Analyst Thinks Next Starcraft II Won't Come This Year

Analyst Thinks Next Starcraft II Won't Come This Year

image

It's looking more and more like Heart of the Swarm will hatch in 2013.

Once upon a time, there was an elite military operative named Sarah Kerrigan. Then she went all buggy, and her erstwhile boyfriend Jim Raynor tried to blow her up. But then there was a chance - just a sliver, mind you - that things could go differently. Narratively, that's how Blizzard has left us hanging since the end of campaign of Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty, released all the way back in mid 2010. The concept of breaking up the story of the real-time strategy sequel into three distinct games rather than expansions hinged on delivering the next two iterations over the next two years. Here we are, two years later, and there's no Heart of the Swarm release date on our books. Doug Creutz - an analyst for financial firm Cowen & Company - doesn't think we'll get one in 2012, estimating 2013 at the earliest.

"Typically, Blizzard puts its new titles into beta for 3-6 months before they are officially released," he wrote in a report on Activision Blizzard this week. "With only 5 months left in the year, while it is still possible that Swarm could make the fiscal year, we are now assuming it ships in FY13."

Even though there's no public beta yet, Blizzard will be showing off multiplayer units from all three races - Terran, Protoss, Zerg - at the Gamescom festival in Germany this summer. That's a good sign that at least the designers are hard at work, but it could also be why there's been such a delay. The first Starcraft II iteration is so well-balanced that it has been adopted as a esport even more than its predecessor. I'm sure Blizzard wants to make absolutely sure the changes don't screw that up.

That's all fine, but for us non-pro strategy fans, I just want to continue the story. I don't want Heart of the Swarm to end up like Half-Life 3.

Source: CVG

Permalink

It was already said by Blizzard earlier that they were going to be able to release two products this year, Diablo 3 and one other which wasn't chosen yet. Since MoP now has a release date of September 25th 2012, logically the next SC2 episode won't be due until 2013. Which makes sense, since it seems anything about SC2 makes it out to being still developed.

I wonder if this is going to turn into Starcraft Ghost. Anyone else remember that piece of vaporware?

Wow these analysts are really good at stating the obvious. Blizzard already announced a wow expansion for later this year so they will not also be releasing the next starcraft around that time. If I had to guess I would say they will release this around six months later so as not to interfere with wow.

I am betting online only for it.

You don't "Heart" Mr. Games Editor?
Maybe there wouldn't be such "overwhelming" spikes in traffic if you guys didn't rush to put out three articles within five minutes of each other.

ProtonGuy:
I wonder if this is going to turn into Starcraft Ghost. Anyone else remember that piece of vaporware?

Except it won't? This game has been played in Alpha and from what I have heard it is in "Selective Beta" so most likely it is phase 3 of their Alpha process.

Ghost didn't even get to the Alpha Phase before it was scrapped.

Anyways, OT: I am excited for this to come next year. I am too poor to afford this game right now :(

ZippyDSMlee:
I am betting online only for it.

For what? The full game? Because it's already been stated repeatedly that it's going to include a single player.

DVS BSTrD:
You don't "Heart" Mr. Games Editor?
Maybe there wouldn't be such "overwhelming" spikes in traffic if you guys didn't rush to put out three articles within five minutes of each other.

Thanks for the tips!

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
I am betting online only for it.

For what? The full game? Because it's already been stated repeatedly that it's going to include a single player.

Daiblo 3 has single player as well.

First, who cares about Blizz after SC2 and especially after D3?

And second: enough news about what analysts think!. Most of them are nothing more than tarot card readers, and those that know something don't say a thing.

ZippyDSMlee:

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
I am betting online only for it.

For what? The full game? Because it's already been stated repeatedly that it's going to include a single player.

Daiblo 3 has single player as well.

Yeah, but it's so crippled by Blizzard's idiocy that it might as well drop it.

Multiplayer also.

ZippyDSMlee:

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
I am betting online only for it.

For what? The full game? Because it's already been stated repeatedly that it's going to include a single player.

Daiblo 3 has single player as well.

Ah, so you mean always online in order to play single player? WoL is technically always online, but there was offline mode for single player if you weren't connected to the internet. I see no reason why they would change that, particularly since there's no reason for it (not even their made up reasons for Diablo 3 apply to the single player Starcraft experience), and they already had a huge backlash against them over Diablo 3.

paketep:

ZippyDSMlee:

Vivi22:

For what? The full game? Because it's already been stated repeatedly that it's going to include a single player.

Daiblo 3 has single player as well.

Yeah, but it's so crippled by Blizzard's idiocy that it might as well drop it.

Multiplayer also.

That won't stop them from putting it all their games tho. ^^

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:

Vivi22:

For what? The full game? Because it's already been stated repeatedly that it's going to include a single player.

Daiblo 3 has single player as well.

Ah, so you mean always online in order to play single player? WoL is technically always online, but there was offline mode for single player if you weren't connected to the internet. I see no reason why they would change that, particularly since there's no reason for it (not even their made up reasons for Diablo 3 apply to the single player Starcraft experience), and they already had a huge backlash against them over Diablo 3.

Has not stopped Ubisoft any and I see no reason why they would not do it since they pretty much already have destroyed their reputation.

This just in....Blizzard doesn't release game in timely manner. Film at 11!

This comes as no surprise to me. It's blizzard doing what blizzard does. Admittedly, this does sadden me slightly as I don't play WoW anymore and was looking forward to the next part of SC2. Oh well, I have plenty to keep me occupied until they get this thing out the door.

The only way Blizzard could win back my heart is if they decided to make SC: Ghost, that would be lovely!

They should have just released SC 2 as a full game.

Suki_:
Wow these analysts are really good at stating the obvious. Blizzard already announced a wow expansion for later this year so they will not also be releasing the next starcraft around that time. If I had to guess I would say they will release this around six months later so as not to interfere with wow.

They are two astronomically different types of games. The release of one has no bearing on the sales of the other beyond blizzards resources to support the launch. WHile I agree that they would never release both games in the same quarter that has a lot more to do with keeping their shareholders happy than any concerns about the games cannibalizing one another.

walrusaurus:

Suki_:
Wow these analysts are really good at stating the obvious. Blizzard already announced a wow expansion for later this year so they will not also be releasing the next starcraft around that time. If I had to guess I would say they will release this around six months later so as not to interfere with wow.

They are two astronomically different types of games. The release of one has no bearing on the sales of the other beyond blizzards resources to support the launch. WHile I agree that they would never release both games in the same quarter that has a lot more to do with keeping their shareholders happy than any concerns about the games cannibalizing one another.

You would have to be nuts to think there was no overlap between the games. If you release them to close together people will be to busy with one to buy the other.

ZippyDSMlee:
Has not stopped Ubisoft any and I see no reason why they would not do it since they pretty much already have destroyed their reputation.

Uhh, even Ubisoft started backing away from that due to the lashing they were getting from fans. But no, your logic is totally flawless. They hurt their reputation with Diablo 3, so it definitely makes sense for them to do something which they didn't in the previous game, is completely unnecessary, and which could only serve to harm their reputation more.

I find it a bit more likely that they'll just keep doing what they did last time.

Quiet Stranger:
They should have just released SC 2 as a full game.

I have to say that I hate this argument because it's such an obvious load of crap which people like to trot out to take undeserved shots at Blizzard. If you want to hate on Blizzard for anything, there are plenty of legitimate issues to talk about with them. But saying that a game which had as many single player missions as the original, new units, additional challenges, a co-op mode, and a full featured multiplayer with integrated ladder rankings and three different races is somehow incomplete is a disingenuous argument to say the least.

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
Has not stopped Ubisoft any and I see no reason why they would not do it since they pretty much already have destroyed their reputation.

Uhh, even Ubisoft started backing away from that due to the lashing they were getting from fans. But no, your logic is totally flawless. They hurt their reputation with Diablo 3, so it definitely makes sense for them to do something which they didn't in the previous game, is completely unnecessary, and which could only serve to harm their reputation more.

I find it a bit more likely that they'll just keep doing what they did last time.

And yet ubi has done nothing to change and there is no proper D3 offline mode as of yet, thus the current trend is constant online connections for these 2 devs unless you are on the WIIPS360.

They care more about the stockholders than consumers this also dose not help in removal of constant online connections.

Until they show functional change they have not changed any at all.

ZippyDSMlee:
And yet ubi has done nothing to change

I wasn't aware that removing the always online requirement for games like AC: Brotherhood, and going back and patching it out of games like AC2 qualified as doing nothing to change. You'll have to forgive me, I seem to have gotten doing something about a problem confused with twiddling their thumbs.

and there is no proper D3 offline mode as of yet

And there may never be. But you seem to have missed the point I was making that the lame excuses they used to justify always online in Diablo 3 aren't applicable to Starcraft. So I'm not going to jump the gun and assume they'll require you to be online for single player when there's no justification for it in the case of Heart of the Swarm, and they didn't do it in the last SC game.

Until they show functional change they have not changed any at all.

Well since you seem to turn a blind eye to companies actually doing something to fix a problem they created I'm not sure how you'd know if any company actually changed.

ZippyDSMlee:
I am betting online only for it.

Well, considering you need to log into Battle.net to play SP and MP in Starcraft 2 already, exactly the same as Diablo 3 (and yet didn't generate nearly as much buzz as D3, no idea why), it's pretty much 99% certain HotS is going to need to login to play, too.

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
And yet ubi has done nothing to change

I wasn't aware that removing the always online requirement for games like AC: Brotherhood, and going back and patching it out of games like AC2 qualified as doing nothing to change. You'll have to forgive me, I seem to have gotten doing something about a problem confused with twiddling their thumbs.

and there is no proper D3 offline mode as of yet

And there may never be. But you seem to have missed the point I was making that the lame excuses they used to justify always online in Diablo 3 aren't applicable to Starcraft. So I'm not going to jump the gun and assume they'll require you to be online for single player when there's no justification for it in the case of Heart of the Swarm, and they didn't do it in the last SC game.

Until they show functional change they have not changed any at all.

Well since you seem to turn a blind eye to companies actually doing something to fix a problem they created I'm not sure how you'd know if any company actually changed.

Oh really? They removed the flaw not the DRM itself, Uplay is still in all their games.....

Viper114:

ZippyDSMlee:
I am betting online only for it.

Well, considering you need to log into Battle.net to play SP and MP in Starcraft 2 already, exactly the same as Diablo 3 (and yet didn't generate nearly as much buzz as D3, no idea why), it's pretty much 99% certain HotS is going to need to login to play, too.

Not really as once you got it up and running and authenticated you could play it offline for 30 days at a time.

ZippyDSMlee:
Oh really? They removed the flaw not the DRM itself, Uplay is still in all their games.....

If your issue is with it having DRM of any kind then say so from the start next time. Otherwise it just looks like you're moving the goal posts in the debate because your original point was refuted.

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
Oh really? They removed the flaw not the DRM itself, Uplay is still in all their games.....

If your issue is with it having DRM of any kind then say so from the start next time. Otherwise it just looks like you're moving the goal posts in the debate because your original point was refuted.

So I was ranting about them using a constant online connection in the games as a DRM scheme, he said they have removed it. Yet from all the googling I have done they have done no such thing. Uplay still requires a constant connection even after the patch.

My point kinda stands.

ZippyDSMlee:
Not really as once you got it up and running and authenticated you could play it offline for 30 days at a time.

Ah, right, I suppose there is that, though I never bothered as I'm always connected to the Internet anyway, which probably explains why I don't mind D3's online requirement.

ZippyDSMlee:
So I was ranting about them using a constant online connection in the games as a DRM scheme, he said they have removed it. Yet from all the googling I have done they have done no such thing. Uplay still requires a constant connection even after the patch.

My point kinda stands.

You must not have looked very hard. They did change their DRM so games like AC2 and Brotherhood don't require a constant internet connection. You do have to be logged in when you start up the game, but that's it. If your connection is lost part way through you don't get booted out of the game.

I normally wouldn't do this because I loathe people who can't do even the most basic online research, but here you go anyway:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed_II#DRM-related_criticism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed:_Brotherhood#Reception - see the last paragraph in this section specifically.

Viper114:

ZippyDSMlee:
Not really as once you got it up and running and authenticated you could play it offline for 30 days at a time.

Ah, right, I suppose there is that, though I never bothered as I'm always connected to the Internet anyway, which probably explains why I don't mind D3's online requirement.

Vivi22:

ZippyDSMlee:
So I was ranting about them using a constant online connection in the games as a DRM scheme, he said they have removed it. Yet from all the googling I have done they have done no such thing. Uplay still requires a constant connection even after the patch.

My point kinda stands.

You must not have looked very hard. They did change their DRM so games like AC2 and Brotherhood don't require a constant internet connection. You do have to be logged in when you start up the game, but that's it. If your connection is lost part way through you don't get booted out of the game.

I normally wouldn't do this because I loathe people who can't do even the most basic online research, but here you go anyway:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed_II#DRM-related_criticism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed:_Brotherhood#Reception - see the last paragraph in this section specifically.

Ok....but needing to be online every time you start the game pretty much means you need to be online to play thus not to far from constant connection.

To be honest, thinking that Diablo III, the new WoW expansion and HotS would all come out in the same year was a bit too optimistic considering Blizzard's past track record. At least it will be amazing though.

Of course they aren't, Blizzard doesn't respect deadlines at all. Everything is late from them. It's for the best though, look at how D3 turned out. Years and years of development, extensive testing, all the annoyance, but when it came out it was the best game ever made and was completely perfec...... wait.... wait, that was a dream I had. I remember how it went, years of development time, broken on release, no more fun than the last game, dated graphics....

I return to my original thought, is anyone surprise by this... I didn't think so.

Suki_:

walrusaurus:

Suki_:
Wow these analysts are really good at stating the obvious. Blizzard already announced a wow expansion for later this year so they will not also be releasing the next starcraft around that time. If I had to guess I would say they will release this around six months later so as not to interfere with wow.

They are two astronomically different types of games. The release of one has no bearing on the sales of the other beyond blizzards resources to support the launch. WHile I agree that they would never release both games in the same quarter that has a lot more to do with keeping their shareholders happy than any concerns about the games cannibalizing one another.

You would have to be nuts to think there was no overlap between the games. If you release them to close together people will be to busy with one to buy the other.

that'd be true if the games were both similar genres. Or even both casual focused games of different genres. But a game like Heart of the Swarm has a very narrow audience, there are precious few players that are just going to hear about starcraft 2 for the first time and go out and buy both Sons of liberty and HotS. The people who are going to be getting HotS on day one already know about it, they play starcraft 2, and they aren't going to skip it because mists of pandaria just came out.

walrusaurus:

that'd be true if the games were both similar genres. Or even both casual focused games of different genres. But a game like Heart of the Swarm has a very narrow audience, there are precious few players that are just going to hear about starcraft 2 for the first time and go out and buy both Sons of liberty and HotS. The people who are going to be getting HotS on day one already know about it, they play starcraft 2, and they aren't going to skip it because mists of pandaria just came out.

You seem to be underestimating the size of the wow crowd that plays SC2. These are people who like SC2 but not enough to stop playing wow all the time when their is new content out. When its later on and just on farming mode they will be more likely to get it on day one.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here