle solving or turn based.
That and who the hell would play a MMO let alone an RTS on a phone... let alone pay to play one. Can't see that as a viable strategy.
On September 28 2017 00:16 andrewlt wrote: MMO RTS on a phone? RTS seems too fast paced for a phone game. The only mobile games I've played so far are either puzzle solving or turn based.
That and who the hell would play a MMO let alone an RTS on a phone... let alone pay to play one. Can't see that as a viable strategy.
Isnt Clash of Clans like an RTS? It's one of the biggest games around.
On September 28 2017 00:16 andrewlt wrote: MMO RTS on a phone? RTS seems too fast paced for a phone game. The only mobile games I've played so far are either puzzle solving or turn based.
That and who the hell would play a MMO let alone an RTS on a phone... let alone pay to play one. Can't see that as a viable strategy.
Isnt Clash of Clans like an RTS? It's one of the biggest games around.
But is it an MMO i.e. a Single Character and so on?
On September 28 2017 15:11 Akara12345 wrote: Why would they separate their FPS playerbase by making another FPS? isn't Overwatch popular enough?
They separated their RTS fanbase at one point to create Starcraft. Valve has multiple distinct FPS franchises under their belt. Perhaps its related to Overwatch, or perhaps its a different game entirely, like a looter shooter or a co-op shooting game
On September 28 2017 15:11 Akara12345 wrote: Why would they separate their FPS playerbase by making another FPS? isn't Overwatch popular enough?
They separated their RTS fanbase at one point to create Starcraft. Valve has multiple distinct FPS franchises under their belt. Perhaps its related to Overwatch, or perhaps its a different game entirely, like a looter shooter or a co-op shooting game
Yeah you gotta imagine Blizzard kicking themselves for not doing the Borderlands/Destiny idea first.
On September 28 2017 15:11 Akara12345 wrote: Why would they separate their FPS playerbase by making another FPS? isn't Overwatch popular enough?
They separated their RTS fanbase at one point to create Starcraft. Valve has multiple distinct FPS franchises under their belt. Perhaps its related to Overwatch, or perhaps its a different game entirely, like a looter shooter or a co-op shooting game
Yeah you gotta imagine Blizzard kicking themselves for not doing the Borderlands/Destiny idea first.
Except that project Titan was going the Destiny route as an MMO shooter but they failed to make it fun enough so they recycled its assets and created Overwatch. The earliest rumors of Titan are from 2007 and with that pre-date Destiny.
On September 28 2017 15:11 Akara12345 wrote: Why would they separate their FPS playerbase by making another FPS? isn't Overwatch popular enough?
They separated their RTS fanbase at one point to create Starcraft. Valve has multiple distinct FPS franchises under their belt. Perhaps its related to Overwatch, or perhaps its a different game entirely, like a looter shooter or a co-op shooting game
Yeah you gotta imagine Blizzard kicking themselves for not doing the Borderlands/Destiny idea first.
Except that project Titan was going the Destiny route as an MMO shooter but they failed to make it fun enough so they recycled its assets and created Overwatch. The earliest rumors of Titan are from 2007 and with that pre-date Destiny.
Yet they failed to do it. You assume it would of been anything like those titles. we truly dont know.
In response to this idiotic mobile (this is the idiotic part) MMO RTS idea, which will almost certainly be pay-for-advantage, here's my old post about what Blizzard should have done:
Activision Blizzard acquired the mobile gaming company King in 2016 for a swooping $5.9B (BILLION). If you look at the annual reports of the company, you will EASILY understand, why this is a fucking no-brainer.
With King's expertise they have internal resources that will translate into a mobile game together with the Warcraft IP icying on the cake. Blizzard is gotta fart gold nuggets out of this bad boy. Also go look at the mobile gaming industry -you are going to shit yourself over those numbers.
I dont think, it will be a Warcraft 4 - just another "Hearthstone - Heroes of Warcraft" and "World of Warcraft" - another parallel universe.
On September 29 2017 00:22 paralleluniverse wrote: In response to this idiotic mobile (this is the idiotic part) MMO RTS idea, which will almost certainly be pay-for-advantage, here's my old post about what Blizzard should have done:
I dont think thats a sound business plan. You spend all that time retrofitting old stuff where there's not much for growth. Meanwhile Nintendo made 100m in 5 months with Fire Emblem Heroes
On September 29 2017 00:34 mrwhite- wrote: Activision Blizzard acquired the mobile gaming company King in 2016 for a swooping $5.9B (BILLION). If you look at the annual reports of the company, you will EASILY understand, why this is a fucking no-brainer.
With King's expertise they have internal resources that will translate into a mobile game together with the Warcraft IP icying on the cake. Blizzard is gotta fart gold nuggets out of this bad boy. Also go look at the mobile gaming industry -you are going to shit yourself over those numbers.
I dont think, it will be a Warcraft 4 - just another "Hearthstone - Heroes of Warcraft" and "World of Warcraft" - another parallel universe.
WoW is set in the same universe as the games. Yeah, ultimately, even if it was a canon Warcraft RTS, they would be that dumb to call it Warcraft 4.
Its fucking crazy how King was worth more twice more than Star Wars and Twitch combined.
and one more detail we know, is that Jason Huck is working on this game, and he was a level designer/lead game designer on Starcraft II.
during the last ATVI Investor call Uncle Mike said they have "multiple incubation teams" working on several new games. so there could be more than 1 game on the way.
if its a shooter then i'm pretty much convinced Blizzard made the engine for Destiny2 because VV and Bungie have zero PC experience.
On September 29 2017 00:22 paralleluniverse wrote: In response to this idiotic mobile (this is the idiotic part) MMO RTS idea, which will almost certainly be pay-for-advantage, here's my old post about what Blizzard should have done:
Mobile gaming is growing by leaps and bounds. PC-only is not. You must fish where the fish are. in 1999 that was on a giant desktop PC. It ain't 1999.
ATVI is about making Billions of dollars. PC only RTS games can not do that. Blizzard is finished with PC-only RTS games. SC2 is their swan song. They'll of course never announce that publicly for many years as the attempt to get their RTS customer base playing their other games.
They can easily make a PC-desktop client version of this mobile game so you can play any way you like.
Furthermore, criticizing Blizzard for not making multiple billions of dollars off of SC2 or WC3 or whatever is absurb. Blizzard and ATVI are 1000X better at monetizing RTS than any one. This is like saying "Namco Sucks at monetizing Dot Eating Maze Games Because Pacman only made $1 billion".... Namco has no vision ,,, they should've introduced paid skins in 1980.
Funny how no one else is "jumping into" this giant RTS market to rake in $100 Billion? I mean.. its easy money.
On September 28 2017 15:11 Akara12345 wrote: Why would they separate their FPS playerbase by making another FPS? isn't Overwatch popular enough?
They separated their RTS fanbase at one point to create Starcraft. Valve has multiple distinct FPS franchises under their belt. Perhaps its related to Overwatch, or perhaps its a different game entirely, like a looter shooter or a co-op shooting game
If you're talking about CSGO / TF2, the split isn't really effective as they almost do not support tf2 anymore. Anyway they branded the two games to different audiences : csgo for esports, tf2 for casuals, and they refuse to support tf2 competitive scene.
On September 28 2017 15:11 Akara12345 wrote: Why would they separate their FPS playerbase by making another FPS? isn't Overwatch popular enough?
They separated their RTS fanbase at one point to create Starcraft. Valve has multiple distinct FPS franchises under their belt. Perhaps its related to Overwatch, or perhaps its a different game entirely, like a looter shooter or a co-op shooting game
If you're talking about CSGO / TF2, the split isn't really effective as they almost do not support tf2 anymore. Anyway they branded the two games to different audiences : csgo for esports, tf2 for casuals, and they refuse to support tf2 competitive scene.
I'm just saying from a gameplay perspective. Like up until 2013, Valve's support for "competitive" TF2 and CS was exactly the same. 0 dollars.
Valve has developed and released multiple first person shooters with different niches and mentalities in mind. Exactly the same with the Starcraft/Warcraft divide, except FPS is a much more diverse genre.
and one more detail we know, is that Jason Huck is working on this game, and he was a level designer/lead game designer on Starcraft II.
during the last ATVI Investor call Uncle Mike said they have "multiple incubation teams" working on several new games. so there could be more than 1 game on the way.
if its a shooter then i'm pretty much convinced Blizzard made the engine for Destiny2 because VV and Bungie have zero PC experience.
For sure. I suppose I should have said, that we know about. If I had to guess, I think 1 more unknown project is likely.
Ur 2nd statement seems to be all tin foil hat for me. No reason why they wouldnt announce that.
Also, theres a JimmyRaynor in this thread, and a JimmyJRaynor in this thread, don't mix em up.
On September 29 2017 08:02 lestye wrote: Ur 2nd statement seems to be all tin foil hat for me. No reason why they wouldnt announce that.
true, i have no direct proof.
From my experience playing the Destiny2 on PC Beta the engine behind Destiny2 is incredibly good. That engine doesn't just fall out of the sky. its a major accomplishment to create an engine that good. the quality of the engine, of course, is not a final comment on the game's quality. the game itself could still possibly be crap. we'll find out soon enough on that one.
VV barely has any experience with the latest console hardware amd no PC experience. Bungie has zero PC experience. If ATVI didn't lean on Blizzard in some major way for the engine of Destiny2 i'd be suprised. Of course that's not the same thing as "Blizzard made the engine".. but after mulling it over i'm willing to make the leap.
On September 29 2017 08:02 lestye wrote: Ur 2nd statement seems to be all tin foil hat for me. No reason why they wouldnt announce that.
true, i have no direct proof.
From my experience playing the Destiny2 on PC Beta the engine behind Destiny2 is incredibly good. That engine doesn't just fall out of the sky. its a major accomplishment to create an engine that good. the quality of the engine, of course, is not a final comment on the game's quality. the game itself could still possibly be crap. we'll find out soon enough on that one.
VV barely has any experience with the latest console hardware amd no PC experience. Bungie has zero PC experience. If ATVI didn't lean on Blizzard in some major way for the engine of Destiny2 i'd be suprised. Of course that's not the same thing as "Blizzard made the engine".. but after mulling it over i'm willing to make the leap.
I mean, I think its more likely VV to pull amazing work out of their ass than Blizzard to secretly work on a project and give the credit to someone else.
On September 29 2017 17:43 Terrorbladder wrote: fucking hell please send someone to take care of Warcraft 3 and make the engine catch up to modern standards plzzz
They are, the Classics team has been improving WC3 over the last 2 years.
On September 30 2017 00:28 lestye wrote: I mean, I think its more likely VV to pull amazing work out of their ass than Blizzard to secretly work on a project and give the credit to someone else.
you undervalue how difficult making entertainment software is.
i don't think its that big a secret because i don't think its that big if its found out. Execs just say "we leveraged Blizzard's PC expertise and their experience building the engine of Overwatch to aid in the development of Destiny2 PC"
Blizzard's reward is they get a big piece of Destiny2 revenue because its running on their platform, Steam gets 30% just for being a store front. Blizzard is offering much more than that to ATVI/Bungie.
On September 30 2017 00:28 lestye wrote: I mean, I think its more likely VV to pull amazing work out of their ass than Blizzard to secretly work on a project and give the credit to someone else.
you undervalue how difficult making entertainment software is.
i don't think its that big a secret because i don't think its that big if its found out. Execs just say "we leveraged Blizzard's PC expertise and their experience building the engine of Overwatch to aid in the development of Destiny2 PC"
Blizzard's reward is they get a big piece of Destiny2 revenue because its running on their platform, Steam gets 30% just for being a store front. Blizzard is offering much more than that to ATVI/Bungie.
I think you're undervaluing it more because you're saying they took people off projects at Blizzard to work on something, while not announcing it or mentioning it. There would be no reason not to. Why not just give credit where credit is due?
Blizzard specifically said they're not doing anything with the game besides hooking it up to their network/infrastructure.
On September 30 2017 00:28 lestye wrote: I mean, I think its more likely VV to pull amazing work out of their ass than Blizzard to secretly work on a project and give the credit to someone else.
you undervalue how difficult making entertainment software is.
i don't think its that big a secret because i don't think its that big if its found out. Execs just say "we leveraged Blizzard's PC expertise and their experience building the engine of Overwatch to aid in the development of Destiny2 PC"
Blizzard's reward is they get a big piece of Destiny2 revenue because its running on their platform, Steam gets 30% just for being a store front. Blizzard is offering much more than that to ATVI/Bungie.
I think you're undervaluing it more because you're saying they took people off projects at Blizzard to work on something, while not announcing it or mentioning it. There would be no reason not to. Why not just give credit where credit is due?
Blizzard specifically said they're not doing anything with the game besides hooking it up to their network/infrastructure.
if you listen to what Blizz says they never get really specific on exactly what they did and didn't do for Destiny2. Bungie doesn't have to give Steam 30% to sell their game online. the heavy lifting on the Overwatch Engine was done by the time they showed it off at Blizzcon. you just move those engine guys over to helping with a Destiny2 engine for PC. consumers won't notice a thing.
i bet ya Blizz is getting 50% of all Destiny2 on PC revenue that is sold on BNet and its definitely more than 30%.
On September 30 2017 00:28 lestye wrote: I mean, I think its more likely VV to pull amazing work out of their ass than Blizzard to secretly work on a project and give the credit to someone else.
you undervalue how difficult making entertainment software is.
i don't think its that big a secret because i don't think its that big if its found out. Execs just say "we leveraged Blizzard's PC expertise and their experience building the engine of Overwatch to aid in the development of Destiny2 PC"
Blizzard's reward is they get a big piece of Destiny2 revenue because its running on their platform, Steam gets 30% just for being a store front. Blizzard is offering much more than that to ATVI/Bungie.
I think you're undervaluing it more because you're saying they took people off projects at Blizzard to work on something, while not announcing it or mentioning it. There would be no reason not to. Why not just give credit where credit is due?
Blizzard specifically said they're not doing anything with the game besides hooking it up to their network/infrastructure.
if you listen to what Blizz says they never get really specific on exactly what they did and didn't do for Destiny2. Bungie doesn't have to give Steam 30% to sell their game online. the heavy lifting on the Overwatch Engine was done by the time they showed it off at Blizzcon. you just move those engine guys over to helping with a Destiny2 engine for PC. consumers won't notice a thing.
i bet ya Blizz is getting 50% of all Destiny2 on PC revenue that is sold on BNet and its definitely more than 30%.
They said exactly what they're doing, they're using their global internet infrastructure and social network/features. You have yet to explain why they would keep that a secret. Saying Blizzard co-developed the PC version straight up would be far more enticing to consumers.
and one more detail we know, is that Jason Huck is working on this game, and he was a level designer/lead game designer on Starcraft II.
during the last ATVI Investor call Uncle Mike said they have "multiple incubation teams" working on several new games. so there could be more than 1 game on the way.
if its a shooter then i'm pretty much convinced Blizzard made the engine for Destiny2 because VV and Bungie have zero PC experience.
On September 29 2017 00:22 paralleluniverse wrote: In response to this idiotic mobile (this is the idiotic part) MMO RTS idea, which will almost certainly be pay-for-advantage, here's my old post about what Blizzard should have done:
Mobile gaming is growing by leaps and bounds. PC-only is not. You must fish where the fish are. in 1999 that was on a giant desktop PC. It ain't 1999.
ATVI is about making Billions of dollars. PC only RTS games can not do that. Blizzard is finished with PC-only RTS games. SC2 is their swan song. They'll of course never announce that publicly for many years as the attempt to get their RTS customer base playing their other games.
They can easily make a PC-desktop client version of this mobile game so you can play any way you like.
Furthermore, criticizing Blizzard for not making multiple billions of dollars off of SC2 or WC3 or whatever is absurb. Blizzard and ATVI are 1000X better at monetizing RTS than any one. This is like saying "Namco Sucks at monetizing Dot Eating Maze Games Because Pacman only made $1 billion".... Namco has no vision ,,, they should've introduced paid skins in 1980.
