Starcraft 2 wins Wired.com's vaporware award

[Gifted]

Oh and another thing. With the amount of income Blizzard takes in on a monthly basis, they have to be one of the richest game developers out there. Yet with all the resources in the world they still cannot complete a sequel in 7 years. And it's not like SC2 will be revolutionary or anything, it's basically a rehashed version of the original game running on a new engine with a few new units. They aren't even adding a new race.

If BLizzard is uncapable of finishing this game in 7+ years then that shows one of two things: Either their team is incredibly incompetent, or SC2 clearly isn't a priority for them. I think the entire company is drunk on the success of WoW and only concerned about keeping the keg full.

They seem to have no problem churning out WoW expansions.

Well, if what you said was right, then that's no problem. Let's look at what's been done so far to our knowledge.

For the first 2-3 years, they had a skeleton crew coding the new engine. That's about standard, The unreal engine (which is SOLIDLY replicated) took 4 to my knowledge.

That leaves 4-5 years remaining, of which they worked on a scope that was different for the first chunk. About 2 years into that, a scope change radically shifted the project in terms of singleplayer involving the trilogy split. This would involve them having to start from scratch. At this point, they'd have to re-analyze a new way to handle battle.net as it would not have to encompass 3 games, not just one. This also provided an opportunity to re-evaluate how Diablo 3 worked in.

After that point, when looking at 4 games, why not look to the future. About the same time they realized they had to scrap what they had for a multiplayer backbone and move forward with something new. It was so large of a project it created a whole new software project and not just an implementation within SC2.

This means that about 4 years ago (Benefit of the doubt, worst case scenario), they had to restart the project essentially on terms of the slate, and see what previous information could fit in. For that reason, I'm not having much of an issue when you look at the big picture.. they're working with essentially a 4 year scale for 2 separate projects. Let's also understand that in the youth of the project, it had a skeleton crew and the company as a whole had fires that had to be put out. It's not like they had a fully functional staff working on the project from day 1. And no matter how long or little it takes, that's not an insult to the developers, that's an insult to the methodology of the company. They have a motto "When it's ready". This is what I feel you're mad at.. not the skill of the people creating the game. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, it's only what I perceive after all.

Regarding those fires with WoW, btw. No matter how much passion a person has for a project, the company should always come first, especially one with a repuation that well. If WoW was fine and SC2/b.net infrastructure has issues on the first few weeks, I guarentee they would consider taking people off other staffs (Such as diablo 3 or WoW) to help assist with the debugging if it's a viable option. This isn't "WoW Entertainment" or "StarCraft Entertainment"... it's "Blizzard Entertainment" afterall. I know you know that after all our conversations regarding the matter.

Blazur, I've always suspected that the only reason that your "flawless perception" of Blizzard is reduced is highly influenced with a distaste for their other product, World of Warcraft. Nothing wrong with that, I can't change your emotions or opinions. But in terms of taking a long time to work on a game, nothing has changed in the company. The designers are still calling the shots, not the producers. And even when you admit that you know the games going to be ok but you disagree with them as a company... I speculate 3 days after beta or even release, the frustration will subside quickly. It still supports my own speculation that the issue with Blizzard's delays are not in the company, but in the people/community who expect like they're wronged. It's up to us to be more patient or not. They have an alternative to release a product that could be less than the standards they hold. They are public that they hold high standards and have public mottos regarding it.

If people thought "They'll release it when it's ready" instead of "They delayed beta"... there would be a lot less frustration/disappointment. It's also a shame that they think they're the only ones disappointed. Blizzard wants it out in the public more than we want it in our hands... but it has to be ready. No matter what anyone speculates, that is fact.

[Norfindel]

When examining Battle.net, it's going to need to support the 10 million existing on battle.net today... the additional charge added by StarCraft 2... eventually Diablo 3. It will also need to support the workload provided by World of Warcraft in peak situations (Such as when Cataclysm comes out) which amounts to over 10 million as well.

An improper alternative is to create a structure that "MIGHT" support it on day one. Wouldn't it be a shame if StarCraft 2 were "unavailable" as much as "WoW" was in the first days? I think we all agree we'd like to avoid that.

So when you say "I blame wow" then yes, maybe a part of that is true... but it is also true for Diablo 3, StarCraft 2, the unnammed MMO, the recreated StarCraft: Ghost, their future console division, WarCraft 4 and any other games they could pull off in the next 20 years.

They already know how to do it, if the current WoW server system can manage the load. I blame WoW, because SC2 did got delayed some time because people from the SC2 team got used to help WoW development. I mean: The SC franchise got no sequels for 10 years, and they diverted people to a WC franchise game?

They knew that Battle.net 2.00 was going to support a lot of users, it was a huge mistake to take Battle.net 2.00 development so lightly, as they seem to have done, or to delay SC2 because they decided to add all the extra functionality to BN2.00 so late in the game's development.

[Pandonetho]

LMFAO. Blizzard sucks these days, and is easily outshined by several other game developers actively producing innovative games that are fun and require no subscription to play.

Yep...I said it.

Your post just shows your impatience to wait for a game. Were you excited about SC2 a couple of years ago? Undoubtedly, I knew you back then. Now you just seem to pick at Blizzard for the SOLE reason that they're taking their time.

The problem is, you're implying that just because time has passed Blizzard has gone down in quality. I mean, that's utter BS. SC2 has done nothing but get better since announcement but since they're taking a long time to release beta suddenly means that Blizz has been outshined by people who have developed other games sooner? Do you know how absurd that logic is? Why, SC1 must be a TERRIBLE game in today's age, much worse than when it was released 12 years ago, since it's been so long right? I mean if developers are "these days" developing games that are "innovative" and "require no subscription to play" (as if that's some kind of measurement of quality?) then SC1 should be considered garbage to you. After all, it's hardly innovative by today's standards.

How does developing a game lead to a company going down in quality and being "outshone" by others just because they're taking a longer time to develop it?

Suck it up, and deal with it man. Instead of being so bitter about it, go play these other games that you speak about and forget about SC2 until the beta is actually released. Maybe you could enjoy life more like that.

BUT if you go into something like Braid, where you have this one guy for 3 years making this totally unique and revolutionary game what can you say?

I looked at Braid just now. Is it the platformer where you have this queer looking dude running around and playing with time? How can you even COMPARE that to SC2? First of all, it's a 2d platformer SINGLEPLAYER game, and you're comparing it to one of the most anticipated games of all time that has to follow up on its predecessor. And really, it didn't look all that revolutionary to me. You reverse death, you know what was the first thing I thought of? Prince of Persia. It has a couple of cool effects and abilities, but I'd hardly compare a game like that to SC2, even if it was made by 1 person.

[Blazur]

The problem is, you're implying that just because time has passed Blizzard has gone down in quality. I mean, that's utter BS.

Do you hear me complaining soley about the wait and constant delays? No. Anybody who follows Blizzard games know the development cycle spans 3+ years. My angst for Blizzard runs deeper than that.

There's plenty of reasons for me to lose respect for Blizzard, beyond just the standard delays. Allow me to list a few that immediately come to mind.

- Ridiculously long period of time between announcement and release.
- Lack of innovation or newness in SC2. No new race.
- Splitting of SC2 into a trilogy, each likely at the cost of a full game while potentially splitting the multiplayer audience into 3.
- No LAN support in SC2.
- Diablo 3 multiplayer reduced to 4 players max.
- Overpromising and underdelivering with SC2. Morhaime confidently asserting the game will be due "This year", or "Beta this Summer", with barely any official confirmation when they again miss their deadlines.
- Lack of official communication about timelines or projections. It's almost 3 years since announcement and we still lack even a vague idea of when the beta will start.
- All Blizzard seems to care about nowadays is WoW.
- Patches are promised for their various games (WC3, D2) and delivered years afterwards without any official correspondance about the delay.
- Incessant milking of their franchises to death. This includes BlizzCon which really isn't necessary.
- Like I said, they haven't produced a game that interest me in nearly 7 years. During that time I struggle to count all the great games I've played.

[spychi]

Don't worry guys. At least Mass Effect 2 is comming out next month. Bioware still hasn't let us down.

yeah, Alien Vs Predator 3 as well, Dawn of War II: Chaos Rising, Battlefield: Bad Company 2
and I just got for X'mas a Wii even though I am a bit too old for it lol

[DemolitionSquid]

yeah, Alien Vs Predator 3 as well, Dawn of War II: Chaos Rising, Battlefield: Bad Company 2
and I just got for X'mas a Wii even though I am a bit too old for it lol

Depends on what you enjoy. I work with a 36 year old married father of 2 who plays at least 2 hours of "Wii Fishing" a day.

[Pandonetho]

- Ridiculously long period of time between announcement and release.

Boohoo, cry me a reaver, build a dropship, and get over it.

- Lack of innovation or newness in SC2. No new race.

That's nice to know that you take innovation as a quality setting standard. SC1 was innovative, but SC2 isn't so that's all the reason more to lose respect for Blizzard. DoW2 was innovative, why don't you go play that? I actually want to keep SC2 the WAY IT IS.

