EPTStarCraft 2 Delayed to 2010 - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
| ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
 | ||
|
Railz
United States1449 Posts
Blizzard is its own developer and publisher now as well which means they no longer have pressure from Vivendi to release an early game (cough WC3) | ||
|
WolfStar
United Kingdom155 Posts
Wolf. | ||
Eeevil
Netherlands359 Posts
On August 06 2009 16:37 Plexa wrote: More time to enjoy SC - im happy This It means at least one more season of SCBW in the full spotlight. | ||
|
GoSu
Korea (South)1773 Posts
| ||
|
GoSu
Korea (South)1773 Posts
On August 06 2009 17:10 Eeevil wrote: This It means at least one more season of SCBW in the full spotlight. Don't worry, SC1 will stay in the full spotlight. | ||
|
Ych9
Canada39 Posts
http://seekingalpha.com/article/154118-activision-blizzard-q2-2009-earnings-call-transcript With this in mind, we are repositioning the release of Blizzard Entertainment’s Starcraft 2 into the first half of 2010 to coincide with the launch of our new Battlenet game service which will be ready early next year. If I am not mistaken, this basically confirms that Beta won't start until early next year. As we all know, Battlenet needs to be ready in order for the beta to begin. Since it wont' be ready until early next year, there is no way that beta will start in 2009. On top of that, we know that beta is estimated to last around 4-6 months. This would fit their timeline of their quoted first half of 2010 which would take us to around June. I really hope that isn't really what it meant or my reading skill is severely lacking. Because if it isn't, then we are seeing a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE DELAY!!! | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
on a side note its obivous the BattleNet 2.0 that is causing the delay. When listening to Dustin Browder the game itself has been good enough for Beta for quite a while. | ||
|
Orphan
Australia49 Posts
If I am not mistaken, this basically confirms that Beta won't start until early next year. As we all know, Battlenet needs to be ready in order for the beta to begin. Since it wont' be ready until early next year, there is no way that beta will start in 2009. I doubt we'll get the full package of Bnet 2.0 during the beta. I imagine there'll be alot of features unavailable and will be released when the full game go live. They just need to get up enough to be able to handle the minimum required for people to beta test SC2 really. | ||
|
despite
Bulgaria105 Posts
| ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On August 06 2009 17:37 despite wrote: I'll roflmao when they finally show us bnet 2 and it sucks balls. Yea, Bnet2.0 better be awesome, and by that I mean i will make you breakfast while you wait to join games. | ||
|
TurboMaN
Germany925 Posts
Ok so maybe Diablo 3 might be released before SC2? Very stupid, thx Blizzard. | ||
|
saritenite
Singapore1680 Posts
On August 06 2009 17:43 TurboMaN wrote: I wish they had never announced that they are working on SC2. This is so damn long to wait for the release. The first infos about the game are more than 1 year old? Ok so maybe Diablo 3 might be released before SC2? Very stupid, thx Blizzard. Contrary to that, announcing SC2 way before they release it is a sure way of getting the public to criticise and correct their work. Would you have liked it if Ultralisks v2.0 were released with 4000 hitpoints and 20 armor? I think not. SC2 was announced around 2007. It is worth the wait. + Show Spoiler + plus we get to watch more Broodwar, which is spectacular because of the perfection Progamers have achieved Diablo 3 is not as hyped as SC2, Blizzard's MMOs are generally less popular than its RTS games. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On August 06 2009 17:43 TurboMaN wrote: I wish they had never announced that they are working on SC2. This is so damn long to wait for the release. The first infos about the game are more than 1 year old? Ok so maybe Diablo 3 might be released before SC2? Very stupid, thx Blizzard. The delay is caused because of Bnet2.0 and not the game itself, in worse case scenario SC2 and D3 be released at the same time. | ||
|
TurboMaN
Germany925 Posts
Many ppl think that the delay of SC2 is because of Activions Management which doesn't want to let MW2 compete with SC2 because more ppl will buy both games if they are released in different months. I'm sure the Blizzard development team would have finished a stable B.net 2.0. It's all about the CEO decisions. | ||
|
despite
Bulgaria105 Posts
On August 06 2009 17:48 sArite_nite wrote: Diablo 3 is not as hyped as SC2, Blizzard's MMOs are generally less popular than its RTS games. Diablo 2 was not MMO and I doubt D3 will be. Also D2 was as popular as SC among my friends maybe even more. | ||
|
Boundz(DarKo)
5311 Posts
| ||
|
saritenite
Singapore1680 Posts
On August 06 2009 18:04 despite wrote: Diablo 2 was not MMO and I doubt D3 will be. Also D2 was as popular as SC among my friends maybe even more. Perhaps. But if you look at the trends, Blizzard's main moneymaker has been WoW because of the subscription. Looking at success differently, WC3 and SC have made it much further than WoW in terms of popularity. (I played WoW and it got steadily easier and easier. So I left.) WC3 is boring because of DotA (and also popular because of it) and SC is still the best. I do not see D3 becoming as popular as SC2 unless SC2 turns out to be a blowjob after all the delays and Battle Reports. Diablo does have a very loyal fanbase though. I'll probably play both games. And I don't see how SC2 will sway DotA gamers over, DotA gamers stereotypically suck at RTS and at life (at least in my country they do). | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On August 06 2009 16:22 MasterFischer wrote: Whatever the problem with B.net 2.0 is, it seems to be a tricky little thing. As I stated previously, these programmers aint the friggin gods of the universe. They get into hairy situations and problems that nobody would have thought of.. why? because that´s life... unexpected things happen from time to time.. and until you find a way to deal with it.. your stuck that way... is that so hard to fathom? Arguably, Blizzard should have pinned down and gone to work on B.net earlier, or they simply felt rather confident about what was gonna happen that they didn´t foresee future problems. It is quite clear that some of you have absolutely no idea how gamedevelopment and mechanics work in a company like Blizzard. I honestly don´t understand why all this hate must be put on Blizzard for delaying the game and make it better.. or at least implement the cool features that they promised in the friggin first place.. Most companies would probaly just say "AWWWW FCK it" and release it... without really having the new cool stuff... because it was too "hard". This is where Blizzard shines, because it never comprises its integrity with its work, or caves in to pressure to release an unfinished product due to hardships in the development cycle. This aint the friggin end of the world... If your genuinely pissed off about these news... well then maybe you should consider going out more.. or finding other pleasures in life other than a computer game, revolving around your day... Just a thought... Or it has to do that the game will have been in development for 7 years by the time it gets released. I could name things MUCH harder than developing a game that happened in less than 7 years, lets see for example the Atomic Bomb. | ||
| ||
