Wow, no LAN, thats sad. Like most, I'm only interested in single player and lan parties. I played the original Starcraft on battle.net 1 time, and played single player a million times. Well, if they can milk people, more power to them. But I can see that the second starcraft2 release will undersell, then by the 3rd, they will try to fix it, but too little too late.
Following wide speculation, Blizzard Entertainment confirms heavily anticipated PC sci-fi RTS will now ship during the first half of next year.
Over the past few weeks, Activision Blizzard's stock has been creeping downward on analysts' growing suspicion that one of the company's most anticipated releases of 2009, Blizzard Entertainment's Starcraft II, would be delayed. Today, that suspicion became a reality, as the publisher announced as part of its April-June earnings report that Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty for the PC has been delayed to the first half of 2010.
Blizzard attributed the delay to a desire to release Starcraft II alongside the relaunch of its online networking service Battle.net. That said, the developer also confirmed that it planned to use the extra time to continue honing the game.
"Over the past couple of weeks, it has become clear that it will take longer than expected to prepare the new Battle.net for the launch of the game," the Irvine, CA-based developer said in a statement. "The upgraded Battle.net is an integral part of the StarCraft II experience and will be an essential part of all of our games moving forward. This extra development time will be critical to help us realize our vision for the service."
Blizzard has previously indicated that the newly redesigned Battle.net will factor heavily into the game maker's antipiracy initiative, often seen as the Achilles' heel of the PC gaming market. As such, Blizzard said in June that it would be doing away with local area network play, forcing all Starcraft II players to connect through the online portal, instead.
Though Starcraft II was initially announced as a single product, Blizzard announced at BlizzCon 2008 that the sci-fi real-time strategy title would be split into a trilogy. The first installment, Wings of Liberty, will focus on the human faction known as the Terrans. More specifically, it will seek to resolve the conflict between Jim Raynor and Kerrigan, which was the crux of the original Starcraft.
Notably, Starcraft II has yet to enter an open beta-testing phase, though the publisher has been accepting applications from volunteers through its Web site since May. Blizzard also noted today that it plans to provide more details on the beta test "in the future."
Well, it is officialy clear now. If i do play sc2 on my comp it will be under two conditions. First is that i dont pay for it, and second is that it has lan. Mark my words, both of my conditions will be met shortly after release. I will continue buying games from other companies, but never again will bliz&acti see my $. It was difficult task to induce this amaunt of hate but you made it. Salute.
Oh, and somebody there just keep on telling people that Relic produces worthless game products, and Starcraft series is similar to Command and Conquer crap in terms of sequel structure. Hah. Just keep on preaching that, and see if people take that seriously... With cartoon-like graphic, 3 parts split, and no LAN, I am not really attracted to get this game in a hurry. I have waited for the sequel for 10+ years only to know the conclusion of its story, as I am not interested to play online matches competitively anymore now due to real life focus. Blizzard milks out money from clueless players of WoW too long. Several 3D modders in the past attempted to polish the old Starcraft so they would look more 3D, nicer and sharper, then released it. Never got the result. Could it be the lawyers from Blizzard intervened/threatened them. For occasional fun meetings with friends which I still do, LAN is more preferable since LAN actually allows you to see real friends, interact with them directly, and have fun together. I think when I visit China, Indonesia or something in the future I ll just go downtown and buy a cheap copy of it, just to follow the storyline.
lol @ the LAN qq. Is it really that big of a deal? L2buy fast internet. Oh what am I saying....battle.net delay ****ing sucks, I'd rather play it on LAN.
@ thenephariouson dont be dissapointed, its not worth it. their ripping u off, the PS3's GPU is based on a 7 series graphics card.......id like to see a PC with a 7 series GPU run a game as good looking as MGS or killzone. as for this game, i doubt youll need a proper gaming PC to play anyway......probably stick in a £50 GPU and ur sorted.
And why not split this game in 50 parts instead of 3? Every part released each 2 years (4 years with delays). In that case my grandsons could enjoy this saga. /sarcasm off
No LAN means every single player you want to play with needs a copy of the game. That means more cash in Blizzards pocket, as I'd need 5 or so CD keys instead of 1 to play with my friends or relatives. Will it work? Hell no. Some of us aren't stupid. I'll share the game like always and we'll just live without LAN, they wont' be getting more money out of us. As for anti pirating, they will actually be supporting it by making this trilogy. Who in their right mind would want to pay ALL 3 games just to play the campaigns? I bet most ppl will be like me and just buy 1 for the CD key then pirate the other 2 off demonoid for the campaigns.
@SpunkyB0B The whole point of a LAN party is playing with your friends and meeting other gamers. Then, playing games to show your skills. Blizzard is saying that the performance and features on B.net will be good enough, no one will want to play LAN. LAN party organizers can just create a temporary clan. Everyone going to the party gets the password to enter that area of B.net. The new B.net is supposed to have built-in support for tournaments.
Im just gutted i dont own a descent gaming PC, i absoloutely loved playing as the Zerg, lost many hours on the original.
I think blizzard saying that there not having LAN play to stop pitrating is stupid... Starcraft doesnt need a CD to play anymore from an offcial patch WOW doesnt need a CD to play and you can play for free on hacked servers (I dont condone or know where to sigh up, i think WOW is the spawn of satan) which they could fix at anytime with a patch, but then again you dont have to upgrade to the latest version. Save milions of $$ and just put no protection on the DVD..... you know that within .000008384 seconds of being released its going to be available on the net with a working crack and a 9999999999 money cheat.
yup this is |Blizzard, i hope this will be better than the first starcraft (better = 10+++++++++)........ so i will see diablo 3 hmmm in 20122222 without no paladin or assassin
Blizz if you screw this up like WotLk then ill rip you're heads off, you delay 2 years now ! take you're time but don't fail us.... again !
Oh man..... If it has a single bug in it when it comes out, i`m going to sue Blizzard. Well, at least my hopes are now certain that Starcraft II will be an awesome game. :)
@chaos20 Your comment is worth reposting, lol. "hey everybody, for a laugh....dont buy this game for 6 months+ after it comes out, see how they like waiting"
Interesting story on the AP about why they think SCII was delayed. I think most of us had are suspicions about this anyway, but they could be true? It seems they held back SCII for next year because Prototype did way better than expected. So they are holding SC as an ace up their sleeve. could be true, don't know,but I wouldn't doubt It.
I hope that delay will give them more time reconsidered of putting LAN to the game. Its truely unfair to force me & other Starcraft fans to go online Battle.net. Especially now I no longer using fast online network to save money for this game. World of Warcraft is too expensive for my country to play. So I play it for a month, then sell cheaper it to my friend, which is richer and can affort to play it(Can't say his exam result though. Hopfully he didn't view this statement XD ) I hope they put LAN back to it and make it one of kind game that will win us Starcrat fans again.
Alright! Unlike some people.. I don't care waiting as long as it is a good as they can make it, I'm happy. I have the original one to play while I wait.
God damn I am not surprised, but I am thoroughly pissed off. I've been waiting too long for this game, and I'm getting a little tired of the whole, "we must take our time to make it the best." I mean have they ever heard of a little thing called efficiency?
Not a complete shock to me at least, but I would much rather them delay it a little if thats necessary to release the best game possible. After all they have to make up for all of the years of starcraft fans have been waiting for this game. As far as im concerned to date Starcraft is the best RTS ever released and they have standards to live up to. If that takes a couple more months to do than so be it, it just better be worth the damn wait...
Once again Blizzard dissapoints. They are just happy to milk the WOW cow for another few years. What a bunch of lazy slackers.
How about we just say it's release date is TBA. And not Q2 2010. I don't feel like being disappointed again.
Absolutely not true ottumatic. Read a few of the bad reviews from critics and gamers alike on this site, most of the time you'll find the phrase "could have been a good game but wasn't finished" attached to those that scored a 6-7 when they could have been an 8-9. All things are secondary to gameplay; make sure it's ready to go before sending it out the door.
I don't understand why they bother slating a release date publicly when they are just going to get on everyone's nerves by further postponing it indefinitely. It is not the matter of the quality of end-product delivered but the punctuality of delivering.
@Humorguy_basic For the last time, I grant you that the game COULD BE a let down. That's fair to say. No other game can serve as proof of it being a let down, especially when said games have very little to nothing in common with the series. Over-hyped games can still be really good games. We'll have to see in the end, but just because you believe something is getting over-hyped, doesn't mean it's not going to live up to it.
@Humorguy_basic All of your statements have been YOUR opinion. The whole point you made about these over-hyped games being disappointments in the end IS a quality issue (What else would it be?) I showed you the reader scores just to give you some insight. I have tried to explain to you the difference between a successful franchise with a massive following and one-shot reboots or new franchises. Hype generated by companies trying to get a new IP (or rebooted one) out there is much different than a much-lauded franchise with a massive following and a national sport generating it's own hype from previous installments. Citing other unrelated games (made by entirely different companies) doesn't make it more scientific or accurate, it just masks your opinion as research or fact. You tried to make a correlation, but didn't consider any of the variables. It's one thing to make a blanket statement about hype and how it can set expectations too high. You could have left it at that, but it's your opinion (it can't be anything else if the game isn't out) that SC2 will follow in the footsteps of the other games you mentioned. Yet, even the games you mentioned being let downs is another opinion. I gave you reader scores. I tried to explain KEY verifiable differences between those games and a game series like Starcraft.
Out of the hundreds of big companies in the video game industry out there, Blizzard is the one worrying about pirating?? Blizzard??? The richest and most successful PC game developer??? Nobody here can put it any more plainly than what Ychi stated. But if I may add, in plain words: Blizzard has begun riding Activision cock now.
I just hope this delivers 'cause otherwise it'll confirm that good 'ol Blizzard is dead and the only thing left is one fat Activision.
Blizzard is dead and now there is only Activision wearing their corpse as a cape. The Emperor of Activision proudly spouts off investor and market speak while the very foundation of their financial empire is left with nothing but rot. The old Blizzard produced games for gamers - looking up their original titles for comparison shows what a lack in game quality that is being presented today. I would imagine they are sitting on SC2 hoping people will cool off and forget about how much they have stripped away from what was the original intended Starcraft sequel. As long as customers continue to be spineless and pay tribute to the Activision Emperor he will show you no respect. Pay him no tribute! Let his empire crumble to dust! Only after this happens will room be made for market leaders who remember and cherish the very thing that made them great - their customers.
@ KreepLX I agree about Starcraft Ghost though to be fair it wasn't being developed by Blizzard, and it was really Activision's fault that it got canceled. This will mean 12 years since the first Starcraft game, 7 years since the start of development on the sequel and 3 years since the announcement. This had better be good.
Hell, from what I read, Starcraft Ghost was almost done before they scrapped it. Strange company. Could have at least released it as a bargain bin.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 6:33 am PT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 12:44 pm PT