My problem with Blizzard...

Recommended Videos

go-10

New member
Feb 3, 2010
1,557
0
0
my problem with Blizzard is they canceled Star Craft: Ghost and have no plans of releasing Warcraft IV
 

mcnally86

New member
Apr 23, 2008
425
0
0
FelixG said:
I said some things and am now misquoted.
I guess my problem is books. I don't like to have to read an expanded universe to know whats going on. I think a game should stand on its own feet and not require reading homework to understand. But I hear WOW is worse at this than SC.

Hey wait since you bring it up I do know a guy who reads all the books. He told me that bombs in the suits was something stolen from one of the SC books. Are they stealing their own ideas at this point?

EDIT: Hillbillies in a truck is not old west. There were no hillbillies in SC just people with wild west badges and dusters.
 

mcnally86

New member
Apr 23, 2008
425
0
0
GZGoten said:
my problem with Blizzard is they canceled Star Craft: Ghost and have no plans of releasing Warcraft IV
Ghost was cannibalized. The SC2 missions for Nova(or against her) was the ghost story line. Nova was the main character from Ghost I hear. Pretty sad I wanted to play them too.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
GZGoten said:
my problem with Blizzard is they canceled Star Craft: Ghost and have no plans of releasing Warcraft IV
The story behind the cancelation of SC Ghost is that Blizzard outsourced all the programing and designing to a third party developer so that Blizzard could focus on WoW. The problem is that when that 3rd party developer turned in a draft of their product, Blizzard said they didn't like it. They were wanting more 3rd person stealth, I'd imagine in the style of Metal Gear, and the company that had been working on it was making it more of your standard 3rd person shooter. As such, Blizzard said to hell with it. As for WC IV, I knew that would never come out when they first announced WoW. Nevermind the fact that the factions were boiled back down to Horde and Alliance (meaning in WC IV there would be no undead faction and no Night Elf faction), but to date according to the WoW story line, every possible titanic threat to Azeroth has been defeated. Illidan's gone, the Burning Legion has been crushed, the Lich King is no more, even Deathwing who was supposed to have been killed at the end of WC II: Beyond the Dark Portal was brought back just to get his ass kicked.

Which brings us to the fact that they are very, VERY quickly running out of direction for WoW...as can easily be seen by the fact that the next expansion is Mists of Pandara...a concept that originated as a joke some years ago. There's nothing left for a WC IV RTS game unless they went back to the classic standard of Horde vs Alliance, but as I mentioned: all of a sudden you'd have The Horde with undead, blood elven, and goblin units and The Alliance with night elves, worgen, and draenei.

mcnally86 said:
FelixG said:
I said some things and am now misquoted.
I guess my problem is books. I don't like to have to read an expanded universe to know whats going on. I think a game should stand on its own feet and not require reading homework to understand. But I hear WOW is worse at this than SC.

Hey wait since you bring it up I do know a guy who reads all the books. He told me that bombs in the suits was something stolen from one of the SC books. Are they stealing their own ideas at this point?

EDIT: Hillbillies in a truck is not old west. There were no hillbillies in SC just people with wild west badges and dusters.
About the books: yeah, I gotta agree with you on that one. Games shouldn't have parts of their story that can only be understood if you read the books, rather books based off of games - if anything - should be the things that you can't fully understand unless you actually played the game.

As for the hillbillies: actually I gotta disagree with you on this one. The Teran race was specifically designed to essentially be Red Necks in space. Just look at the intro video to the original SC when the Protoss destroy that salvage crew, the back-and-forth dialogue between the Terans is pretty redneckian (if I can invent a word). The Teran Confederacy was built to mirror the American Confederacy, which is why most every in-game video features Teran's talking like a bunch of yokels with southern accents. It's not true about any of their actual in-game unit speech, but the videos such as the one in question where the two guys run over the zergling definitely does make the Terans out to be a bunch of space rednecks.
 

baconfist

New member
Sep 8, 2009
70
0
0
So let me see if I got this straight. Blizzard is bad because they made you pay them for years of entertainment? To be fair $15 a month is a way cheaper hobby then anything else I can think of.

As for SC2... I can't say I was thrilled that they were releasing it in three installments but after playing it I also can say that it was worth the money I paid. Sure was a lot better then the last couple CoD games, and I look forward to the next two SC2 expansions.

Not to happy with the direction Diablo 3 is going though.
 

mcnally86

New member
Apr 23, 2008
425
0
0
RJ 17 said:
I was all like, POWER UP!
I think on books, I'm fine with it being set in the expanded universe but not the things handled in the games. If a book hands Jim Raynor a six shooter they better explain it again in the game. Not just have him pull it out of his butt.

Old west and rednecks are two different things. We don't have an old west anymore but we still have rednecks.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
mcnally86 said:
RJ 17 said:
I was all like, POWER UP!
I think on books, I'm fine with it being set in the expanded universe but not the things handled in the games. If a book hands Jim Raynor a six shooter they better explain it again in the game. Not just have him pull it out of his butt.

Old west and rednecks are two different things. We don't have an old west anymore but we still have rednecks.
And that's what I was trying to say about the book situation. Books should expand FROM the games, not the other way around. If the game gives Jimmy a six-shooter, it'd be fair to mention it in the book. But like you said: if the book gives Jimmy a six-shooter, you should see that scene in-game so it doesn't look like he's just pullin' it out his ass.

And really I never said that the Terans were suppoed to be Wild Wild West, as you are 100% correct: there is a difference between rednecks and the old west. What I'm saying is that if you ask me, Terans aren't Space Cowboys, they're Space Rednecks.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
True, but the over-all theme of Teran civilization is based off the American Confederacy...which, correct me if I'm wrong, was mostly rednecks. :p
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,221
0
0
lol

sir, you wanna pay $15 a month for dress up? WoW is NOT the right game, in fact your doing it wrong

City of Heroes takes that idea and runs with it, i've spent about as much time at the tailor as i have actually running missions. best part is CoH is F2P now, XD.

but i hear ya, game gets old after awhile ya get to a point your just 'done' and nothing worng with that, just means its time to move on
 

VoidWanderer

New member
Sep 17, 2011
1,551
0
0
Has anyone else noticed how closely Blizzard resembles Nintendo?

The main one being the main franchises. They both have three main franchises they focus on.
 

itaywex

New member
May 19, 2011
65
0
0
You do need to remeber that Blizzard is a company which wants to earn money, not to satisfy us.
Personally I bought and played SC 2 WOG and enjoyed it. Maybe they are greedy but I rather them making 3 games about SC 2 rather than making only 1 game of "Starcraft Goodness".

So eventually its your choice if you want to play SC 2 or not. (but WOW is evil).

FYI I played WOW for few years before getting bored, Im not angry that Blizzard made WOW that way because after all it's our choice whatever to play these games or not.
 

Zerazar

New member
Aug 5, 2010
100
0
0
I didn't read all of it, but it seems like you mistook an mmo with an rpg, and that you just failed to realise that you simply don't like MMOs.
I still say compare Blizzard to, well, most other developers out there. They're making high quality, high content games and selling it for the same as "Game the FPS #33 This Year" or "MMO the Almost-WoW #12".

Remember to account for rose tinted glasses. I'm sad there's no rpg that encaptures me like Diablo II or NWN1 did, but that doesn't mean the newer games are of worse quality. Time, circumstances and perception are all as much if not more relevant than the quality of the game.
 

greatcheezer2021

New member
Oct 18, 2011
82
0
0
my problem with blizzard started after they released the expansion for Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos; The Frozen Throne.

I played a little bit of Diablo, warcraft humans and orcs, and warcraft 2 tides of darkness. I got way into Diablo 2, LOD, Starcraft, broodwar, and said, warcraft 3 reign and frozen throne.

i learned most of my vocabulary at a young age with blizzard. i learned a good amount of lore, and characters taken from literature that was USED in their mythos and blizzard lore. weapons, locations, time sets almost, some technologies, sci-fi and medieval, but most of all, the experience of good gameplay and a titular story done in blizzard fashion. "in war, whoever wins, there will be a downfall, wether it be honor, or the well being of an entire race."

basically, diablo boiled down to getting the best gear and feeling like a good guy for once. RTS titles was for the maps, scenario building, custom units and occasional online play with frieeeends. gameplay was stellar, and the map editors made the experience much more worthwhile.

the enviroment and setting were all very different from each other. Diablo was dark and gothic. Diablo 2 was rough and demonic. Starcraft was gritty and demanding. warcraft was epic and fantastic. now, we have a game designer that went from RTS and the hack and slash RPG element to a massive MMORPG style game. a warcraft game with Diablo 2 kiddy friendly elements and a bigger map. no story to engage the player, only what you do with your virtual character.

STARCRAFT 2. a rehash with the "graphics makes gameplay" argument. an story that was flawlessly told in starcraft and broodwar, completely heel-turned on itself, and created more questions and plot holes. Characters that were established in the previous games, that were OUT OF CHARACTER. characters that are introduced, but why bother? they are easily predictable.
New units are nice, as they add a challenge in mastering new play styles, but changing the formula for HEART OF SWARM? AND BUTCHERING what is equivalent in my opinion the original starcraft for a half assed Phantom Menace!?? when boiled down to its roots, yes it sounds good BUT THE EXCELLENT PRESENTATION THAT BLIZZARD IS KNOWN FOR, has gone to shit...

maybe we can blame activision. maybe blizzard is going down. but we can only blame ourselves if we keep sticking around.

at this point, you are the tiny tyrannosaur who is living off his dead mother, Activision-Blizzard.

Diablo 3?? i dont even have the energy to think about it. im not buying it unless it takes the USA out of debt and puts food in my fridge.
 

Lawlhat

New member
Mar 17, 2009
102
0
0
I've enjoyed their RTS games some, but never really got pulled into Diablo or WoW because the main drive to play (loot) is not especially appealing to me. I'm always interested to see what people that DO like that type of game have to say about it though. Thanks for the post OP.
 

Mortons4ck

New member
Jan 12, 2010
570
0
0
That's why I stick with Starcraft BW, Diablo 2, and that new-fangled Warcraft 3. No problems here.
 

Darkmantle

New member
Oct 30, 2011
1,030
0
0
mcnally86 said:
BanicRhys said:
And you know what's more cliched than SC2's dialogue, the argument that SC2 had cliched dialogue, it's such a cop out and never backed up in the slightest.
How is it a cop out? Here is some back up. Its a western now. SC1 had Jimmy being a Marshal and being on a backwater planet but it still was futurey. Now SC world is a western, with jukeboxes hardwired into the ship and people dressed like extras from Firefly. Why does he have a six shooter with one bullet in it why? It was never in the game before that cut scene. Why was it important. It just seemed a silly thing to throw in and not explain.
a lot of the disconnect you're feeling comes from blizzard calling the books canon and using the books canon in game, so some things feel unexplained, but are fleshed out in other mediums. not for or against, just saying.


although I love the Sc2 story, and think people are way too hard on it for no reason
 

Warachia

New member
Aug 11, 2009
1,116
0
0
BanicRhys said:
You don't raid for gear, you raid for the thrill of finally downing a boss and for the enjoyment being in the company of people you like. But fine, vanilla WoW and Cataclysm are shit and MMOs aren't for everyone, so I won't go any further on that game.

WoL had one fewer campaign mission than the original had, plus challenges, achievements and an engine capable of almost anything the modding community can imagine. When I played SC1, I couldn't care less about any of the races because I only had them for 10 or so short missions with a dialogue screen in between. In SC2, I grew very attached to the all of the characters on the Hyperion.

And you know what's more cliched than SC2's dialogue, the argument that SC2 had cliched dialogue, it's such a cop out and never backed up in the slightest.

I'm surprised the OP didn't complain that he can't play Diablo 3 on the bus, as well. Because that argument has been beaten to death about just as much.

Quit your nitpicking and enjoy an exceptional game, sure it might not be as good as you think SC1 was, but it's still better and more polished than a vast majority of the shit that gets put out there these days.
I disagree, you can't bring up the argument that someone made, then dismiss it simply because other people have made it as well, like Diablo 3, people say "Just play it at home", whereas I can't because I DON'T have a stable internet connection. It's not nitpicking as well if he has a problem of one game being split apart just for the company to make money, that would be like me saying "don't reply to this comment, you're just nitpicking."

As for the original poster, welcome to Mars, where you realized the companies you used to love aren't that good any more. Next up, why Bethesda is a bad studio, and why Nintendo should not get a free pass on everything they make.
 

Sandytimeman

Brain Freeze...yay!
Jan 14, 2011
729
0
0
AC10 said:
theultimateend said:
AC10 said:
I agree with the SC2 thing.
"We can't fit all on one Disc!"

"By the way, did we mention the campaign is 4/5ths filler crap that has nothing to do with the main story?"
I...

I'm so glad I'm not into that whole internet justice thing anymore. This would have killed my night.

It wasn't a great game (I don't really get that feeling from anything anymore), but 4/5ths of it being "filler crap" is pretty ambitious commentary. Makes it sound like you never played the original.

It's as big as Starcraft 1. The expansion will probably be as big or bigger than Starcraft: Brood Wars.

Then they'll have a 3rd expansion.

Something like 10 years and they've managed to add ONE expansion to the formula. Feels like they should be given a medal, frankly.

They didn't string along half the characters as DLC either.

Buuuuut...not a big deal. The game is out, the past won't change, and a couple random smucks on the Escapist aren't going to make them suddenly change.
Of course I played the original :p
I waited 4 fucking hours outside the store to get the collectors edition. I blitzed the story, in two sessions sleeping 3 hours in between because I WAITED 12 DAMN YEARS TO PLAY IT.

And god damn, it let me down.

Not that I think you need to feel the same. If you liked it I'm happy for you, but I was just severely disappointed.
Personally I loved the story and I am waiting with bated breath for the next two collector's editions to come out.

It had a good story imo and I loved all the extras in between campaigns. Its like a combination of my two favorite genres. Point and Click Adventures and RTS.
 

Maveroid

New member
Apr 22, 2009
82
0
0
I should contribute something more valuable to this conversation, but 'sadly' I have the absolute same opinion about Blizzard as you do, so there is not much to discuss.

Just to make you more angry, though... I am sure that Diablo 3 will have expensive DLC; very expensive, I bet. And if its not very expensive, it WILL be when you have to buy ALL of it to keep up with the other players. And guess what, it is also an MMORPG when you play it online, so there is even more potential for even more content for even more money! Hooray.

Hey hey, guess what!? Warcraft 4 might actually come out some day! Haha, wait, who am I kidding? How many players are longing for Warcraft 4? Oh, thats right, a gazillion! Great great, so if they make the game and sell it for $60, Blizzard will have tons of money!

"Aww... Tons of money is not enough... How many playable races did Warcraft 3 have again? Undead...Human... Night elves...Wait, that's THREE races.... So, if we just rewrite the story and make it a bit longer and stuff it with a lot of horrible filler in, we can actually... We could... OMG!!!
Hey guys, how would you like it if we split up Warcraft 4 into three parts?!?!?! Imagine how much money that will bring us! Look at those idiots that bought Starcraft 2, they would do that again!!!!

Haha, good thing we have such a stupid fanbase that enjoyed our game for its artistic value and technical standpoint back in the day. Remember how they praised us and said we were the best company ever because we were so different back then? Good thing that's over, because more money is more important than anything.."


Honestly though, I can't blame them. The fanbase is satisfied even after they sold Starcraft 2 Part 1 for $60. Why not do it then?
Now, if everyone was NOT satisfied, theeeen maybe Blizzard would think about it.... And decide to do it again.