- Splitting of SC2 into a trilogy, each likely at the cost of a full game while potentially splitting the multiplayer audience into 3.

Now you're just starting to sound like an angry hating fanboy. They've SAID that they're looking to price each accordingly and that the other 2 are akin to expansions. You've no basis to assume that each will be "fully priced." You're just letting your hate cloud your judgment and now you're making baseless assumptions.

- No LAN support in SC2.

This I can see the point of view from people who have limited or no internet access. I do NOT see the point of view of those who wish to buy 1 copy and pirate it around 7 friends to play in a house.

- Diablo 3 multiplayer reduced to 4 players max.

I like Diablo too, but I see nothing wrong with this. I'll wait until the game is actually OUT before I cry about whether I like the decision or not.

- Overpromising and underdelivering with SC2. Morhaime confidently asserting the game will be due "This year", or "Beta this Summer", with barely any official confirmation when they again miss their deadlines.

You can't miss deadlines that you've never set. They've tried aiming for certain times, they've never definitively said that these would be out by then. It's only your fault that you took these too literally. Wouldn't you know? You're the king of popping up hoaxes and shooting down people's hopes who believed you. I wouldn't expect you to fall for the same and actually believe that beta would be out on the times that they "hoped" to release by.

- Lack of official communication about timelines or projections. It's almost 3 years since announcement and we still lack even a vague idea of when the beta will start.

You lack a vague idea? Does 2010 sound vague to you? There's your "vague" idea of when it's out. 2010. Second of all, a release date is going to do nothing but bring up posts from you complaining about how they're going to miss it.

- All Blizzard seems to care about nowadays is WoW.

Sounds like another post from a clouded judgment. What makes you say this? Just because they are constantly providing new content for people PAYING to play the game? I mean, if I were a subscriber I think I'd like to keep the content coming too. Second of all, what's it to you? If WoW is their top priority so what? If SC2 was the top priority of their list, would that give WoW players a right to complain like you do?

- Patches are promised for their various games (WC3, D2) and delivered years afterwards without any official correspondance about the delay.

Were there even dates set in stone for these patches? Or are you yet talking about delays from which you can't have without release dates?

- Incessant milking of their franchises to death. This includes BlizzCon which really isn't necessary.

Oh, really now? Starcraft 1, Starcraft 2. OMFG IT GOT A SEQUEL. MILKED!
And what's wrong with milking if they provide quality games? Would you actually prefer less? They shouldn't release Diablo 3 after all should they? After all, it's already the 2nd sequel and that's going too far. Your logic makes NO sense. You're complaining about them milking their franchises, so what do you want? Them to stop making money? Them to stop making games? Do you actually want Diablo 3 or not? Hell what about Lost Vikings? Is that a milked franchise?

- Like I said, they haven't produced a game that interest me in nearly 7 years. During that time I struggle to count all the great games I've played.

Your opinion is not that of the masses that have helped their games reach critical acclaim. Kthnxbai.

[Pick]

I hate admitting it and being whiny, but the wait has decreased my excitement.

Last April through June I was 100% obsessed with SC2. SCLegacy was updating their site, I was very confident in a summer start to the beta, and Blizzcon was on the way. I was crazy with anticipation.

But now... wake me up when there is an official beta start date cause I am truly burnt out on the waiting.

[Crazy_Jonny]

There's plenty of reasons for me to lose respect for Blizzard, beyond just the standard delays. Allow me to list a few that immediately come to mind.

- Ridiculously long period of time between announcement and release.
- Lack of innovation or newness in SC2. No new race.
- Splitting of SC2 into a trilogy, each likely at the cost of a full game while potentially splitting the multiplayer audience into 3.
- No LAN support in SC2.
- Diablo 3 multiplayer reduced to 4 players max.
- Overpromising and underdelivering with SC2. Morhaime confidently asserting the game will be due "This year", or "Beta this Summer", with barely any official confirmation when they again miss their deadlines.
- Lack of official communication about timelines or projections. It's almost 3 years since announcement and we still lack even a vague idea of when the beta will start.
- All Blizzard seems to care about nowadays is WoW.
- Patches are promised for their various games (WC3, D2) and delivered years afterwards without any official correspondance about the delay.
- Incessant milking of their franchises to death. This includes BlizzCon which really isn't necessary.
- Like I said, they haven't produced a game that interest me in nearly 7 years. During that time I struggle to count all the great games I've played.

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

[Hamshank]

Depends on what you enjoy. I work with a 36 year old married father of 2 who plays at least 2 hours of "Wii Fishing" a day.

You must have an interesting time during your job hours, Squidward.


And @ Blazur the second you play the game all your spite will disappear.