| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
I don't mind if it come out later if the games better for the extra work. | |
Called it. Faith in Blizzard has reached a negative value. | |
Bah. They always push release dates back. It'd be a cold day in hell if Blizzard made a release on time. | |
Cold day in hell, with a blue moon plus the second and third comings of Christ maybe. Even then, I bet they'd run into shipping problems and still be late on the shelves. | |
Predicting a delay in a Blizzard game is like predicting it'll be dark at night. | |
I'm guessing early 2010 before a release. | |
We've been waiting for ten years for a sequel, I guess we can wait a few more months. | |
I don't think Starcraft 2 can be analyzed in the same way most products are. First of all, it's not a hard sell. Even without expanding the audience they will have a formidable number of buyers, regardless of when it's released. Secondly, SC2 has (if I've understood correctly) been developed very much in cooperation with pro-level Starcraft players, so the beta will probably be far more polished than most betas. Basically, I think it'll be a quick process to finish the game once the beta period is over. | |
I thought it would be to good to be true but as long as they don't do what HAL Labratory did with Brawl, it doesn't bother me. | |
So long as it's better, I'll wait another year. This game has to be the closest thing to perfect I have ever seen after waiting a decade. | |
2012 for all I care. StarCraft without LAN is no stinkin' StarCraft. | |
Well that kind of sucks, but id rather have them release a finished product. | |
I like you, you know Blizzard awfully well. | |
You'd think, with all that money Blizzard/Activision is making, they could afford some more employees to kick out their damn games on schedule. Edit: SC: Ghost was a game I fuckin wanted to play :/ but I guess if it had been any good they would have released it. You can say about Blizzard whatever you want (e.g. that you hate half their releases, like me) but they only release games that are well crafted. No rushed shit, no extremely bad stuff. | |
Killjoy. That's what this guy is. I mean, we all know the truth, but he didn't have to tell it to us. | |
Would you prefer they release it this year and it not be done? | |
FFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU- Ok not really, I really dont mind when it comes out. | |
Blizzard said they could've released it last year, but I severely doubt it would look like the gem it is today. Since the annoucement units have been added, others cut, skills tweaked, and graphics revamped. Not to mention Windows 7 support probably as well. Can't just put a sticker on a game and call it done, and if they released a buggy unbalanced mess to tarnish the Starcraft name I doubt anyone would put faith in another Starcraft title again. Let them work on it, and I bet it'll be out in 2009 like they said. | |
Whoever knows Blizzard is not surprised. And this, too.
| |
push it back 4 more years, i dont care, i just want a good starcraft game | |
At least it's not Blizzard announcing the latest way they're screwing over fans of the original. We've seen far too much of that already. | |
Yeah they've never held games back before right? | |
At the rate they're going, I wouldn't be surprised to see the beta in 2010, let-alone when the game will eventually come out. | |
Dear Lord, what will I do without all those sequels that will be mild variations of their counterparts... | |
Only early 2010? try fall 2010, that sounds more realistic for blizzard. | |
I just bought a new gaming rig this month partly cause I knew there was no way my 8 year old machine would even handle the intro screen for SC2. <g> As long as they don't wait so long to release that I have to upgrade a second time for my machine to handle it, I'll be happy. Fortunately, I don't think there's any real danger of Blizzard pulling a Daikatana (or worse, a DNF) on us and that's all that matters. | |
Well all this is nice and all about people understanding taht blizz needs time... | |
This isn't surprising to me. Blizzard (or at least their executives) are notourious for setting goals they can't make. I remember distinctly around Burning Crusade the promise of an expansion every year -- which obviously became one every two years or so. However, to their credit, they don't seem to be intentionally lying to us. After all, Burning Crusade launched in January 2007, only a couple months past their "target" date. As I recall, they had no problems getting Wrath out before Christmas of last year. If Blizzard is shooting for a 2009 release, the team will likely do what they can to make it. If it does launch in 2010, it will be early 2010. If you're worried about another StarCraft:Ghost phenomenon, don't worry about it. SC:G never had beta-opt in. Oh, and I'm sure Blizzard and Activision are both in a hurry to get the flagship BattleNet going so they can start cashing in on it. | |
No, what I'd prefer is they keep their gods-damned yaps shut about what projects they're doing until they are within 6 months of release. As a company which is infamous for their inability to get Product A onto Shelf B, it would do them some good not to hype us up two to three years before they are even in fucking BETA trials. They officially announced this game in what? May 07? Known about it a year or more before the "official" announcement. It's now July 09 and we're being told not to expect it for another six months at best, nine to twelve being realistic, and longer than that a grim possibility? And of course, Diablo 3 has begun its hypefest, and we won't be seeing that particular game until we know whether 2012 is actually the end of the world or not. Meanwhile, fans are already bitching and moaning about trivialities like how colorful the game is, based on screenshots, never having actually seen the game and with know knowledge of the setting. You don't think that won't set things back another six to nine months? I hadn't heard about Wolfenstein until early spring of this year, and it's slated for an August release. THAT'S how you fucking do things. Not giving the fans gamehype-blueballs but actually delivering on the product you are throwing in their face. Blizztavision could learn a think or two-thousand from id/Pi/Raven. | |
By being totally boring and uninteresting? I was aware of that game a year and a half ago, I just didn't care in any way, shape or form. | |
I have to agree with Sennet here: Blizzard has given me a severe case of gamer's blueballs. I'd eagerly devoured news tidbit after news tidbit about Starcraft 2, but now I have a distinct sense of apathy. Sure, I'm still gonna get it, but I'm not gonna be excited about it. On the other hand, I am hyped for the Wolfenstein game. I want to get it, partially because I think it will be fun, and partially to see how far over the line of acceptability it will step. I hope that it steps FAR. | |
Starcraft 2: The new Duke Nukem Forever. This game has been postponed way too much, and I wouldn't be surprised if Hickey is right. | |
Don't mind waiting another year for Blizzard to release one third of Starcraft II.... Mby they will do something about the crappy graphic. | |
I doubt that fellow surprised anyone. What I'd like to know is how I can get paid to tell stuff that's already obvious? Listening to this stuff on games is almost like listening to commentators and experts during a presidential election. It's all for them to hear themselves speak. | |
| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Extra Punctuation
MovieBob: Intermission
Experienced Points
First Person
Exploding Barrels
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Loading Time
Special Attack
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist News Wrap - Premium
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Mahalo
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Space Janitors
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
The Retro Show
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
Max Payne 3 Review
Company of Heroes 2
XCOM Enemy Unknown
Black Ops 2
Diablo 3 Review
TERA Review
Firefall Beta Preview
Starhawk Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
Analyst: No StarCraft II This Year
Janco Partners analyst Mike Hickey is predicting that Blizzard's highly anticipated StarCraft II won't make it into 2009, one of several snags that could make the end of this year a little bit rougher than Activision thinks it will be.
Though Blizzard's own Mike Morhaime recently declared that StarCraft II is being targeted for a release sometime later this year, some industry analysts are using recently revealed information to argue that the game might not make it until the fiscal year for 2010.
Yesterday Kotaku reported that Blizzard is planning for the SC2 multiplayer beta to last four to six months, which, depending on when the beta starts, could put SC2 dangerously on the edge of 2009, considering we're already six months into this year. Hopeful fans no doubt have their fingers crossed that's not what this means, but Janco Partners analyst Mike Hickey isn't going to beat around the bush, saying: "We find it increasingly probable that the game will be released in [Activision's] fiscal '10 period."
And that's just the beginning of the bad news Janco Partners has for Activision-Blizzard. Hickey pointed out the recent boost in Activision shareholders unloading their shares as a bad sign. And despite a number of huge titles on the horizon for the year including Modern Warfare 2 and Guitar Hero 5, Hickey thinks that without price cuts, current console asking prices could "compromise holiday sales expectations."
While I am worried about Blizzard's plan for the beta pushing back the game, if that does happen it can't mean that we'll have to wait too much longer. They're not going to end the beta and then wait another year to put the game out. And what about Blizzard's declaration to put out "one front line release per year?" Without StarCraft II, they'd have nothing, right? Unless they pull World of Lost Vikings out at BlizzCon, I think they'll try their best to get StarCraft II out in 2009.
[Via Gamasutra]
Permalink