Why no new WarCraft or StarCraft?

MightyUnclean

Why do you guys think Blizzard has shown no interest in developing new WarCraft or StarCraft games?  Wouldn't these games, with modern graphics, be worth a fortune?

Kabulozo

Blizzard looks like have lost interest in developing new games for PC, and slowly turing into a mobile developer.

Kabulozo

Yeah i don't see RST going back to mainstream again as it was in 2000s.

TheScavenger

Because they can't easily put massive amounts of microtransactions into it, like they can mobile games.

MightyUnclean

TheScavenger said:

Because they can't easily put massive amounts of microtransactions into it, like they can mobile games.

You just might have a point.

Vorthanion

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

ConstantineMerus

I don't know. Maybe because the creative people have next to no influence on decision-making process and it's all marketing.

Not sure what caused the power shift the beginning. I refer you all to an episode of Mad Men which Don Draper threatens to leave the company when Duck the marketing guy takes control. That happens a lot. 

MightyUnclean

I always sucked at RTS, too many things to manage.  But I enjoyed them.  Damn, I'm old and stuck in the past.

Phaserlight

Near perfection doesn't leave much room for improvement.

Sovrath

Vorthanion said:

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

You do ignore them if you want to concentrate your resources to making the maximum profit.

If spending 30 million dollars (just winging it there) to make a 5 million dollar profit is then compared to spending 30 million to make a 100 million dollar profit the course of the company is clear.

Nilden

Don't worry I'm sure next Blizzcon they will announce Starcraft and Warcraft for mobile!

Vorthanion

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

You do ignore them if you want to concentrate your resources to making the maximum profit.

If spending 30 million dollars (just winging it there) to make a 5 million dollar profit is then compared to spending 30 million to make a 100 million dollar profit the course of the company is clear.

Blizzard is not an indie company with limited resources or personnel, hence my comment.

psychosiz1

You only need to look at the revenue of mobile games versus pc games to understand.  The casual players have finally made their full scale invasion into gaming and it appears pc games are the collateral damage.  

Sovrath

Vorthanion said:

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

You do ignore them if you want to concentrate your resources to making the maximum profit.

If spending 30 million dollars (just winging it there) to make a 5 million dollar profit is then compared to spending 30 million to make a 100 million dollar profit the course of the company is clear.

Blizzard is not an indie company with limited resources or personnel, hence my comment.

Yeah, but they are a publicly traded company.

And publicly traded companies are in the business of making the most money for their investors.

So they invest in "x game", it doesn't make "that much money" (but does make money) and their investors go "why?"

The problem with your statement is that it's a "gamer" statement. It doesn't take into account that running a business is still "running a business."

If it's not in their financial best interest, no matter their resources, they aren't going to do it.

Kayo83

Im sure Starcraft will get a new installment sooner or later. Part 2 was extended over 3 releases and its far from ready for another installment.

Warcraft 4 probably not. At least not until WoW is a distant memory. Im hoping theyll remake the original Warcraft with modern mechanics and graphics (or even Warcraft 2). Zero interest in Reforged... Ive already played that game like 3 times through and can do so right now if I wanted.

Vorthanion

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

You do ignore them if you want to concentrate your resources to making the maximum profit.

If spending 30 million dollars (just winging it there) to make a 5 million dollar profit is then compared to spending 30 million to make a 100 million dollar profit the course of the company is clear.

Blizzard is not an indie company with limited resources or personnel, hence my comment.

Yeah, but they are a publicly traded company.

And publicly traded companies are in the business of making the most money for their investors.

So they invest in "x game", it doesn't make "that much money" (but does make money) and their investors go "why?"

The problem with your statement is that it's a "gamer" statement. It doesn't take into account that running a business is still "running a business."

If it's not in their financial "best interest", no matter their resources, they aren't going to do it.

How exactly is that in the investor's best interest.  Catering to both markets would net them more money than chasing only after one.  Investors care about the bottom line, they don't care if the company has to work hard to get it.  The mobile market might be easier to milk, but if I were invested in Blizzard, I'd be pissed if they left behind a perfectly good revenue market that combined with the new platform would result in more money in my pocket.

mgilbrtsn

RTS isn't in vogue atm.  However, it doesn't mean it won't come back.  The gaming industry ebbs and flows like any industry.  Good things come to those with patience.

Vorthanion

skadad said:

Vorthanion said:

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

You do ignore them if you want to concentrate your resources to making the maximum profit.

If spending 30 million dollars (just winging it there) to make a 5 million dollar profit is then compared to spending 30 million to make a 100 million dollar profit the course of the company is clear.

Blizzard is not an indie company with limited resources or personnel, hence my comment.

Yeah, but they are a publicly traded company.

And publicly traded companies are in the business of making the most money for their investors.

So they invest in "x game", it doesn't make "that much money" (but does make money) and their investors go "why?"

The problem with your statement is that it's a "gamer" statement. It doesn't take into account that running a business is still "running a business."

If it's not in their financial "best interest", no matter their resources, they aren't going to do it.

How exactly is that in the investor's best interest.  Catering to both markets would net them more money than chasing only after one.  Investors care about the bottom line, they don't care if the company has to work hard to get it.  The mobile market might be easier to milk, but if I were invested in Blizzard, I'd be pissed if they left behind a perfectly good revenue market that combined with the new income would be more money in my pocket.

Investors want to make as much money as possible. Delving into a less profitable market instead of the most will not sit well with them.
Again you are thinking as a non-investor, methinks The real investors, not small-timers.

No, you're acting as if Blizzard is a small company that isn't capable of penetrating and catering to multiple markets.  The natural progression for any company is to widen their market share and penetrate new markets, adding them to their portfolio and increasing and maximizing overall profits.  Burning bridges is not in any company's best financial or PR interest.  It makes no sense to give up one for the other when they could easily have both.

If they are stupid enough to do that, then to heck with them.  Some other company with new faces and new ideas will take their place and we PC gamers will at least continue as normal or even better yet, enjoy new games with greater innovation by companies that haven't forgotten who made them rich in the first place.

Sovrath

Vorthanion said:

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

Sovrath said:

Vorthanion said:

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

That makes absolutely no sense.  You do not ignore profitable markets just because some are larger than others, you exploit all of them if you are a smart company.

You do ignore them if you want to concentrate your resources to making the maximum profit.

If spending 30 million dollars (just winging it there) to make a 5 million dollar profit is then compared to spending 30 million to make a 100 million dollar profit the course of the company is clear.

Blizzard is not an indie company with limited resources or personnel, hence my comment.

Yeah, but they are a publicly traded company.

And publicly traded companies are in the business of making the most money for their investors.

So they invest in "x game", it doesn't make "that much money" (but does make money) and their investors go "why?"

The problem with your statement is that it's a "gamer" statement. It doesn't take into account that running a business is still "running a business."

If it's not in their financial "best interest", no matter their resources, they aren't going to do it.

How exactly is that in the investor's best interest.  Catering to both markets would net them more money than chasing only after one.  Investors care about the bottom line, they don't care if the company has to work hard to get it.  The mobile market might be easier to milk, but if I were invested in Blizzard, I'd be pissed if they left behind a perfectly good revenue market that combined with the new platform would result in more money in my pocket.

Again, and I can only assume you don't or have never worked in publicly traded companies, that's not how it works.

It's not like "hey, we have 1 billion dollars let's do everything with greater and lesser success"

It's "hey, we have 1 billion dollars, where can we use that money to get the most bang for the buck"

So if they have 100 million to invest in a new Warcraft RTS but they know that spending that money in mobile will get them MORE money, they will use it in Mobile.

Companies plan out their product roadmap in advance. True, there is something to say about being agile in the marketplace in order to respond to various trends, but they have taken into account their resources, their hiring, their teams, what revenue they have, what their expenditures are going to be, with the possibility of future growth and where they want that growth to be.

So if you are not seeing a Warcraft 4 it's because they just don't see it as being viable AND/OR they just don't want to do it as they want to do other things. With an eye on those other things being profitable.

"but if I were invested in Blizzard, I'd be pissed if they left behind a perfectly good revenue market that combined with the new platform would result in more money in my pocket."

No, you would be pissed if they didn't invest in mobile and didn't take advantage of that market to the maximum as it would net you more money. You are only assuming that investing in an RTS will make you more money because you like it.

paul43

I would be surprised if they release another RTS now. It's not that in the wind. My guess is that they try to tap the Battle Royale market. Blizzard is not shy about tapping into markets dominated by other games. The only thing that mattter to Blizzard is money.

ciely

inb4 they release a p2w warcraft / starcraft for the mobile where you can buy and upgrade units (imagine it taking like 4-12 hours or spend money for instant upgrades) *vomit* yeah i lost hope in blizzard a long time ago

Akulas

I'd buy a WC4 game where WC3 left off. Even though we've already seen the story in WoW. There's a market of people who would want to experience that in an RTS format. Could drag it on for years and make alot of money out of it. So why not. But that won't happen even if WC4 did.

k61977

The issue with a Warcraft 4 is where do they pick up at and what do they do with the story?   It wouldn't really make to much sense to make it follow the story of 3 because they pretty much did that with WoW.  So would they jump ahead years and start a new story, that would make more sense in reality. 

The biggest issue is the company that made those games though no longer exist in reality.  That was back when Blizzard was a company ran by gamers and made games for gamers.  Today it is more of a profit for shareholders kind of company, which there is nothing wrong with except the gaming portion can get hurt by people rushing things or changing things to make more money instead of a good game.

Shaigh

I'm sure they are working on starcraft 3 but blizzard hasn't been a company that releases sequels quickly for ages. Had to wait 12 years between starcracft 1 and 2, 12 years between diablo 2 and 3. Its only been 3 years since the last starcraft expansion.

They have the patience and money to go back to the drawing board if they are unhappy about something in development.

gervaise1

If you read what they said in their latest results they very much are thinking of .....  Warcraft:Mobile and Starcraft:Mobile.

TheDarkrayne

SedrynTyros said:

I think the market has shown that RTS has become somewhat old hat.  Don't get me wrong, I think Warcraft 4 would be very profitable just counting the sales from Blizzard fans alone, but RTS is no longer at the forefront of gaming like it was from 1993 to the mid-2000s.

Everyone said the same thing about cRPGs and isometric aRPGs too...