Funny how no one else is "jumping into" this giant RTS market to rake in $100 Billion? I mean.. its easy money.
I have to disagree here. PC only RTS has the potential to bring a lot of profit especially when you consider the possibility of it being WC4. The biggest advantage over sc2 would of course be the emphasis on the hero mechanics. Imagine having coop style missions set in warcraft universe being supported from the first day of release. People playing with their favorite warcraft heroes, getting items, leveling them up etc while the more competitive players have the standard ladder.
and one more detail we know, is that Jason Huck is working on this game, and he was a level designer/lead game designer on Starcraft II.
during the last ATVI Investor call Uncle Mike said they have "multiple incubation teams" working on several new games. so there could be more than 1 game on the way.
if its a shooter then i'm pretty much convinced Blizzard made the engine for Destiny2 because VV and Bungie have zero PC experience.
On September 29 2017 00:22 paralleluniverse wrote: In response to this idiotic mobile (this is the idiotic part) MMO RTS idea, which will almost certainly be pay-for-advantage, here's my old post about what Blizzard should have done:
Mobile gaming is growing by leaps and bounds. PC-only is not. You must fish where the fish are. in 1999 that was on a giant desktop PC. It ain't 1999.
ATVI is about making Billions of dollars. PC only RTS games can not do that. Blizzard is finished with PC-only RTS games. SC2 is their swan song. They'll of course never announce that publicly for many years as the attempt to get their RTS customer base playing their other games.
They can easily make a PC-desktop client version of this mobile game so you can play any way you like.
Furthermore, criticizing Blizzard for not making multiple billions of dollars off of SC2 or WC3 or whatever is absurb. Blizzard and ATVI are 1000X better at monetizing RTS than any one. This is like saying "Namco Sucks at monetizing Dot Eating Maze Games Because Pacman only made $1 billion".... Namco has no vision ,,, they should've introduced paid skins in 1980.
Funny how no one else is "jumping into" this giant RTS market to rake in $100 Billion? I mean.. its easy money.
I have to disagree here. PC only RTS has the potential to bring a lot of profit especially when you consider the possibility of it being WC4. The biggest advantage over sc2 would of course be the emphasis on the hero mechanics. Imagine having coop style missions set in warcraft universe being supported from the first day of release. People playing with their favorite warcraft heroes, getting items, leveling them up etc while the more competitive players have the standard ladder.
I mean, that doesnt really prove or disprove how much it will actually sell. What would sell more, a Warcraft RPG or a Warcraft RTS? RPG 100% of the time. RTS isnt that popular not matter how much you spin it, especially when you consider how BIG a WC4 would have to be to match expectations. I dont think WC3 did better than BW long-term.
But as a counter to that point, Blizzard has never stopped hiring great RTS talent, so I think there's an argument to be made, why do they keep hiring top tier RTS talent, if they're not going to do big RTS anymore.
and one more detail we know, is that Jason Huck is working on this game, and he was a level designer/lead game designer on Starcraft II.
during the last ATVI Investor call Uncle Mike said they have "multiple incubation teams" working on several new games. so there could be more than 1 game on the way.
if its a shooter then i'm pretty much convinced Blizzard made the engine for Destiny2 because VV and Bungie have zero PC experience.
On September 29 2017 00:22 paralleluniverse wrote: In response to this idiotic mobile (this is the idiotic part) MMO RTS idea, which will almost certainly be pay-for-advantage, here's my old post about what Blizzard should have done:
Mobile gaming is growing by leaps and bounds. PC-only is not. You must fish where the fish are. in 1999 that was on a giant desktop PC. It ain't 1999.
ATVI is about making Billions of dollars. PC only RTS games can not do that. Blizzard is finished with PC-only RTS games. SC2 is their swan song. They'll of course never announce that publicly for many years as the attempt to get their RTS customer base playing their other games.
They can easily make a PC-desktop client version of this mobile game so you can play any way you like.
Furthermore, criticizing Blizzard for not making multiple billions of dollars off of SC2 or WC3 or whatever is absurb. Blizzard and ATVI are 1000X better at monetizing RTS than any one. This is like saying "Namco Sucks at monetizing Dot Eating Maze Games Because Pacman only made $1 billion".... Namco has no vision ,,, they should've introduced paid skins in 1980.
Funny how no one else is "jumping into" this giant RTS market to rake in $100 Billion? I mean.. its easy money.
I have to disagree here. PC only RTS has the potential to bring a lot of profit especially when you consider the possibility of it being WC4. The biggest advantage over sc2 would of course be the emphasis on the hero mechanics. Imagine having coop style missions set in warcraft universe being supported from the first day of release. People playing with their favorite warcraft heroes, getting items, leveling them up etc while the more competitive players have the standard ladder.
I mean, that doesnt really prove or disprove how much it will actually sell. What would sell more, a Warcraft RPG or a Warcraft RTS? RPG 100% of the time. RTS isnt that popular not matter how much you spin it, especially when you consider how BIG a WC4 would have to be to match expectations. I dont think WC3 did better than BW long-term.
But as a counter to that point, Blizzard has never stopped hiring great RTS talent, so I think there's an argument to be made, why do they keep hiring top tier RTS talent, if they're not going to do big RTS anymore.
good point about the warcraft rpg vs rts profit potential but I guess WoW could be seen as that type of rpg game already. On the other hand, a possible wc4 with a solid support for coop/PvE could be targeted more towards attracting the moba/hero defense crowd
here is a good look at what new game(s) might be on the way.
this guy suggests 2 games are on the way (1) a mobile platform MMO-RTS like Clash of Clans running on the Unity Engine (2) an FPS running on a Blizzard custom FPS engine
during a recent ATVI Investor Q&A session Morhaime stated Blizzard has multiple "incubation teams" working on several new game ideas.
i hope we're in for another Overwatch-style of surprise @ BlizzCon 2017. I just love how Blizzard makes their big announcements at gamer events rather than at ATVI investor meetings.
On October 01 2017 05:47 lestye wrote: But as a counter to that point, Blizzard has never stopped hiring great RTS talent, so I think there's an argument to be made, why do they keep hiring top tier RTS talent, if they're not going to do big RTS anymore.
because they view them as "action-strategy" specialists not just "RTS guys". So they can work on Blizzard's new Clash of Clans type mobile game. Also, what big new RTS talent has Blizzard hired in the last year?
i hope we're in for another Overwatch-style of surprise @ BlizzCon 2017. I just love how Blizzard makes their big announcements at gamer events rather than at ATVI investor meetings.
Who the hell announces games during investor calls? Usaully the publishers wait for trade shows.
i hope we're in for another Overwatch-style of surprise @ BlizzCon 2017. I just love how Blizzard makes their big announcements at gamer events rather than at ATVI investor meetings.
Incredibly unlikely. 1) It hasn't been enough time, imo. It took them years to announce Hearthstone, and the directors got off their projects sometime around last Oct-Nov. 2) They're basically guaranteed to announce the new WoW expansion this year, they wouldnt announce 2 big games at the same event, itd take the hype away.
because they view them as "action-strategy" specialists not just "RTS guys". So they can work on Blizzard's new Clash of Clans type mobile game. Also, what big new RTS talent has Blizzard hired in the last year?
That's incredibly speculative. I don't know anyone in any genre in the last year, but they've been constantly acquiring RTS talent in the last five years.
Oh man, I come to this thread hoping to read some interesting tidbit and instead I see the thread spammed with jimmyjraynor wanking over blizzard and his "uncle mike". Again. An incredible 1 in 7 posts are his and his fanboyism, like a full time job.
On October 13 2017 03:43 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Oh man, I come to this thread hoping to read some interesting tidbit and instead I see the thread spammed with jimmyjraynor wanking over blizzard and his "uncle mike". Again. An incredible 1 in 7 posts are his and his fanboyism, like a full time job.
Hoping for WC4. Both Ow and HotS was big failure in my gamers eyes. Not fun, and it doesn't even look good. When I played HotS, the animation felt like shit even.
But I feel, whatever Blizzard does, sell good these days.