Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Starcraft Ghost Off The Cube 97

Posted by Zonk from the console-officially-dead dept.
Gamespot has the news that Blizzard's upcoming action/stealth title Starcraft: Ghost is officially no longer in production for the Gamecube. From the article: "Speaking to GameSpot, a Blizzard staffer confirmed that the game is now only being released for the Xbox and PlayStation 2, meaning the previously announced GameCube edition has been canceled ... Unfortunately the GameCube has no online service and since so much work is going in to the online portion, it would be additional work to release only part of the intended game."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Starcraft Ghost Off The Cube More

Starcraft Ghost Off The Cube

Comments Filter:
  • So that means it IS comming out for the Revolution.. Right??

  • This is an understandable move. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rowan_u ( 859287 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @01:08PM (#13942051)
    When Ghost was in early development the focus was on the single player experience. Now, with the information and playable versions released at Blizcon, it seems that the game is shaping up to have a considerable multiplayer portion. In light of this new focus, it makes sense to drop costly support for the Gamecube version.

    If you look at the PS2 version of the game, I'm sure this already requires extensive extra work to the multiplayer portion as well. Its going to be a big difference between putting a game up on Xbox live, and creating a complete multiplayer service like you have to do with PS2 online games.

    I wonder if the Ps2 version will contain features like matchmaking, buddy lists, and playlists. With Blizzards previous excellent multiplayer track record on battlenet, it seems unlikely they would expect anything less from developers taken under there wing. Could such extensive online support be the killer-app for the PS2 Ethernet adapter?
    • Still, they make it sound like the game is worthless without the online mode so if I was planning to buy it that would be a definite reason not to as I don't use my PS2 for online.
    • Sadly this move from single player to Multiplayer might turn off some fans, personally I don't play many multiplayer games on the consoles, because when I play games I like to give a little taunt, or just relax. I don't see many games on the consoles(though tony hawk has been fun to play multiplayer most games are less then stellar, especially EA's fare (SSX 3 was dead)) that are worth playing multiplayer.

      Personally I'm more likely to skip a multiplayer heavy game and likely I'll do the same for this one.

      B
    • It would make sense if the Gamecube didn't have a broadband adaptor. Oddly enough, it does. So Blizzard is lying. Not that I care at this point, but to make this decision 3 years after the game was announced is a bit slimy.

      Good luck selling any copies on the previous-gen Xbox, wankers.
      • That was my first thought as well. The Gamecube has a broadband adapter (i've sadly never gotten to use mine... but I have it.)

        If they are cancelling the Gamecube version just because they have no central online service then would not the Playstation 2 version be cancelled as they have no central online service. XBox has the Live service so that qualifies as a central online service... but as far as I know Playstation 2 does not. Didn't we just have an article yesterday about how Sony isn't going to have on

      • Re:This is an understandable move. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by RogueyWon ( 735973 ) * on Thursday November 03, 2005 @02:02PM (#13942527) Journal
        And how many games make use of it? How many consumers are likely to own one? How does the market penetration compare to X-Box Live and the PS2's online services?

        While it's technically wrong to say that the Cube has no online services, in any serious business decision, you cannot include the Cube's network adaptor as a factor. It's sold far too few and it's not going to start selling them now, so late in the cycle.

        Blizzard's decision makes perfect sense and I doubt most people outside of slashdot games will even notice.

        • Re:This is an understandable move. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by valintin ( 30311 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @02:15PM (#13942646)
          There is far more consoles that do not have online than there are that do. It makes perfect sense to sell more games to more users to make more money. If the game was any good they would come out with a robust single player to sell to the majority of console users. This shows their lack of confidence in the game over all and in the single player mode.

          The single player mode is not good enough to sell the game to enough Gamecube owners to make it profitable for that platform. That says much about the game for any console owner.

          • There is far more consoles that do not have online than there are that do. It makes perfect sense to sell more games to more users to make more money. If the game was any good they would come out with a robust single player to sell to the majority of console users. This shows their lack of confidence in the game over all and in the single player mode.

            The single player mode is not good enough to sell the game to enough Gamecube owners to make it profitable for that platform. That says much about the game for
            • Since Decemeber of last year. I got it because it was a cheaper option to upgrading my son's computer to play games. I guess I'm a Nintendo fan because I think it's the best game system for kids and adults together.

              We still play Starcraft on his PC and if the next gen of consoles end up being PC like, I will skip them and build a new PC for him. I'm interested in the next gen game systems, not PCs for dumb people.

        • THere is not such thing as "PS2 Online Services" unless by that you mean "It has an ethernet port". Sony has made it very clear that each game developer is responsible for developing and maintaining their own system for making their games talk to each other. A previous post hit the nail on the head with the response that Blizzard's reasoning doesn't make sense.
        • Unless this game is entirely multiplayer-dependant, with no single-player component, this decision makes no sense. Cube owners are just as able to buy the broadband adapter as PS2 owners, and are just as able to connect to Battle.net through it. If the content is good enough, I guarantee Cube owners will buy the adapter. And without it, there should still be a rich, single-player experience to be had. Personally, I was really looking forward to playing this game by myself, and had no intention of playin
        • I, for one, would have bought an online adapter for this game.
      • Yes the GameCube has a broadband adaptor. But Nintendo show absolutley no interest in it at all. There are two whole online games availible in Europe (PSOI&II, PSOIII), and another two games that support LAN play (Mario Kart and Kirby Air Ride). Compared to Sony, who have managed to get a fair selection of online games, and intergrated it into newer consoles. The PS2 doesn't have a unified online service, but Sony support online game development for it (they've actually developed some online games thems
        • The Xbox IS dead. Microsoft's contract with NVIDIA has run out. There wil be no new Xboxes. Like I said, good lick selling to a dead system. Hope the dev costs pay off.
          • Well, considering it's sucessor is just about to launch, I'm not surprised Microsoft are dropping the Xbox 1, it's famously made at a loss, and they can't easily redesign it to be cheaper, so it's getting dropped. A contract running out would be as good a point to stop as any (I hadn't heard that however, do you have a source?).

            However I doubt it'll kill the Xbox 1 software market dead overnight, there's generally some overlap between generations, the software will still sell. There's still a fair amount of
        • I agree with you but anyone that owns an older version of the PS2 would still have to go out and buy the Sony Network Adapter to get their PS2 online. Or I guess they could pay for a whole new console (or maybe their old one is broken, etc, etc)

  • OH NOES! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Inoshiro ( 71693 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @01:09PM (#13942054) Homepage
    Considering when it was announced [slashdot.org] years ago, you have to wonder a bit. Does this matter? It's like saying that Duke Nukem Forever won't come out on the GameCube -- it's sure as shit not coming out on anything else, either!

    After 3 years, it's not going to live up to expectations anyways. The edge of gameplay is further out, and whatever monetary hit they took developing a game in 2002 and 2003 is 100% wasted money. Some of the code and art may transfer, but the gameplay and graphics standard have been raised in the meantime. Anything over 18 months is wasted money in game development.
    • Yeah,

      WOW was a complete waste for Blizzard.

    • Anything over 18 months is wasted money in game development.

      I wouldn't really say that, but given the fact that the game was supposed to come out late '03, early '04, you really have to question just how much money was wasted after all this time. Other than nailing down the gameplay, everything else is more or less rearranged for them. (Just mimic the art from Starcraft, copy and paste Starcraft units and characters, stealth based games have been done already so build on those and the storyline for Starcra

      • iirc, it isn't being made by Blizzard anyways. Which is why I'm confused about people caring abou this title - I mean, don't they remember what happens to a franchise when some other development team makes a sequel/spin-off? Star Control 3? OMF: Battlegrounds? This is going to be just another standard fare stealth-shooter that happens to be in the StarCraft universe. It won't be the perfectly polished gameplay (with just enough creativity to make it fresh) and beautiful artwork that Blizzard is known f

        • Re:Harsh but true (Score:3, Interesting)

          by snuf23 ( 182335 )
          "iirc, it isn't being made by Blizzard anyways"

          Well, actually now it is, sort of. Originally it was being developed by Nihilistic Software:

          "During the summer of 2002, the entire Nihilistic Software development team, the original developer of the game, quit en masse after an internal power struggle with Blizzard Entertainment. At the time, Slashdot and Penny Arcade reported that the team had already completed more than 85% of the game engine and 40% of all level design." Wikipedia Starcraft Ghost [wikipedia.org]

          So now Blizz
        • This is going to be just another standard fare stealth-shooter that happens to be in the StarCraft universe.

          Thats my whole point. How long does it take to create a stealth/shooter in a universe like Starcraft? Other than a making new game engine/licensing a FPS geared engine, porting the graphics and designing the gameplay, it shouldn't take more than 4 years.

          Building new game engine, 2~3 years. If using licensed one, 1~2 years.
          porting graphics, 6~18 months.
          Implementing and testing gameplay, 6~12 months

          • But Blizzard is taking responsibility for it. Blizzard would not take responsibility for the game unless it was going to be a good game.
            Now, I'm not a Blizzard advocate. I didn't even like Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3 that much, but I recognize their goodness as games, and I trust blizzard to kick out another excellent game.

            They have eared my trust, and the trust of a lot of people, that when we buy their games, we're getting the cream of the crop, and I doubt they would blow it on a shooter, of all thin
    • It's like saying that Duke Nukem Forever won't come out on the GameCube

      What?? Duke Nukem Forever isn't coming out ont the gamecube.... damn... I had money saved up for that one.

  • PS2 has no online service either (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MayonakaHa ( 562348 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <ahakanoyam>> on Thursday November 03, 2005 @01:17PM (#13942128) Journal
    So why are they dropping it just for the GameCube? By their logic they should be dropping the PS2 version also since all it has is an internet adapter. X-Box is the only console with an online service.
    • Exactly. I wouldn't be too suprised if money was exchanging hands behind the scenes of this.
    • The difference is that the PS2 has enough marketshare to make the extra work worthwhile.
    • Must just be poorly worded. Who actually owns a GCN internet adapter anyway? For just PSO, there can't be too many people with it.
  • Taking into consideration all the delays that we've been put through.... it's not coming out for any system. I mean, come on! It was supposed to be out summer '04

  • Wake up people! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by fujiman ( 912957 )
    I think we've all seen enough press releases to read between the lines on this one. Either: (1) Someone figured out it wouldn't sell that well on GC, or (2) Blizzard had some falling-out with Nintendo about something.

    Either way, I guarantee it has nothing to do with online multiplayer. *Every* console game is sold on the strength of the single-player experience. Only PC games (BF2, CS) can be sold as primariliy multiplayer. Sure, Halo grew into a MP juggernaut, but everyone played the SP first.

    Why PS2

    • Either way, I guarantee it has nothing to do with online multiplayer. *Every* console game is sold on the strength of the single-player experience. Only PC games (BF2, CS) can be sold as primariliy multiplayer. Sure, Halo grew into a MP juggernaut, but everyone played the SP first.

      Wrong. Everquest Online Adventures (PS2) has no single player mode at all. Same for Final Fantasy XI (PS2). And a LOT of games are sold on the strength of their multiplayer. Also multiplayer doesn't have to mean ONLINE. You wou
    • So you're telling me the appeal of Smash Brothers is single player and multiplayer is just a nice extra? Sorry, but you're wrong. Single player is the nice extra. Off the top of my head, I can think of a dozen or so people I know who have played mutliplayer Smash Brothers but have never touched (or care about) single player. And I've played multiplayer Halo but not single player.
    • *Every* console game is sold on the strength of the single-player experience.

      Next time I'm playing Counter-Strike on Xbox, I'll remember reading your post and laugh and laugh...

      You would have been right a few years ago, though.
    • *Every* console game is sold on the strength of the single-player experience. Only PC games (BF2, CS) can be sold as primariliy multiplayer. Sure, Halo grew into a MP juggernaut, but everyone played the SP first.

      Every? That's funny, because EQOA and FFXI for the PS2 have no single player and are played online. Also, people aren't buying the Star Wars Battlefront games (the first is a greatest hit) for the single player. Same goes for the SOCOM games. Can't forget SOE's Norrath based Diablo clones
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • The current shipping PS2 has an ethernet port out of the box. The adapter is no longer a seperate purchase.

      I have all three consoles, (and bought a broadband adapter for my older PS2) but never found a compelling reason to buy the broadband adapter for the GC. Heck I've seen better reasons to try to find one for my Dreamcast. Having multiple consoles, the GC would not be the first choice for me if a game was available for all three consoles. It's far better suited for the games Nintendo puts out, that are u
    • Probably they decided that it just wouldn't sell many copies on the GC, a system that:

      Doesn't have many owners with the network adapter.

      That doesn't have a strong base of fans of third person shooters with online capabilites (that don't already own a PS2 or Xbox)

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Well, in Sony's case their broadband adaptor has a far higher market penetration than the Gamecube one, especially as new PS2s have it built in. Bringing an online-aimed game to the Gamecube is stupid, as Nintendo frankly have given no support to online gaming on the 'cube, and therefore few 3rd parties have either.

          I think the "service" claim is a bit of bullshit from Blizzrd though, it's really a case of the fact that Microsoft and Sony actively support online games, Nintendo don't.

          I do wonder about the on

    • Both the PS2 AND the GQ use a online adapter

      The slim PS2 has built-in Ethernet. If you'd believe some people's numbers, there are probably more PS2 units with Ethernet (whether through an adapter or through the slim PS2) than GameCube units period.

      So if they do go through with the PS2 version, it means Blizzard pulled bullshit out of their ass to justify not completing a game like they where supposed to

      Or it could mean that the game design required more than 1.35 gigabytes of space. Unlike PS2 and

  • I found it funny when looking the /. original posting of Blizzard's annoucement and the post of Blizzards FAQ about the game. Taken from that FAQ:

    "We expect to ship StarCraft: Ghost in late 2003."

    lol. Yes blizzard has added a lot and changed a lot, but by the time this game is ready to ship to PS2 and XBox it's going to be playing on a system that's already replaced by the next gen systems. I know this is Blizzard's first attempt at a video game system, but I think they are going to learn a lot of lesson
    • I know this is Blizzard's first attempt at a video game system...

      Ahhh, you need to read up on Blizzard's history. They originally started out making games for the SNES, but they used a different name (Silicon & Synapse). They moved on to making PC games in the mid 90s. Although, IIRC, Ghost is being developed by someone else entirely anyways.
    • I don't see how Blizzard could possibly release this game for the current generation of consoles. Blizzard's official stance is that the game is planned to be released in the first half of 2006, but it could be delayed if it doesn't meet the standards of a Blizzard game. If they release it for the current generation, Xbox 360 will already be out and PS3 will also probably be out, so everyone will be playing a current generation game on a next generation console, and it would have to be a really good game fo
      • That is the only scenario that makes any sense to me at all. Most people who buy this game are going to spend more time playing it on next-gen consoles than current gen consoles, anyway. Why not just make Ghost a Rev title and be done with it, rather than waste all of that effort? They don't even have to take the time to develop it for the Rev's unique controller (though I think it would be a fantastic match.) They can either use the shell or require a Cube controller, since initial development was on th
  • At times like this im glad i still have my copy of Starcraft 64. Take that Xbox owners!
  • 3 years ago it was a toss up on getting a game system. Metriod Prime looked cool but that wasnt enough for me to get a console, figured hey Ghost is coming out too. Bought a GC and have been waiting since, sigh.....oh and NERF SHAMANS!
  • ...Ghost is the new Duke Nukem Forever!
  • The new starcraft ghost is more like hl2. Hl2 was supposed to be released years ago, but they continued to delay the game to keep up with the newer games coimg out. Like the final delay that they made, to compete with Doom 3. Instead of dropping the game from just gamecube, they should drop it from all the current consoles and release it for xbox 360 and ps3, where as there will still be the online multiplayer.
    • Actually, that's kind of misleading. As far as I know they were off by a year and a few months. They kept their mouthes quiet for a while so nobody knew for certain they were working on it (just speculating). Then they released a teaser screenshot of the infamous crowbar and the world went ape.

      Yeh, that September release didn't exactly go as planned, they missed it by over 12 months. But they were hardly years behind.

      Team Fortress on the other hand, eck. They sent press releases and screenshots out a f
  • However, they still lack a reasonable explanation why they aren't releasing it for the PC.

    The reason can't be technical, as everyone knows the Xbox IS a (crippled) PC.
    • Could be any number of reasons here. I suspect the most likely issue are concerns about the expense of getting it to work on a decent spread of PC hardware. With console development, you know the exact hardware yur customers are going to use. For PC games, you've got to make sure your game will run on umpteen billion different combinations of hardware. Even after extensive testing, most developers don't actually maange this, which usually results in bad publicity and noisy forums.

      It's not surprising that, w

  • So, let's see here... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Txiasaeia ( 581598 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @06:54PM (#13945803)
    ...Ghost was announced in 2001 as being developed by Nihilistic Software. Then it changed hands from Nihilistic to Swingin' Ape Studios. Nihilistic had completed 85% of the engine and 40% of level design, but Ape scrapped most of this (according to an interview earlier this year) in favour of a new engine(?) and entirely different story. Now they've changed it to a PS2 and XBox-title only, and four years after production began, they're shifting the focus from single-player to multi-player. I'm taking bets that the game is going to merge productions with Duke Nukem Forever, and the resulting unholy union will only be playable on the Infinium Labs Phantom.
  • I remember hearing a while back that Sega was offering its software to developers wanting to take Gamecube games online. I'm not aware that anyone took them up on that offer.

    In any case, designing a non-MMORPG console game solely around the online experience seems rather narrow-sighted. Sure online console gaming is growing, but it's not the way most people play.

    I suppose the bright side is that now I'll have one less game to not have time to play.

  • I was excited when I first heard about SC: Ghost and even more excited when I heard that Swinging Ape studio took over development, since I loved Metal Arms. But to be honest, I had completely forgotten about this game. Is it possible that this is some strange means to garner some buzz before it's released?
  • I personally find myself agreeing with Nintendorks' take [nintendorks.com] on it:

    Apparently a big part of StarCraft: Ghost is a subpar online mode where everyone stealths around while trying to capture a base or some crap. That certainly sounds more exciting than the single player story mode full of StarCraft lore that we've been waiting 3 years for.

    Seriously, if there's going to be so much of a focus on online gameplay that they don't think releasing the game for the GCN makes sense, it sounds like Ghost will become yet ano

    • I have to agree. I own an X-Box so I wont be out of the loop for this game but that doesnt mean crap if they are going to throw this thing out as a big online game.

      As a single player game I could see such massive possibilities the missions and story in such a great universe could be nothing less than epic. Now the single player appears to be stuck on to the far easier option of make a handful of levels plug in some generic AI and let people take care of the gameplay themselves in the same multiplayer experi

Slashdot Top Deals

This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian

Close