Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M

The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) has an interesting game budget tidbit about StarCraft II, saying: "Blizzard's parent company, Activision Blizzard, has spent more than $100 million developing the computer-based game." Thanks GameSpot where they note that this figure represents development costs, and does not include the marketing budget for the real-time strategy sequel.

View
66 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 3.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

26. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 02:46 Fion
 
Valcor wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 23:30:
ASJD wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:32:
If this bombs I'm going to be giddy.

The culture of wishing and cheering for failure here on Blues News is getting old.


Or maybe I am....

I'd have to say both. As someone who has worked on a project (not a game mind) that took years of long hours, blood/sweat/tears, etc and see it go down the tubes I know how it feels when game fail or are canceled prior to release. Because of that experience I never wish for anyones project to fail. Trust me if you have spent years of your life on something and watched it go down with you being powerless to stop it and having no say in it's failure, you wouldn't wish that on your worst enemy.

Lets just say I got out of the field after that experience. And I'm not going to mention what it is. I've been heckled and jeered at on other forums because of it and it still gets me down years and years later.
 
Avatar 17499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 02:37 Zyr
 
Flatline wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 00:41:
Actually, it *is* a Facebook game to be technical.

That RealID system is more than likely the fruit of a massive deal between Blizzard and Facebook penned a while ago.

No, it's really not. Unless they snuck in playing ranked SC2 matches in your browser on facebook, it's not a facebook game. There may be connectivity features that you and I actively dislike, but there is nothing wrong or compromised about it's gameplay.

I fully expect to hear about some irritating achievement pushing to facebook feeds soon after release, but going as far as calling it a facebook game is a little much, imo.

I don't get the negativity towards SC2 either, to be honest. B.Net 2.0? Absolutely, it's really shabby right now. But SC2? Not liking the genre (base-building micro heavy RTS) is no reason to wish a dedicated PC game from one of the few dedicated PC devs left to fail, that's just asinine and short-sited.

They could have dumbed it down to the point of being a disgrace like Supreme Commander 2, and half the people trashing SC2 for being "more of the same" would be griping how Blizzard sold out to the casual WoW crowd instead of giving the hardcore fans what they want...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 02:34 Ruffiana
 
Eh, it stands out more at Blues, but it just seems to be PC gaming culture now. Sucks, because I too am getting tired of it. Seems to be the way it is now. Maybe I just have on some particularly dark rose-tinted glasses, but it seems PC gamers as a whole weren't always overly negative dbags...

It's not your glasses, it's the culture of the internet for everything...not just PC gaming, console gaming, or gaming as a whole. People on the internet generally act like douchebags. When they're not acting like douchebags, we're mis-reading what they say as such.

Ironically, some of the exact malaise that Blizzard wants to combat with stripping away anonymity on their forums. I have had the pleaser of meeting a number of people from forums in real life and they are, with very few exceptions, much nicer face to face.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 01:35 Jerykk
 
That RealID system is more than likely the fruit of a massive deal between Blizzard and Facebook penned a while ago.

Wasn't the RealID system already dumped due to consumer outrage?

EDIT: Nevermind, looks like they just dumped the requirement for using real names. In any case, you know what I meant when I said it wasn't a Facebook game. It isn't Farmville or Mafia Wars or whatever.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Star Trek Online End of Beta Event Jul 17, 2010, 01:21 HellSlayer
 
Good points, Jerk.  
o0
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 00:41 Flatline
 
Jerykk wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 00:29:
6) Not a Facebook game.

Actually, it *is* a Facebook game to be technical.

That RealID system is more than likely the fruit of a massive deal between Blizzard and Facebook penned a while ago.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 00:29 Jerykk
 
I'm not sure why anyone would want to see this fail. SC2 is:

1) Designed for PCs.
2) Not a pseudo-realistic military shooter.
3) Is making relatively few concessions for accessibility.
4) Belongs to a relatively niche genre.
5) Not an MMO.
6) Not a Facebook game.

Blizzard is one of the very, very few companies still making big-budget games designed for the PC. If they were turning SC2 into a dumbed down console RTS or worse yet, a console shooter, then the hate would be well-deserved. However, even though I don't care much for their games, I can't deny that they are one of the last bastions of PC gaming.

This comment was edited on Jul 17, 2010, 00:37.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 00:23 StingingVelvet
 
MattyC wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 00:18:
Valcor wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 23:30:
ASJD wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:32:
If this bombs I'm going to be giddy.

The culture of wishing and cheering for failure here on Blues News is getting old.

Eh, it stands out more at Blues, but it just seems to be PC gaming culture now. Sucks, because I too am getting tired of it. Seems to be the way it is now. Maybe I just have on some particularly dark rose-tinted glasses, but it seems PC gamers as a whole weren't always overly negative dbags...


The worst part is you can't even get a feel for a game anymore. Doesn't matter if the game is great or awful, 300 jerks will be posting in every thread online about how "If this game was paper it would be a waste of poop to wipe my ass with it WTF!".

Yes. I usually blame the negativity on nostalgia for the old days of PC games and an inability to change, but Starcraft 2 and Dragon Age Origins are pretty much those same old games regurgitated and they still get hated on endlessly.

Who knows what the fuck people want.

At $60 Starcraft 2 will have to sell just over 2 million copies to make a profit though I would guess, and I doubt it will have any trouble doing that. It would be horrible for PC gaming if it didn't though, so why any PC gamer would wish for that is beyond me.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 00:18 MattyC
 
Valcor wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 23:30:
ASJD wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:32:
If this bombs I'm going to be giddy.

The culture of wishing and cheering for failure here on Blues News is getting old.

Eh, it stands out more at Blues, but it just seems to be PC gaming culture now. Sucks, because I too am getting tired of it. Seems to be the way it is now. Maybe I just have on some particularly dark rose-tinted glasses, but it seems PC gamers as a whole weren't always overly negative dbags...


The worst part is you can't even get a feel for a game anymore. Doesn't matter if the game is great or awful, 300 jerks will be posting in every thread online about how "If this game was paper it would be a waste of poop to wipe my ass with it WTF!".
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 00:14 SlyBri
 
Bumpy wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 23:37:
How many years has this been in development? Must be many for the coin consumption.


That's what I was wondering. 100 million over how many years and people. This is one game where I'd actually like to see a behind the scenes, "making of," story. It really is one of the most anticipated games of all time. Hope they don't screw it up.

And if they do screw it up, I'll blame Activision, not Blizzard. hehe
 
"Nice shot 'William Burroughs'! You hold a gun like a guy who plays Riven!"
-The Venture Bros.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 17, 2010, 00:06 Slashman
 
Lord Tea wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 23:59:
after all the years of WOW-cashcowing 100+ million bucks must be nothing for Blizzard.

Well it probably isn't that much money from Blizzard's standpoint.

Still, looking at the game, the engine certainly didn't cost that much to make. The gameplay is classic Starcraft with heavy micro management to satisfy the Korean Overlords of pro gaming.

I'm guessing the cutscenes and other production values are where the cash went, plus really high salaries.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 23:59 Lord Tea
 
after all the years of WOW-cashcowing 100+ million bucks must be nothing for Blizzard.  
UPSA = United Police States of America
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 23:37 Bumpy
 
How many years has this been in development? Must be many for the coin consumption.

Hope the game does well even though I have zero interest in it. Perhaps a demo can show me otherwise but the RTS genre has gotten dull to me after Zero Hour.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 23:35 Prez
 
Having never done anything in the way of software development, I'd LOVE to see the breakdown of expenditures showing where all this money went.

100 million bucks seems incredibly, stupidly high for what we will be getting, but again, I'm not really all that knowledgeable on game development. Honestly, I can't see for the life of me what would cost a tenth of that. Maybe someone who has done this sort of thing can explain a bit?
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 23:30 Valcor
 
ASJD wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:32:
If this bombs I'm going to be giddy.

The culture of wishing and cheering for failure here on Blues News is getting old.


Or maybe I am....
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re:Games Cost People! Jul 16, 2010, 23:26 Techie714
 
This sounds totally within reason to me. A lot of you people live in la la land thinking games cost like 15 million to make. A decent AAA title can EASILY go up to 50-60 million. I remember reading that the first Call of Duty YEARS ago cost like 30 million. Remember it takes years to make these games, I'm sure SCII has been in production for at least 5 years.  
Avatar 25373
 
Steam (ID)
http://steamcommunity.com/id/techie714/
DEAD SH0T
Keep your privacy!
http://prism-break.org/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 23:20 PropheT
 
Rhett wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:49:
Though, SC2 is very, very, very polished. As is WoW. Can't really complain. We need more dedicated developers.

I don't think it's an issue of dedication or lack thereof with other companies, it's that they don't have truckloads of cash on hand to let development progress along as leisurely as Blizzard is able to with the resources they have at their disposal.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 22:49 Rhett
 
It only cost $100m because everyone at Blizzard is ungodly rich at this point, and likely have ridiculous salaries. >_>

Though, SC2 is very, very, very polished. As is WoW. Can't really complain. We need more dedicated developers.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 22:43 entr0py
 
Zyrxil wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 21:30:
Whoa, did they remake the game 5 times or something?

They're only planning on making it 3 times as far as I know.
 
Avatar 55038
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M Jul 16, 2010, 22:39 ASeven
 
ASJD wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:32:
At this point, I think they're really overrating how popular this game is going to be.

If this bombs I'm going to be giddy.

To be honest PC gaming loses no matter what happens. If SCII does well then Blizzard's plans of a social network will most likely go ahead, if SCII bombs then publishers will again start saying PC gaming is dead and all that.

Can't see PC gaming winning from SCII no matter what.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 3.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo