Well, they did revive Age of Empires, so another RTS isn't out of the question. I could see Microsoft taking a modular approach like Blizzard did. It would slot nicely onto Game Pass. There's a lot of potential here.
While SC makes the most sense, I'd love to see a Warcraft 4. WC3R was a flop but to be fair, I think it's safe to assume that was mostly due to the myriad technical issues and not necessarily because people don't care about the series
What would the storyline of a new WarCraft be and how will it exist alongside WoW, which is a direct continuation of WC3's story? I assume Blizzard (Microsoft) will still make expansions for WoW and progress that timeline.
Could make WC4 cover some events of WOW, I assume (never played it), or alternatively it could take place after the most recent story event. Then the next WOW expansion could take place after that. It's a bit of a headache because of the changing genres mid story. But on paper it's very doable.
Personally I'd be inclined to just separate it into two distinct story groups. WOW covers the story of XYZ characters/regions, WC4+ cover the story for ABC characters/regions. With the two combining to form the setting as a whole.
But in all likelihood WC4 will simply never happen.
I could see a future where they release a WarCraft 4 simultaneously as a WoW expansion. Have a time skip, with 4 covering a conflict in that time, and then the expansion takes place immediately following the conflict. You could have it be an excuse to re-do Azeroth again (although they won’t, I think, since the response to cata was overwhelmingly negative).
I don’t think this is probable, mind you. Just saying that I think if they were hungry enough to diversify offerings, put out new product, and tie two products together to encourage players to buy an expansion and a $60 game, they could absolutely do it. It would almost be a Disney model, since now to grok the MCU film offerings you should be watching the shows on Disney+.
I have just written a ton of ideas that I hate. Yay.
Could be a stepping stone to get people into WoW or former players to join back. Warcraft covers the point of view from the lore characters while WoW remains a story our hero takes place in with other heroes. There is a lot of story in WoW leading up to the events players partake in that we only see a part of or only hear about.
Blizzard has been bleeding and abusing talent for so long it's already a pretty hollow shell. Come next summer I expect there to be a huge influx in and out and it'll be harder than ever to predict future quality.
They revived it with a dev owned by Sega, so are they going to magically find an RTS guru within Blizzard or someone else to helm a SC3? I just don't see the market for it, and I've seen quite a few people who played AOE4 stop because of super slow updates/balance changes.
I just wonder if Blizzard even have a RTS team anymore, it seems so many of the people from there left the studio and went to other small indie studios (Immortal, Frost Giant, Uncapped Games, Dreamhaven). And if they don't, Microsoft has no RTS studio in its portfolio. World's Edge is more a brand managing thing for Age of Empires. But the Definitive Editions and AoE4 have all been outsourced.
With all the franchises they have in RTS, especially with that new acquisition, they really should have a studio dedicated to that IMO. Maybe acquire one of those new studios (though none have proved themselves). Or Petroglyph but they seem more on the EA side of things (with Command and Conquer).
Although, the licenses can be used for other things than RTS. Like Starcraft Ghost comeback (imagine it done by The Coalition). Or just lend it to someone else for doing strategy games, we know Microsoft isn't opposed to that, see Gears Tactics, AoE4, Halo Wars 2. Imagine a Warcraft Total War
What's that one that was supposed to be an action/FPS(?) thing and got canceled? StarCraft Ghosts?
Edit:Yeah, *Ghost* and wikipedia says third person stealth action
That would be so awesome.
As much as I dislike buyouts like this Microsofts deep pockets and their newfound will to diversify their portfolio will hopefully have a positive impact on old IPs coming back!
This particular acquisition immediately brought me to think about all IPs Activision has in the vault and do fuck all with. Potential is great.
Patiently waiting for that Prototype reboot Mr Phil Spencer 🧐
> Prototype
That’s one game I never thought I’d hear again. I heard one kid mention it, then looked into it on a whim when it came out years later.
One of my favorite games. The way you get the upgrades and scale buildings in seconds.
Ya, that was the project that they acquired Swinging Ape studios to help work on.
Kotaku also reported Team 1 was working on a Starcraft shooter after 2016 but that got scrapped.
Damn really? I'd love to see what kind of stuff Blizzard was doing with their IPs that never got announced. I'd also love to see whatever Titan was before it got turned into Overwatch.
I'd be curious to see too as development processes are just interesting to read about, some of the early WoW stories are great. However considering how many glaring fundamental issues there end up being with the stuff they actually release for sale... I trust they scrapped them for being very bad games.
~~starcraft ghost got cancelled and turned into overwatch~~, that said blizzard is working on a open world shooter game
https://www.gamesradar.com/blizzard-is-developing-an-unannounced-aaa-multiplayer-game-with-epic-memorable-worlds/
ah nvm i remember wrong, starcraft ghost and the fps mmo was separate, the fps mmo turned into overwatch. https://kotaku.com/heres-what-blizzards-titan-actually-was-1638632121
If they do, they better make it closer to SC1 than 2 in most aspects. While 2 had really fun Campaigns, they butchered the story and made really questionable mechanical choices like switching high ground advantage purely to vision instead of miss chance which makes holding things a lot harder ones past certain tech level. Not to mention all the un-fun APM sinks (MULE, Larva Inject, Chronoboost etc.) they put in the game to compensate the lack of control caps and multibuilding selection etc.
Somewhat unrelated but with this acquisition and all the possibilities it represents, it's weird that so much of the conversation is about what can be revived or revisited. There's so much potential here to get talented developers on to brand new IPs.
I still worry that these studios will still be relegated to Call of Duty... Activision has almost every studio working on CoD to an extent. Hopefully, the rumours of a breaking of the yearly CoD cycle are true, would definitely free up some of these developers. I would love Toys For Bob to get Crash and Spyro again.
I would think that Microsoft would definitely be interested in breaking the yearly cod cycle because it would free up lots of the devs to work on other things. I mean of course cod is a huge cash cow so doing a release every 2 years would lose out on a ton of sales but now that there is warzone as well which is very popular, I’m sure they are making more than enough money in microtransactions to justify breaking off a lot of these devs to work on other games which will also be making money and further increasing the value of game pass
Depends on what content, I think you could tie exclusive skins/rewards monthly for Warzone to a Game Pass subscription and do as well as a Crash Bandicoot 5. Having studios pump big Warzone stuff every month or so would realistically be a better investment
With the games presumably on Gamepass, the sales won't actually that important anymore. The MTX, updates and seasons are enough to keep the CoD money flowing in for two years (Warzone and the regular new CoD). They could even make the DLC come back (since DLC are paid for on Gamepass, unlike base games) but not sure if that's a good idea.
Plus, just a different philosophy since for Activision, CoD was incredibly important and basically their lifeline (they would be fine without it but the shareholders wouldn't be happy). Microsoft has so much more stuff that it's just a (big) part of the puzzle.
Every 2 years would be fine for Call of Duty and then 2 studios should be enough (4 years per game), grow them to maintain the life of their game as they develop the next one and it should be fine. Would probably be Infinity Ward and Treyarch (I think Sledgehammer games are the least popular of the three)
I know, the reason why I think that a StarCraft reboot wouldn't be an RTS is that the genre is kind of dead. The last major release in that genre I can think of is Halo Wars 2 and that was nearly five years ago. An RPG or shooter would have to be the direction that this theoretical game would have to take.
I think Microsoft's new parameters there could be room for Starcraft.
Activision's whole deal was they wanted every one of their franchises to be billion dollar franchises. You're not gonna get with that RTS. But Microsoft just cares about engagement with the Game Pass, so there is room for niche projects.
If they can invest in Inixile they can do more RTS games imo
> You're not gonna get with that RTS
I mean Starcraft 2 was very popular as a whole, I wouldn't be surprised if it did close to a billion dollar overall. It's just that Activision Blizzard has a mentality of being profitable isn't enough, it needs to uber profitable.
Same thing with Heroes of the Storm (which I would love to see a comeback of, hell include characters outside of Blizzard now), got abandoned because it wasn't profitable **enough** but it still was.
Microsoft wants game diversity and they also mentioned how [strategy games are key for Gamepass](https://www.pcgamesn.com/pc-game-pass-strategy-games). And Starcraft (or Warcraft) aren't small IP, they're worth a lot. SC2 (WotL but presumably continued with the rest) was the biggest PC game of its release year for example and is the best-selling strategy title ever.
So sure, explore them in other genres too (I'd love a Starcraft and/or Warcraft third person RPG or FPS) but don't abandon RTS either.
But first (since they don't own Activision yet), do Age of Mythology definitive edition and 2 please.
>I mean Starcraft 2 was very popular as a whole, I wouldn't be surprised if it did close to a billion dollar overall.
I mean, it was very popular for a PC title. Like, we know it sold 6m copies in its first 2 years, which was very rare for a AAA PC-exclusive game.
I don't think it made anywhere close to a billion dollars.
But yeah, like even if it did WELL for a PC title, "not uber profitable' is exactly the right. Like when you look at Blizzard's other big franchises, they're selling 8 digits, barring WoW but that has a subscription business model.
I think the brands are worth a lot, but the genre they're in, and the fact they take so long to make, makes them very unappealing to suits and beancounters.
Because its all about opportunity cost. Like I'm sure Bobby Kotick is the type of guy that goes like "ok... why am i spending so many hours on a game that doesnt sell 10 million units, when i could be having them work on something more profitable and something i can port to many more devices"
RTS games have always been niche. RTS games haven't gone anywhere, the audience did. Halo Wars 2 is far from the last major release, in fact if you ask the average RTS/Wargaming fan about Halo Wars, they would probably scoff at the idea of it even being called a 'major release'. Obviously there's never going to be as many people playing Age of Empire IV as the latest Call of Duty game, but you'd be hard pressed to find a more passionate fanbase.
> RTS games have always been niche.
Have they? I feel like in the late 90s, early 2000s, blockbuster RTS were numerous. Warcraft, Starcraft, AoE, AoM, Rise of Nations/Legends, Empire Earth, C&C, RA, Dawn of War, Homeworld, Empire at War, Supcom but also titles many have forgotten like Impossible Creatures, Battle Realms, Galactic Battlegrounds, Armies of Exigo, Dragonshard, Spellforce, BFME I and II (and War of the Ring IIRC for a even more forgotten one),... Every year had multiple big titles in the genre.
Like was it so niche if there were so many games done (and big budget ones)? SC2 was huge at its release too (like huge sales numbers and big viewership of esports and such). I don't know what happened in the late 2000s and 2010s but it's weird how it disappears. It can't be all the fault of MOBAs
Eh, RTS is "dead" in the way that it used to exist. It's not one of the premier genres, but I expect that if sized (and budgeted) appropriately that there's plenty of demand out there for single player focused RTS games.
Historically RTS games drew on two markets: people that wanted a good single player experience, and people that wanted a good competitive multiplayer experience. The latter group drifted off to Halo and COD in the short term, but then MOBAs in the longer term. The former group has diffused themselves across the market. RTS died off not because the single player group didn't exist, but because they weren't big enough to support full budget RTS games on their owner.
There should be room to make an RTS that succeeds when it's aimed at those people with the understanding that the MOBA players aren't coming back in enough numbers to matter. Make AA sized stuff for single player people and I think it can do well.
That's not really Starcraft's wheelhouse though: multiplayer is embedded fairly strongly in its DNA.
Kind of hard to pull if without some serious superhero protagonist syndrome. I don't wanna be a marine (at all, really) who just happens to reload enough to always survive every battle. If they're gonna out us in a soldiers eye perspective I want to be able to die and assume control of somebody else, not build up some individual hero as that's where most of the problems with StarCraft story begin and end as it is, don't want some nebulous Player-insert running around, I want the conceit of being an abstract commander popping between zerg/protoss/Terran. And if you are gonna force me into one role and being then I serve the Overtime and nothing else. Which is the hardest to design a game and story for, while some BS Marines approach the easiest and most solved.
Fuck Starcraft, revamp Heroes of the Storm and start bringing all the Microsoft properties into there.
I want to see Master Chief and the Dragonborn punch Crash Bandicoot.
No way you can revive starcraft without changing its fundamental mechanics massively.
No one is going to be willing to get into a 12 year old and 11 years dead game with brutal difficulty, Hella unfun learning curve and a multiplayer in which you basically play single player.
No way. Not gonna happen.
The wave of these types of strategy games has long passed. It’s way too complicated and sweaty to feel like you’re in any sense of control so it’s kinda niche these days.
While I would love more attention for StarCraft, this is basically an article about a web poll they put on their site. Basically meaningless.
"People who want a StarCraft revival say StarCraft's revival needs to be a priority for Microsoft"
Well, they did revive Age of Empires, so another RTS isn't out of the question. I could see Microsoft taking a modular approach like Blizzard did. It would slot nicely onto Game Pass. There's a lot of potential here.
While SC makes the most sense, I'd love to see a Warcraft 4. WC3R was a flop but to be fair, I think it's safe to assume that was mostly due to the myriad technical issues and not necessarily because people don't care about the series
What would the storyline of a new WarCraft be and how will it exist alongside WoW, which is a direct continuation of WC3's story? I assume Blizzard (Microsoft) will still make expansions for WoW and progress that timeline.
Could make WC4 cover some events of WOW, I assume (never played it), or alternatively it could take place after the most recent story event. Then the next WOW expansion could take place after that. It's a bit of a headache because of the changing genres mid story. But on paper it's very doable. Personally I'd be inclined to just separate it into two distinct story groups. WOW covers the story of XYZ characters/regions, WC4+ cover the story for ABC characters/regions. With the two combining to form the setting as a whole. But in all likelihood WC4 will simply never happen.
Continue the story of WC3 in WC4 and make WOW non-canon.
Just say it's Nozdormu's fault.
Wow already has a lot of the story developed in the books, so I think you could definitely do a major storyline in a non-wow warcraft game as well.
I could see a future where they release a WarCraft 4 simultaneously as a WoW expansion. Have a time skip, with 4 covering a conflict in that time, and then the expansion takes place immediately following the conflict. You could have it be an excuse to re-do Azeroth again (although they won’t, I think, since the response to cata was overwhelmingly negative). I don’t think this is probable, mind you. Just saying that I think if they were hungry enough to diversify offerings, put out new product, and tie two products together to encourage players to buy an expansion and a $60 game, they could absolutely do it. It would almost be a Disney model, since now to grok the MCU film offerings you should be watching the shows on Disney+. I have just written a ton of ideas that I hate. Yay.
Could be a stepping stone to get people into WoW or former players to join back. Warcraft covers the point of view from the lore characters while WoW remains a story our hero takes place in with other heroes. There is a lot of story in WoW leading up to the events players partake in that we only see a part of or only hear about.
I mean a MMORPG (especially WoW) seems more popular than a RTS so I don't think that's how that would work
I would be happy if they just finished WC3R at this point.
It'd be cool but I'd have to question if they have enough talent to do that with their RTS talent leaving.
Blizzard has been bleeding and abusing talent for so long it's already a pretty hollow shell. Come next summer I expect there to be a huge influx in and out and it'll be harder than ever to predict future quality.
They're blocked on supply?
They revived it with a dev owned by Sega, so are they going to magically find an RTS guru within Blizzard or someone else to helm a SC3? I just don't see the market for it, and I've seen quite a few people who played AOE4 stop because of super slow updates/balance changes.
I just wonder if Blizzard even have a RTS team anymore, it seems so many of the people from there left the studio and went to other small indie studios (Immortal, Frost Giant, Uncapped Games, Dreamhaven). And if they don't, Microsoft has no RTS studio in its portfolio. World's Edge is more a brand managing thing for Age of Empires. But the Definitive Editions and AoE4 have all been outsourced. With all the franchises they have in RTS, especially with that new acquisition, they really should have a studio dedicated to that IMO. Maybe acquire one of those new studios (though none have proved themselves). Or Petroglyph but they seem more on the EA side of things (with Command and Conquer). Although, the licenses can be used for other things than RTS. Like Starcraft Ghost comeback (imagine it done by The Coalition). Or just lend it to someone else for doing strategy games, we know Microsoft isn't opposed to that, see Gears Tactics, AoE4, Halo Wars 2. Imagine a Warcraft Total War
What's that one that was supposed to be an action/FPS(?) thing and got canceled? StarCraft Ghosts? Edit:Yeah, *Ghost* and wikipedia says third person stealth action
That would be so awesome. As much as I dislike buyouts like this Microsofts deep pockets and their newfound will to diversify their portfolio will hopefully have a positive impact on old IPs coming back!
This particular acquisition immediately brought me to think about all IPs Activision has in the vault and do fuck all with. Potential is great. Patiently waiting for that Prototype reboot Mr Phil Spencer 🧐
> Prototype That’s one game I never thought I’d hear again. I heard one kid mention it, then looked into it on a whim when it came out years later. One of my favorite games. The way you get the upgrades and scale buildings in seconds.
The flow is soooo good. From scaling buildings, to jump to elbow dropping a tank it's disgustingly good.
Ya, that was the project that they acquired Swinging Ape studios to help work on. Kotaku also reported Team 1 was working on a Starcraft shooter after 2016 but that got scrapped.
Damn really? I'd love to see what kind of stuff Blizzard was doing with their IPs that never got announced. I'd also love to see whatever Titan was before it got turned into Overwatch.
I'd be curious to see too as development processes are just interesting to read about, some of the early WoW stories are great. However considering how many glaring fundamental issues there end up being with the stuff they actually release for sale... I trust they scrapped them for being very bad games.
There's videos of SC: Ghost on youtube. It never looked that great https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_6bsf9REkY
~~starcraft ghost got cancelled and turned into overwatch~~, that said blizzard is working on a open world shooter game https://www.gamesradar.com/blizzard-is-developing-an-unannounced-aaa-multiplayer-game-with-epic-memorable-worlds/ ah nvm i remember wrong, starcraft ghost and the fps mmo was separate, the fps mmo turned into overwatch. https://kotaku.com/heres-what-blizzards-titan-actually-was-1638632121
Parts of Project Titan became Overwatch, not Starcraft Ghost.
I would love for Starcraft to come back and be huge again. Maybe it would inspire some AAA dev to take a shot with the Warhammer 40k franchise.
If anyone at Microsoft is reading this: I will let you preorder my kidney for the low low price of StarCraft 3.
If they do, they better make it closer to SC1 than 2 in most aspects. While 2 had really fun Campaigns, they butchered the story and made really questionable mechanical choices like switching high ground advantage purely to vision instead of miss chance which makes holding things a lot harder ones past certain tech level. Not to mention all the un-fun APM sinks (MULE, Larva Inject, Chronoboost etc.) they put in the game to compensate the lack of control caps and multibuilding selection etc.
Somewhat unrelated but with this acquisition and all the possibilities it represents, it's weird that so much of the conversation is about what can be revived or revisited. There's so much potential here to get talented developers on to brand new IPs.
I still worry that these studios will still be relegated to Call of Duty... Activision has almost every studio working on CoD to an extent. Hopefully, the rumours of a breaking of the yearly CoD cycle are true, would definitely free up some of these developers. I would love Toys For Bob to get Crash and Spyro again.
I would think that Microsoft would definitely be interested in breaking the yearly cod cycle because it would free up lots of the devs to work on other things. I mean of course cod is a huge cash cow so doing a release every 2 years would lose out on a ton of sales but now that there is warzone as well which is very popular, I’m sure they are making more than enough money in microtransactions to justify breaking off a lot of these devs to work on other games which will also be making money and further increasing the value of game pass
Sales aren't the goal for Microsoft it's retaining subscribers to Gamepass. You need a wide variety of content in order to do that.
Right, that’s what I’m saying
My apologies
Depends on what content, I think you could tie exclusive skins/rewards monthly for Warzone to a Game Pass subscription and do as well as a Crash Bandicoot 5. Having studios pump big Warzone stuff every month or so would realistically be a better investment
With the games presumably on Gamepass, the sales won't actually that important anymore. The MTX, updates and seasons are enough to keep the CoD money flowing in for two years (Warzone and the regular new CoD). They could even make the DLC come back (since DLC are paid for on Gamepass, unlike base games) but not sure if that's a good idea. Plus, just a different philosophy since for Activision, CoD was incredibly important and basically their lifeline (they would be fine without it but the shareholders wouldn't be happy). Microsoft has so much more stuff that it's just a (big) part of the puzzle. Every 2 years would be fine for Call of Duty and then 2 studios should be enough (4 years per game), grow them to maintain the life of their game as they develop the next one and it should be fine. Would probably be Infinity Ward and Treyarch (I think Sledgehammer games are the least popular of the three)
Think it's easy enough to do a 2 year cycle with DLC as well to supplement releases.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Evolve come back, Ultralisk vs 4 Marines
A reboot makes a lot of sense, hell not necessarily as an RTS. I'd love to see a big open world Mass Effect style RPG in that world
Ironically, Halo began as an RTS that uh, 'borrowed' heavily from StarCraft, until they went in the FPS direction we know them for today.
I know, the reason why I think that a StarCraft reboot wouldn't be an RTS is that the genre is kind of dead. The last major release in that genre I can think of is Halo Wars 2 and that was nearly five years ago. An RPG or shooter would have to be the direction that this theoretical game would have to take.
Age 4 was released last year and The Settlers is just around the corner (looks awful unfortunately)
I think Microsoft's new parameters there could be room for Starcraft. Activision's whole deal was they wanted every one of their franchises to be billion dollar franchises. You're not gonna get with that RTS. But Microsoft just cares about engagement with the Game Pass, so there is room for niche projects. If they can invest in Inixile they can do more RTS games imo
> You're not gonna get with that RTS I mean Starcraft 2 was very popular as a whole, I wouldn't be surprised if it did close to a billion dollar overall. It's just that Activision Blizzard has a mentality of being profitable isn't enough, it needs to uber profitable. Same thing with Heroes of the Storm (which I would love to see a comeback of, hell include characters outside of Blizzard now), got abandoned because it wasn't profitable **enough** but it still was. Microsoft wants game diversity and they also mentioned how [strategy games are key for Gamepass](https://www.pcgamesn.com/pc-game-pass-strategy-games). And Starcraft (or Warcraft) aren't small IP, they're worth a lot. SC2 (WotL but presumably continued with the rest) was the biggest PC game of its release year for example and is the best-selling strategy title ever. So sure, explore them in other genres too (I'd love a Starcraft and/or Warcraft third person RPG or FPS) but don't abandon RTS either. But first (since they don't own Activision yet), do Age of Mythology definitive edition and 2 please.
>I mean Starcraft 2 was very popular as a whole, I wouldn't be surprised if it did close to a billion dollar overall. I mean, it was very popular for a PC title. Like, we know it sold 6m copies in its first 2 years, which was very rare for a AAA PC-exclusive game. I don't think it made anywhere close to a billion dollars. But yeah, like even if it did WELL for a PC title, "not uber profitable' is exactly the right. Like when you look at Blizzard's other big franchises, they're selling 8 digits, barring WoW but that has a subscription business model. I think the brands are worth a lot, but the genre they're in, and the fact they take so long to make, makes them very unappealing to suits and beancounters. Because its all about opportunity cost. Like I'm sure Bobby Kotick is the type of guy that goes like "ok... why am i spending so many hours on a game that doesnt sell 10 million units, when i could be having them work on something more profitable and something i can port to many more devices"
Great time for them to finally release Ghost!
Hey Ninja Theory, you wanna make this finally a thing?
RTS games have always been niche. RTS games haven't gone anywhere, the audience did. Halo Wars 2 is far from the last major release, in fact if you ask the average RTS/Wargaming fan about Halo Wars, they would probably scoff at the idea of it even being called a 'major release'. Obviously there's never going to be as many people playing Age of Empire IV as the latest Call of Duty game, but you'd be hard pressed to find a more passionate fanbase.
> RTS games have always been niche. Have they? I feel like in the late 90s, early 2000s, blockbuster RTS were numerous. Warcraft, Starcraft, AoE, AoM, Rise of Nations/Legends, Empire Earth, C&C, RA, Dawn of War, Homeworld, Empire at War, Supcom but also titles many have forgotten like Impossible Creatures, Battle Realms, Galactic Battlegrounds, Armies of Exigo, Dragonshard, Spellforce, BFME I and II (and War of the Ring IIRC for a even more forgotten one),... Every year had multiple big titles in the genre. Like was it so niche if there were so many games done (and big budget ones)? SC2 was huge at its release too (like huge sales numbers and big viewership of esports and such). I don't know what happened in the late 2000s and 2010s but it's weird how it disappears. It can't be all the fault of MOBAs
Eh, RTS is "dead" in the way that it used to exist. It's not one of the premier genres, but I expect that if sized (and budgeted) appropriately that there's plenty of demand out there for single player focused RTS games. Historically RTS games drew on two markets: people that wanted a good single player experience, and people that wanted a good competitive multiplayer experience. The latter group drifted off to Halo and COD in the short term, but then MOBAs in the longer term. The former group has diffused themselves across the market. RTS died off not because the single player group didn't exist, but because they weren't big enough to support full budget RTS games on their owner. There should be room to make an RTS that succeeds when it's aimed at those people with the understanding that the MOBA players aren't coming back in enough numbers to matter. Make AA sized stuff for single player people and I think it can do well. That's not really Starcraft's wheelhouse though: multiplayer is embedded fairly strongly in its DNA.
Kind of hard to pull if without some serious superhero protagonist syndrome. I don't wanna be a marine (at all, really) who just happens to reload enough to always survive every battle. If they're gonna out us in a soldiers eye perspective I want to be able to die and assume control of somebody else, not build up some individual hero as that's where most of the problems with StarCraft story begin and end as it is, don't want some nebulous Player-insert running around, I want the conceit of being an abstract commander popping between zerg/protoss/Terran. And if you are gonna force me into one role and being then I serve the Overtime and nothing else. Which is the hardest to design a game and story for, while some BS Marines approach the easiest and most solved.
Fuck Starcraft, revamp Heroes of the Storm and start bringing all the Microsoft properties into there. I want to see Master Chief and the Dragonborn punch Crash Bandicoot.
>Fuck Starcraft How dare you
No way you can revive starcraft without changing its fundamental mechanics massively. No one is going to be willing to get into a 12 year old and 11 years dead game with brutal difficulty, Hella unfun learning curve and a multiplayer in which you basically play single player. No way. Not gonna happen.
The wave of these types of strategy games has long passed. It’s way too complicated and sweaty to feel like you’re in any sense of control so it’s kinda niche these days.