WCSBlizzard cancelled Starcraft FPS game to focus on OW2, Dia…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5594 Posts
| ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States10948 Posts
On June 11 2019 02:05 Excludos wrote: Didn't one of the Battlefield games do this as well? Wasn't that completely pointless? People don't care unless you try to make it realistic and add a little bit of roleplay into the equation, and for that Arma 3 is the closest we have. But that's far to hardcore for the average gamer I'm afraid. The average gamer isn't fond of having to put aside 2 hours for a single mission, where the first 30 minutes is spent planning and scouting, while the remaining 1.5 hours is spent dead because you got unlucky. Battlefield 2, 2142, and 4 had a commander mode. The single commander player could give orders to squads and use powers like scans, supply drops, and artillery strikes. The role felt very exclusive and hard to get, so more recent Battlefield games have moved some of those powers into elite classes or squad leaders. I remember Battlefield 2 commanders were mostly glorified spotters for pinging out enemies on the mini-map. Command and Conquer: Renegade was a neat take on the RTS/FPS hybrid, even though it didn't have a commander role. Starcraft: Ghost looked like it was going to be an evolution of that, and it would've been interesting to see this cancelled Starcraft FPS iterate on that idea even further. | ||
|
Parrek
United States828 Posts
On June 09 2019 12:48 neutralrobot wrote: After D3, I just... can't imagine D4 being a great game. I think D2 will always be the definitive Diablo game, and after that the rest will always be just kinda high-production fanfic. D3 was great after reaper of souls launched. Sure it's not a game you can play indefinitely like PoE because they're not throwing out a ton of new content, but I spent a few hundred hours having a blast and still haven't played all the classes. The grind for new gear is the joy of those games. And there's still a ton of really fun content. | ||
|
Highways
Australia6049 Posts
| ||
BigFan
TLADT23856 Posts
On June 11 2019 09:29 Highways wrote: They should just kill Diablo already are you really that much of a Diablo hater?  | ||
|
Wombat_NI
Northern Ireland11126 Posts
I can’t say I hate it, never just really got the fuss about it. Whatever though gaming companies have to cater to markets and not my personal tastes | ||
Destructicon
4621 Posts
On June 07 2019 16:28 Wombat_NI wrote: Gaming seems to be in a pretty wonky state where publishers seem to have set the bar of success at the WoW/CoD/Fortnite levels of numbers and won’t take any kind of risk on things that can’t hit those really atypical and inflated heights. Especially if something is either divergent from current trends, or lacks an obvious way to monetise it post-sale, or worse, both. Blizzard aren’t exactly reticent in axing projects, but they do usually trot out the ‘it wasn’t up to brand quality’ line, it I suppose they have done that though with projects that were announced and even showcased like Ghost. Pretty much hit the nail on the head. Publishers are so risk adverse now a days that its easier to get excited by indy devs, with some exceptions. That being said, I think it would make more sense for Blizzard to make a WC4 than SC3 for the following reasons. 1. Warcraft as an RTS was more micro focused than Macro focused, indicating a WC4 would also be more micro based. 2. Micro based gameplay is flashier and more personal than macro based, at least for viewership, it would also be easier to follow as you'd have fewer units onscreen.. 3. Micro based gameplay could, potentially be easier to balance, as you have less instances of certain units becoming OP through critical mass. 4. Its just been way, way, way longer since we've had a WC based RTS. On the other hand WC4 has the big problem of existing in the same space as WOW and it seems like, for the most part, Blizz have sort of kept it to one genre per IP, although this might be changing. | ||
|
abuse
Latvia1760 Posts
Something like planetside maybe, with the 3 races fighting for power on a map, expansions, etc. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic8477 Posts
On June 11 2019 17:16 abuse wrote: Honestly, a proper large-scale starcraft FPS could be awesome. Something like planetside maybe, with the 3 races fighting for power on a map, expansions, etc. It doesn't even have to be. Alien vs Predator in Starcraft. BOOM. You'll be a zealot, DT, stalker and end as a pilot of a carrier! Marine part stays Marine, but without motion detector. Zergling -> Baneling. Hydralisk! And a bonus part as an ultralisk. Maybe even the sleezy infestor! It's not like there's no opportunity to do a good shooter from SC world, but it wouldn't be possible to milk it forever with microtransactions and "games as a live service" so they don't care. The rest was written above me. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany2335 Posts
