Next MMOG no WOW competitor, Diablo III post-Starcraft II

  • By Staff, GameSpot
  • Posted Oct 16, 2008 6:13 pm PT

Blizzard CEO Mike Morhaime tells Wired next massively multiplayer project will be so "different" it won't compete with World of Warcraft; VP Rob Pardo says upcoming dungeon-crawler won't hit until after interstellar RTS.

As the dust from last week's BlizzCon 2008 continues to settle, bits of information about Blizzard Entertainment's future plans continue to filter down. In interviews published week, two executives from the massively multiplayer publisher offered tidbits to Wired about what the next few years will hold for the developer-publisher.

First up was Rob Pardo, executive vice president of game design of the Irvine, California-based Blizzard. The executive was asked about when the recently revealed role-playing game Diablo III would appear in stores. At BlizzCon, the game was available in playable form to the public for the first time.

"Even though it looks really complete, a lot of the content is just not there," he said referring to the polished gameplay footage touted at the event. "We have a long ways to go to build each of the different acts in the game and put in all the quests and all the different monsters. We have a lot of development ahead of us before it will be something...It will definitely be out after Starcraft II."

Starcraft II's transformation into a trilogy was the big news at BlizzCon 2008. However, lurking in the shadows was Blizzard's mystery massively multiplayer online game, which was first revealed via an official forum post in December 2007. Wired asked another Blizzard luminary, CEO Mike Morhaime, whether the project was not a World of Warcraft sequel, which the company has ruled out in the past.

"It's not going to be a World of Warcraft sequel," the executive reiterated. "It will be different. We're not trying to replace World of Warcraft with this new MMO. We’re trying to create a different massively multiplayer experience, and hopefully, World of Warcraft will still be going strong when that one is released."

164 Comments

  • Beawolf

    Posted Sep 14, 2009 9:40 pm PT

    Different as in balanced? o_O

  • natewallis123

    Posted Feb 14, 2009 1:23 pm PT

    They said that the game will be different...

    So i would geuss itll be like darkfall in a way.... Or maybe like starfract fps type mmo...

  • Lancing

    Posted Jan 15, 2009 5:30 am PT

    sucks, battle.net used to be free. have they actually announced whether or not sc2 and d3 are going to cost to play online?

  • azn_windsoul

    Posted Jan 11, 2009 3:46 pm PT

    lol, if blizzard's d3 or sc2 kills wow they would still be really sad, 11 million ppl paying 15 bucks a month. all gone, to a one time 50 dollar fee

  • NickAnguiano

    Posted Dec 22, 2008 7:08 pm PT

    lol World of Lost Vikings? :-P

  • NickAnguiano

    Posted Dec 22, 2008 7:04 pm PT

    I would have liked World of Starcraft over WoW but that is just my personal preference. WoW is a great game I just happen to enjoy the SC universe more. I doubt we're gonna see a World of SC though because you're basically talking WoW in space with guns and aliens. A lot of people would probably find that sloppy. Maybe the person who said it might be something like Huxley but starcraft. That's a possibility... FPS MMO that doesn't suck? If anyone could do it I think it could be Blizzard.

  • Kenji_Masamune

    Posted Dec 16, 2008 6:15 am PT

    so.. since SC II is going to come out in 3 waves, does he mean D3 after ALL 3 SC2 games are released? So we're talking D3 out in 2013? Unless they release all 3 SC 2 game back to back (I'm thinking 6 - 14 months between each one) D3 will be out in time for the next 'next gen' console systems. Ugh. I appreciate blizzards quality.. but sometimes I wish they would speed things up a bit.

  • Treifla

    Posted Nov 10, 2008 9:18 pm PT

    that's awesome, but we need more burrito chain's in general currently the only place i can think of off the top of my head is taco bell, sure, there are taco times and pita pits, but they aren't aplenty

  • Earthbound84

    Posted Nov 8, 2008 7:38 pm PT

    In response to Tyco_EX, Mcdonalds owns a majority of chipotle. So... i guess they do have a burrito chain.

  • Treifla

    Posted Nov 4, 2008 4:20 pm PT

    i would be careful to use that website, you have no idea where they are getting their numbers from, or how up to date they are.

    for instance, the lowest number of subscirbers on the market share chart is Tibia with 96,000 (found by the total market size as displayed by their other chart times market share, or 16,000,000 * .006)

    yet Warhammer online (who has reported 750,000 active subscriptions isn't even on there

    but all told it would be ludicrous to say that rune scapes market share is anywhere NEAR WoW's

  • ace1580

    Posted Nov 3, 2008 9:36 pm PT

    To got_ice_tea: according to MMOGChart.com World of Warcraft holds over 62% of the market share while Runescape maintains 7.5%. While it is literally the largest competitor (a fact that still shocks me) I would hardly say that they are "closely at it."

    http://www.mmogchart.com/
    http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart7.html

  • Subacetylene

    Posted Oct 31, 2008 2:41 pm PT

    Universe of Starcraft!!

  • lannyboy334

    Posted Oct 29, 2008 1:46 am PT

    I get this distinct feeling that we are looking at Huxley... Starcraft edition! You can't alter the base formula a whole ton, this is probably the end project that was first cast under the title "Starcraft Ghost." Still, I am putting out props on a lot of pages for DotA, it's not MMO but it is like MMO end game without the monthly fees and hours wasted leveling, dust off your WC3:TFT and enjoy the best competitive RPG experience period.

  • tyco_ex

    Posted Oct 28, 2008 6:58 pm PT

    First... Runescape blows.
    Second... it would be like McDonalds opening up a Burrito chain, not another burger chain.
    Third... I think a World of Starcraft would be pimptacular.

  • feliscele

    Posted Oct 28, 2008 4:29 pm PT

    I sense a "World of Starcraft" project in the works.

  • Treifla

    Posted Oct 22, 2008 10:47 am PT

    not exactly true william, it's called market segmentation.

    basicly they will use the cash from WoW to fun the creation of a game that targets a different segment of the market, my guess is that it is going to be somthing futuristic.

    the idea is that they want to scoop up all the players that arn't interested in WoW, but interested in somthing else, by marketing to a different segment the impact on WoW players will be minimal

    look at the effects of releasing a Starcraft MMO as opposed to a fantasy styled MMO. if blizz released Starcraft online, most of the WoW player base would remain untouched, it's not an improvement on what they want. if they released Planet of Battlemaking, where you use swords and scorcery, it might be a different story, that would be direct compitition and only serve to split the segment.

    now, it is inevitable that some people from WoW will switch to the new MMO, what does that mean? absolutly nothing to blizz, the profits are going to the same place, in fact it might help out, player Pop can be a selling point and MMO's thrive on word of mouth, get a few people to cross over and you will have a stronger player base, and more enjoyable experience, more good things being said by way of word of mouth

  • williamv1138

    Posted Oct 22, 2008 7:29 am PT

    If you had the WoW revenue stream, would you write another game to take market share away from it? It would be like McDonald's opening another hamburger chain.

  • Treifla

    Posted Oct 21, 2008 8:30 pm PT

    WoW generates buckets of profits more, ergo, WoW is better.

    now you may say "but jsut because it makes more money doesn't mean it's better!" and i say "on the contrary, spending money on somthing means that you agree with the price point. WoW is making more money because more people beleive that the higher price point is worth it for the better quality game."

  • got_ice_tea

    Posted Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm PT

    runescape and wow are closely at it but diablo or any other game will never catch up these game are so deep in unless thay made a wowscape then maybe it would pwn the hell out of both lol

  • CreatureRising

    Posted Oct 20, 2008 1:54 pm PT

    It shouldnt Compete with WoW there Different Styled Games

  • unndead16

    Posted Oct 20, 2008 9:56 am PT

    valcrist09, i agree with you about taking time to perfect the game, but you Know that the other companies don't have constant revenues like wow brings. 9-15 mil a month in revenue is something, hell i would take my time if i knew that the financial problem wasn't an issue!

  • dzfunk64

    Posted Oct 20, 2008 8:12 am PT

    Whether or not you agree that RuneScape is better than WoW, you have to know that it is a huge threat to WoW. It may not have as many members quite yet, but it is catching up. With semi-weekly updates, endless amount of fun gameplay, and a staff that cares and even communicates with its members often, RuneScape has an extremely good chance of taking WoW's status as the best MMORPG sometime in the future.

    You WoW fanboys can deny it all you want, but it will happen. It's common sense: A better game for one-third of the monthly price, plus no paying for the game or expansion packs.

    I know you probably all played the free version of the game for 15 minutes and thought it was boring, but if you actually give it a chance, and try the members version, you'll love it. The free version is just a demo, it isn't supposed to be very fun. It's just to let you learn how to do some basic things, and maybe train some of your skills before playing the real game.

  • DrHappy

    Posted Oct 19, 2008 5:40 pm PT

    Less grinding! Less suckage! Less stuff we put in, just to make you mad, so you'll buy this insted!

  • gordois

    Posted Oct 19, 2008 3:31 pm PT

    yea casue it dominates it an its free silly people

  • LostCause420

    Posted Oct 19, 2008 10:45 am PT

    Runescape better than WoW? lawl. I'm interested in seeing how "different" their new MMO will be. Wonder if they'll create a whole new universe instead of taking from Diablo or Starcraft.

  • js0823

    Posted Oct 19, 2008 6:06 am PT

    @gordois

    lol wut? Heap of games that are better than WoW and you give runescape as an example?

  • gordois posted Oct 19, 2008 2:38 am PT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    gordois

    Posted Oct 19, 2008 2:38 am PT (hide)

    i think that blizzard have to upgrade WOW massively for it to attract more people at the moment there are heaps of games that are better than it like free internet games such as runescape

  • valcrist09

    Posted Oct 19, 2008 12:39 am PT

    I have to give blizzard credit they def have a passion to make solid games, they are one of the FEW remaining companys that put Quality first.. WOW might not be awesome to everyone but it is a solid over all game, and a game wouldnt have 12 million players if it sucked.. Starcraft, Warcraft, Diablo all solid games, and i love how they wont release a game tell they feal its perfect, i wish more developers would do that, soo many games now adays are half assed to meet the release date.

  • Treifla

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 9:38 pm PT

    one more note

    i am APALLED at how enybody can blame a company for trying to turn a profit. that is what they bloody well do! there sole purpose, their very being, is to make money. not only is it to make money, but it is to make THE MOST money they possibly can. the more money they make the better and they will do ANYTING to acheive that goal. a buessness that is concerned with only making "some profit" wont last very long, and doesn't deserve to be a business in the first place. what you people don't understand is that thousands of people have invested their money into this entity, blizzard has an OBLIGATION to make the most return on these folks investments. if they don't make returns then they will invest in some place else. if they invest in another company, they are taking their money away and giving it to a competitor. corperate financing on gorwth (examples would be like, developing a new game, or adding a new office / devision, things that add value to the company, but cost money) is either 50%debt and 50% equity, or 60% debt, 40% equity. this means that whatever new strategies they persue, 40-50% of the money for that comes out of their equity. equity is assets + share holders equity, but when it comes to new projects only liquid assets (liquid means how quickly you can convert it into cash, cash is the most liquid asset there is) can be used, so alot of the cash they are using comes from the share holders pockets. so to sumarise, they need to be the most actractive investment for shareholders to get cash, and they need that cash for growth, they use the growth to get as much return on the investment as possible to make themselves look good for more investment etc.

    you complain about it, but you will buy it, that right there is telling them it's allright. if you really want to sit on your high horse then you cannot purchase these games.

    buisiness's make decision on binary input, buy (I) or don't buy (O) all of their strategies, all of the masks they put on, everything, it all boils down to if they think it will make more people buy. will building customer relations make more profit? if yes, then do it. will splitting this game into three make more profit? if yes then do it. will jerking around the customers make more profit? they aparently seem to be gluttons for this sort of thing, so do it.

    if a company is continously screwing it's fanbase over, it's the fanbase's fault. if you give them money, you are telling them it is allright, and they will do it again.

  • Treifla

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 8:53 pm PT

    Supreme4dmira1: activision and blizz merged, there is a difference. and if you want to look at who is controlling who, it was vivendi that bought controlling stake in activisions stock, so it's more like blizz owning activision, then activision owning blizz

    as for release dates, customer service has nothing to do with that. that is marketing, and operations management. customer service is a term that only applies to dealing with customers directly

    i feel by "customer service" you are implying that blizz had a reputation of pleasing it's fanbase (thats a marketing approach, they are trying for customer retention). i hope you truely don't beleive that ANY company does somthing for *you*. they do things for profits, thats all it is, thats all it ever will be. if they seem tobe listening to it's fanbase more then other companies, it's only because they beleive that the added value from that particular operation will give them an edge against there compettitors, anybody who beleives otherwise is jsut fooling themselves.

    but honestly, did you beleive that there was even a REMOTE chance D3 would come out before SCII : WoL? they announced the game itself this year for gods sake, i would be suprised if this game hit next summer, my guess is Xmas or 09, or the summer season after

  • Supreme4dmira1

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 1:32 pm PT

    I was worried when Activision bought out blizzard... Activision has a reputation of abusing franchises for money. I knew they would ruin blizzards reputation of being the good "customer service" team. This sucks, I really wanted to play D3.

  • lol-patrol

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 10:18 am PT

    Diablo three, we've all been waiting for it. Let's face it, recently everything from Blizzard has been pretty similar in one way or another... this is the change we've aaaall been waiting for =D

  • Arath_1

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 9:14 am PT

    I love how everyone seems not to understand what's happening here.

    Starcraft II is being released as a stand alone game with two expansions...! Did anyone complain about Brood War or The Frozen Throne? I don't think so. So why would you complain about something that is years away and isn't a drastic change from what we've seen in the past with the exception that it will include more specific campaigns. It's also been touted that we will see mini campaigns within the larger ones focusing on Protoss, etc. So I don't think why people are getting so worked up

    Blizzard is looking into monetizing some elements of Battle.net but there has been no talk of pay to play for Diablo III, so why are people complaining about something that is at best an internet rumour? Monetizing SOME elements of Battle.net is not the same as Diablo III becoming a pay to play MMO game...

  • Inverni

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 7:25 am PT

    I have to agree with Icehearted on this one. Blizzard is a bit greedy and is really starting to abuse fans they've kept for over a decade now.

    Splitting Starcraft into 3 parts and making Battle.net partially pay-to-play is absurd. The worst part is, they know they can get away with it, because no one is going to boycott their games after having waited this long to play them.

    They already have piles of money, and they are going to make unimaginabley larger piles from the sales of Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3. They have no reason to go looking for even more money by abusing their loyal fans in this way.

  • Icehearted

    Posted Oct 18, 2008 12:23 am PT

    Pay to play Diablo 3, Starcraft 2 being made into Starcraft 2x3, I wonder how else they plan on abusing their customers...

  • rpgNerd321

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 9:24 pm PT

    I'm glad that the new MMO has nothing to do with warcraft,starcraft,or Diablo 3.Making Starcraft or D3 into an MMO would just kill the mojo that they got goin by changing the genres of the games.

  • ZippyDSMLee

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 6:40 pm PT

    Why are you hurting the Daiblo name by forcing a pay scheme on it?
    Thats not daiblo ass hats.

    You want to make money off Daiblo make new towns randomize the environments a bit more and make them larger...don;y drag down D3 like this have the MMO BS on its own game and leave Daiblo 3 multiplayer free like its meant to be.

  • daman1616

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 6:08 pm PT

    yea definitely another cash grab, but SC MMO would be sweeeeeeet.

  • Valen_Ca

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 5:30 pm PT

    Come on World of Diablocraft!

  • endocrine

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 5:09 pm PT

    I like how their two interviews about their new MMO are completely different. One says its goal is to be a WoW killer, the other says its goal is to not compete with Wow. Rollyeyes.

  • aschuhart

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 5:08 pm PT

    While waiting for D3 I just went back to D2 after 6 years. I'm addicted all over again and a lot of people still play (average 50,000+ daily). So yeah it sucks that we gotta wait awhile for D3 but hopefully D2 will help keep my occupied till them.

  • bastian97

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 3:44 pm PT

    i hope they make a starcraft mmo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Timmy_Gwar

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 2:45 pm PT

    I agree with anyone that believes Blizz is after more money, lets not forget there big merger, its not the same Blizz that gave us WC 1-2 and Starcraft. This is The blizz where the creative filter comes after the profitability filter...booooerns!

  • blackdreamhunk

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 1:01 pm PT

    hey wait will there be a starcraft mmo too?

  • Warlock89

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 12:55 pm PT

    Diablo3 isn't even on my radar then. I'll put it back on my "save up for" list in about a year and a half

  • mrboone01

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 12:44 pm PT

    @ Beagle_san

    A fully upgraded PC stomps consoles into the dirt....hard. So where do you come up with the stupid idea "next gen" means platforms over PCs?

    As far as Blizzards' new mmo, who cares? They made millions upon millions off WoW. So what do they do? Become money hungry twits cutting one game intp 3 parts to make you spend 3 times the money (SC2) plus decide to add mmo fees to battle.net. Only Blizzard games I'll be buying will be bought off torrents.

  • MythPro1

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 12:00 pm PT

    So no Diablo III until 2010? What a crock.

  • GoSu69

    Posted Oct 17, 2008 12:00 pm PT

    I've been waiting for Diablo three since LoD came out, i think that was 1999? but people are saying its comming out Q4 2009 and definetly after SC2 as it sais above... Hopefully only a year 'till D3 comes out!!!

advertisement

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!