Starcraft: Ghost

Dazuro · April 10, 2007, 1:51am

Read my edit, please.

Also, I just checked the other servers.

There are approximately 30,000 users on Brood War in all four servers. Checking SC now.

Plus all the players that aren’t on Battlenet at all… and those that just plain aren’t active at the moment…

Ah, 5.3-5.5 thousand on each server there.

The numbers were all pretty close, so maybe it was reading every server at once–a so there’s about a 35,000 minimum… and that’s just at one given time, on a Monday of all times, which is hardly prime time for SC.

SNIPER · April 10, 2007, 1:56am

Read my edit please.
Ok, it wasn’t much of an edit, but what I really said was:
Compare it with other stats to show it is number 1.

Dazuro · April 10, 2007, 1:57am

I don’t have any of those handy. