Blizzard Explains Cancellation of StarCraft Ghost

February 15, 2011 -

During a panel last week at the Design Innovate Create Explore summit, Blizzard front man Mike Morhaime explained exactly what happened to StarCraft: Ghost. Apparently, as Blizzard was developing its first MMO World of Warcraft and StarCraft II, the company had to make a hard decision on where it wanted to put its resources. That choice ended up being World of Warcraft and StarCraft II, which lead to the cancellation of the action game based loosely on its popular RTS series.

"We have to choose, we can't do everything," he said during the panel. "Our vision for what's possible directs that. We like complex games and we like casual games."

"They were working on StarCraft Ghost the same time we were working on World of Warcraft and StarCraft II," Morhaime continued, "World of Warcraft exploded and we needed to make some resource decisions. It just wasn't an environment in which a project like (StarCraft Ghost ) could succeed."

While many lamented that decision, ultimately it was the right one to make at that time.

Source: Kotaku by way of The Escapist

Posted in

Comments

Re: Blizzard Explains Cancellation of StarCraft Ghost

I would say they should give it another go.

And Blizzard is still pretty cool, like allowing the Starcraft Universe mod to go forward.

Re: Blizzard Explains Cancellation of StarCraft Ghost

A bit too late to explain that one.

In any case, it's clear this is no the Blizzard of old. First they cancelled Warcraft Adventures, then Starcraft Ghost, and they ended cancelling the most important part of Starcraft 2: LAN.

RIP, Blizzard. May you keep covering your tombstone and Kotick's pockets with $100 bills if that makes you happy.

Re: Blizzard Explains Cancellation of StarCraft Ghost

They were the best precisely because they didn't release till the product was ready, and knew when an idea just wouldn't work and scrapped it. Those ideas probably didn't pan out so they shelved it. The SC2 comment is a matter of personal opinion, i personally don't give a crap because i'm in it for the singleplayer. Kotick and Activision have little to no control over blizzard other than that of standard Publisher/Developer relations.

Re: Blizzard Explains Cancellation of StarCraft Ghost

But Blizzard has absolute power now! They could go back to it if they wanted! *Sob*

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
james_fudgeUnwinnable Weekly Telethon playing Metal Gear http://www.twitch.tv/rainydayletsplay04/16/2014 - 8:06am
ConsterTo be fair, there's so little left of the middle class that those numbers are skewing.04/16/2014 - 7:42am
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
NeenekoSo "worked" vs "failed" really comes down to who you think is more important and deserving04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoThough I am also not sure we can say NYC failed. Rent control helped the people it was intended for and is considered a failure by the people it was designed to protect them from.04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoIf they change the rules, demand will plummet. Though yeah, rent control probably would not help much in the SF case. I doubt anything will.04/15/2014 - 1:35pm
TheSmokeyOnline gamer accused of murdering son to keep playing - http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/04/15/21604921.html04/15/2014 - 11:50am
Matthew Wilsonyup, but curent city rules do not allow for that.04/15/2014 - 11:00am
ZippyDSMleeIf SF dose not start building upwards then they will price people out of the aera.04/15/2014 - 10:59am
Matthew Wilsonthe issue rent control has it reduces supply, and in SF case they already has a supply problem. rent control ofen puts rent below cost, or below profit of selling it. rent control would not fix this issue.04/15/2014 - 10:56am
NeenekoRent control is useful in moderation, NYC took it way to far and tends to be held up as an example of them not working, but in most cases they are more subtle and positive.04/15/2014 - 10:24am
PHX CorpBeating Cancer with Video Games http://mashable.com/2014/04/14/steven-gonzalez-survivor-games/04/15/2014 - 9:21am
Matthew Wilsonwhat are you saying SF should do rent control, that has never worked every time it has been tried. the issue here is a self inflicted supply problem imposed by stupid laws.04/15/2014 - 8:52am
E. Zachary KnightNeeneko, Government created price controls don't work though. They may keep prices down for the current inhabitants, but they are the primary cause of recently vacated residences having astronomical costs. Look at New York City as a prime example.04/15/2014 - 8:50am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician