08.06.07

Holy mother of God!

Posted in Game news at 08:28 by Jonas

StarCraft 2 gameplay video!

It has a dialogue system! It has a star map! It has modelled the inside of the Hyperion!

Well I don’t know about you, but I’m psyched. Bring it on, Blizzard!

13 Comments »

  1. EER said,

    August 6, 2007 at 18:30

    I agree on the “Bring it on”, but psyched? I’m not really impressed by the video. The graphics are awesome, but that’s not something I get psyched about. I’ve seen dialog and star maps (although not that pretty) in other games.

    So come on Blizzard, bring on something!

  2. Jonas said,

    August 6, 2007 at 20:55

    But this is the StarCraft universe! I LOVE this setting! The Hyperion was the inspiration of many a half-assed video game idea! Being able to walk around on it in full 3D… holy hell!

    And hey, nobody expects Blizzard to come up with any original ideas anyway. What Blizzard does is steal the right things from the right games and make them awesome.

  3. EER said,

    August 6, 2007 at 21:37

    You’re totally right, as we say over here ‘better stolen properly than made up crappily’ (bad translation, but there must be some Danish saying that covers it).

  4. Jonas said,

    August 6, 2007 at 22:03

    Not that I know of. But it’s a good proverb.

  5. Smike said,

    August 6, 2007 at 22:43

    Yeah. True story:
    When Blizzard had that bullshit “something is coming” promo up for awhile (seems familiar…) I was on the phone with Ryan immediately. We were joking around at what it might be, you know, in the alternate-universe where Blizzard had gone completely insane and totally forgot about what they set out to do originally - which was to create a few ultra-polished, ultra-original games.

    And we both thought the ultimate joke on humanity would be a Starcraft sequel. We were laughing for a LONG TIME about how awful an idea that would be, and yet how unsurprised we would ultimately be if that were it - considering how much to the dogs they seemed to be going in recent years.

    So when it was announced, my belly soon ached with all the laughing I was doing at how EXACT it all was to all the crap we were joking they might try to do. I mean, we were JOKING - we didn’t think they’d actually DO any of it. And then they did. Oh man.

  6. Jonas said,

    August 6, 2007 at 23:10

    I wonder if any game studio in the world is earning as much money as Blizzard are. You’d think they could afford to take the risks. But I guess they don’t want to soil their image with a mediocre seller. I still would’ve loved to see that StarCraft: Ghost stealth game, because the SC universe is begging to be fleshed out and explored, but not necessarily in the annoyingly limited medium of the strategy game.

    I think the reason I’m not very enthusiastic about the RTS genre in general is that any sort of personal interaction seems tacked on. It’s a genre about large battles and overarching strategy, and putting 3 named characters in there, whose deaths would end the game, so that you can include a narrative… has an air of artificiality about it. Somehow Blizzard has always seemed to make it work.

  7. Smike said,

    August 6, 2007 at 23:33

    Yeah, I was ready to buy that game too. I always liked the political intrigue elements the most. I’d love to see either a series or an open-ended world with those elements at the forefront. And the pilot in me always wanted to fly a wraith. In a sim, say.

  8. Smike said,

    August 6, 2007 at 23:38

    Oh and I think they are the highest-grossing DEVELOPER, but definitely not studio. They rank high on both lists, of course, but Vivendi and SONY and EA and SEG aren’t small fry.

  9. Smike said,

    August 6, 2007 at 23:40

    D’oh! Vivendi owns them, of course. “Wait, Vivendi, Viv…Blizzard… didn’t I hear something about that?”

  10. Jonas said,

    August 7, 2007 at 00:20

    Well I distinguish between studios and publishers. I’m probably using the wrong words, but “studio” to me means a developer. I’m probably wrong. I didn’t realize Vivendi actually owned Blizzard. Man they must really be happy about that purchase! Kind of a shame, I thought Blizzard was one of the last independent AAA game developers.

    There were three things I always wanted to do in the SC universe:

    1. A Ghost stealth-game (yes that was at the top of my wish-list. FUCK YOU Blizzard!)
    2. A Wraith action flight sim.
    3. To control a Goliath, Mech Warrior-style.

    Oh and for your info: That is spamming. But since there’s no edit button on comments, you’re good.

  11. Smike said,

    August 7, 2007 at 13:57

    The Goliath idea would be cool if there were air strikes from Devourers and having to deal with those pesky Protoss defenses and Ultralisks. Very cool. And of course the whole civil war and fighting other Goliaths - awesome.

    The corporate naming conventions of the entertainment industry are complicated. It’s all relative and depends on whom else you are referencing. I could explain, but only if you’re really interested.

  12. Jonas said,

    August 7, 2007 at 14:57

    Well I am, just make sure you tell me where you got your info from whenever possible, otherwise you might still be basing this off 1999 for all I know ;)

  13. Smike said,

    August 12, 2007 at 02:08

    OK, here it is. If you read our usage above, you should be able to extrapolate where the context matters and where it doesn’t. Distinctions are really only important if you’re naming or comparing more than one of these types of corporations. I’m aware that this is a bit “thorough.” But that’s what you get.

    Studio = a generic term for a production house or anyone who owns or controls or contributes in some way to a production house. In short, anybody can be a studio.

    Developer = the creators of the actual product. Can be called a STUDIO. Specifically a PRODUCTION STUDIO.

    Publisher = the corporation which has actual facilities to package the CDs for a game. They arrange everything SURROUNDING the product itself, its marketing strategy, its box, where it goes and who does things with it, everything. They usually contract factories in second-world countries to manufacture and “stamp” the actual CDs, which are then shipped in massive steel crates back to warehouses owned by the publisher. The warehouses are generally connected to a small packing factory where the CDs are placed in the printed box, put in larger boxes, and then into trucks ready to take them all over. Can be called a STUDIO.

    Distributor = commonly the same corporation as a publisher, but just as often not. Usually the larger corporation if not. Has the methods and money to take it overseas and sell it to Amazon and other web and brick and mortar chains. Often called THE STUDIO. Specifically a “BIG” or MAJOR STUDIO.

    In the film industry, there are only six corporations commonly referred to as “THE STUDIO”, even though every production house under the sun is also called a “STUDIO.” You just have hear it in context and know the difference.

    Note that as the game industry becomes more and more integrated with the film industry, sort of like Television was to film in the 80s, their terms will further coalesce. The thing is, since Hollywood only changes for HOLLYWOOD, the Game Industry will doubtless be forced to slowly change the usage of its terms to accommodate the film industry’s terminology, without the film industry ever returning the favor.

    And thus, in my opinion it is likely that EA and the other big Publishers will someday be DEFINED as Distributors or simply “The Big Studios.” The reason the Literary Industry has been able to avoid terminology unification is because it has always been in the film industry’s best interest to keep novel publishing a wholly separate and distinct industry. It has been a mutual pleasure, I can tell you. Not so with games, not at all.

    Chain of events: A Developer creates the game. But the game needs to be buyable. So a Publisher can put it on a CD and in a box. They might even have the means to sell it nationally at wholesale. But what if they need it to go overseas? Sell the rights to a Distributor. Hell, it might be cheaper to just publish a first run, manufacture a few CDs, and sell the whole thing to a Distributor in the first place, depending on how large the Publisher is and how many copies they’re expecting to sell.

    But just like in the film industry, working for one of the Big Studios bypasses all of these steps, and it goes from nothing to buyable with just one signature from the Production Head.

Leave a Comment