On June 11 2019 05:02 eviltomahawk wrote: Battlefield 2, 2142, and 4 had a commander mode. The single commander player could give orders to squads and use powers like scans, supply drops, and artillery strikes. The role felt very exclusive and hard to get, so more recent Battlefield games have moved some of those powers into elite classes or squad leaders. I remember Battlefield 2 commanders were mostly glorified spotters for pinging out enemies on the mini-map. Command and Conquer: Renegade was a neat take on the RTS/FPS hybrid, even though it didn't have a commander role. Starcraft: Ghost looked like it was going to be an evolution of that, and it would've been interesting to see this cancelled Starcraft FPS iterate on that idea even further. I loved C&C Renegade. Was so sad when they announced there will never be a Renegade 2 I mean, balance sucked, graphic was sub-par and they made some odd design choices. But oh my god was this a fun LAN game back then | ||
|
Wombat_NI
Northern Ireland11126 Posts
On June 11 2019 16:27 Destructicon wrote: Pretty much hit the nail on the head. Publishers are so risk adverse now a days that its easier to get excited by indy devs, with some exceptions. That being said, I think it would make more sense for Blizzard to make a WC4 than SC3 for the following reasons. 1. Warcraft as an RTS was more micro focused than Macro focused, indicating a WC4 would also be more micro based. 2. Micro based gameplay is flashier and more personal than macro based, at least for viewership, it would also be easier to follow as you'd have fewer units onscreen.. 3. Micro based gameplay could, potentially be easier to balance, as you have less instances of certain units becoming OP through critical mass. 4. Its just been way, way, way longer since we've had a WC based RTS. On the other hand WC4 has the big problem of existing in the same space as WOW and it seems like, for the most part, Blizz have sort of kept it to one genre per IP, although this might be changing. RTS seems to fall into the zone where even if it’s a huge success, it’s never successful enough, or it’s not currently in vogue with trends. I quite like a competitive RTS having at least 5-10 years of a run with gradual content added before the next mainline entry, I think rushing sequels you fragment competitive scenes and there’s less fully fleshing out of games and possibilities, plus it’s harder to come up with anything genuinely new or interesting the more you have to do it, chances are you put your best ideas into your first game and tweaking it works better. I’m definitely in favour of WC4, I love WC3 and RTS but not WoW, and that game is bloody old now. Plus I agree 100% on your other points as far as it pertains to people’s general tastes. SC2 is too macro focused and fast for many people to enjoy playing, even people who enjoy watching, WC3 is a bit more sedate and micro is fun I wonder if Warcraft Reforged is not for me, it’s for Blizzard testing the waters with a proven product that needs a lick of paint to see how many non RTS veterans/fans it can pull in. Specifically the MOBA crowd due to WC3 being that genre’s grandfather, as well as the WoW crowd who might like that universe but have never played RTS Then if that does really well, WC4 would strike me as more likely. | ||
|
Destructicon
4621 Posts
But at the same time the RTS niche has never died off and I suspect it will always have fans well into the future, making it still worthwhile for someone to invest into it. You also raise an interesting point with Blizzard potentially testing the waters with WC Reforged, but if we're going by that assumption than it probably means they have no interest in releasing a new RTS for another 5 years. | ||
digmouse
China5327 Posts
On June 11 2019 19:52 Destructicon wrote: Yeah, we're in this weird space where major AAA devs won't invest into an RTS as they feel it will never rise up to the level of a FPS, RPG, MoBA or other popular franchises. But at the same time the RTS niche has never died off and I suspect it will always have fans well into the future, making it still worthwhile for someone to invest into it. You also raise an interesting point with Blizzard potentially testing the waters with WC Reforged, but if we're going by that assumption than it probably means they have no interest in releasing a new RTS for another 5 years. Microsoft just started a studio dedicated to Age of Empires, is releasing AoE2 DE and working on AoE4, sure they have Game Pass to fill but still. | ||
|
argiveajax1
2 Posts
 for real though, i think an mmo rts is completely possible and could be very interesting. | ||
|
seemsgood
4696 Posts
On June 09 2019 08:42 brickrd wrote: starcraft is great but the story is nothing. starcraft is famous for being a great RTS, not for having good writing. a starcraft FPS is a step away from what the franchise is good for. it's an RTS or it's worthless its moar like sc2 story changed ur view about this game imo it used to be dark like DC batman until blizz ruined the setting a well executed spin off with awesome gameplay could make us forget what is gud in its rts counterpart and not considering blizz got top notch art and character design skill | ||
|
seemsgood
4696 Posts
On June 09 2019 07:44 Excludos wrote: Steam isn't a company, it's a product. Valve is the company, and they haven't been a games company since dota 2, nor have they pretended to be. But surprisingly, their latest game was released last year. It just sucked and no one bought it. This year they released a VR headset instead afraid steam might become current blizzard if that fat man reallllly know how to count to three tho.thier games were too iconic for them to take the risk. only blizz and bethesda got the ball to make sequel and any one has enough courage to do that deserve a cookie regardless of success or fail | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic8477 Posts
On June 12 2019 13:17 seemsgood wrote: afraid steam might become current blizzard if that fat man reallllly know how to count to three tho.thier games were too iconic for them to take the risk. only blizz and bethesda got the ball to make sequel and any one has enough courage to do that deserve a cookie regardless of success or fail Larian just announced BG3, that takes huge balls considering how is BG 1 & 2 remembered. Ubisoft just released The Division 2, considering the shitstorm about the first Division it took probably even bigger balls than those of Larians. Divinity Original Sin 2, Pillars of Eternity 2, Wasteland 3(!!), GOD OF WAR, Red Dead Redemption 2, Dark Souls 3, Uncharted 4, Civilization VI - and that's just some huge names which were not shitty games and are a sequel. it's not just Blizzard and Bethesda... Considering Bethesda's latest steps(F76 to be precise) and Blizzard's last year Diablo fiasco I dare to say that the games I named are better addition than what these companies did in 2018/19. Considering the previous parts of some of these games it took big balls to release a sequel. | ||
|
Latham
5878 Posts
On June 12 2019 16:40 deacon.frost wrote: Larian just announced BG3, that takes huge balls considering how is BG 1 & 2 remembered. Ubisoft just released The Division 2, considering the shitstorm about the first Division it took probably even bigger balls than those of Larians. Divinity Original Sin 2, Pillars of Eternity 2, Wasteland 3(!!), GOD OF WAR, Red Dead Redemption 2, Dark Souls 3, Uncharted 4, Civilization VI - and that's just some huge names which were not shitty games and are a sequel. it's not just Blizzard and Bethesda... Considering Bethesda's latest steps(F76 to be precise) and Blizzard's last year Diablo fiasco I dare to say that the games I named are better addition than what these companies did in 2018/19. Considering the previous parts of some of these games it took big balls to release a sequel. I don't think The Division 2 took more balls to announce and decide to develop than Baldur's Gate 3 simply because Ubisoft doesn't know what shame is. They didn't feel ashamed of how they launched Div1, how they kept updating it or how it was at the end of its life cycle. They just decided to do dip into a relatively fresh IP once again and milk it for what its worth. If it worked (and it did) Div2 is way better than Div1, hey, awesome! If it didn't? Put the IP on ice for a few years and try milking again afterwards in the future) Larian is smaller and can't just laugh it off. They put their good name on the line and possibly their whole company on that future release. That takes confidence and balls of brass, akin to Dad of Boy that you mentioned. Anyhoooo... I was actually pretty sad and shocked at the news that the 1st person shooter in the SC universe was cancelled. I'd gobble that shit up through my nose TBH. I also like many many people on this site want to see a proper RTS from what feels like the only company that still knows how to make them in the year of our Lord 2019, but I personally wouldn't mind Alien vs Predator - esque game set in the SC universe. I do hope they know what they're doing with Diablo 4. I was actually devastated when they announced (or leaked?) that they scrapped the 2nd Xpack for Diablo 3. I genuinely believe that Reaper of Souls was an amazing expansion that redeeemed and revitalized the base game. Is Diablo 3 as good as say Path of Exile? Hell no. But still good enough to go back to when you get bored of PoE and want to binge play the next best ARPG hack n slash on the market for 2-3 weeks. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic8477 Posts
Yeah, I would love a game like AvP from SC2. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany2335 Posts
On June 12 2019 19:30 deacon.frost wrote: I'll agree with you, Latham. My point with the rest of the games was that other companies do release sequels. While Ubi doesn't know the shame, they may have pulled out EA(this game never happened, look elsewhere - e.g. ME:Andromeda, appears to be Anthem scenario too) as TD1 was a great selling game so I believe it payed for itself. Yeah, I would love a game like AvP from SC2. But imagine the shitstorm if it sucks. Blizz needs a succes story after all the drama and fails | ||
| ||
|
| ||
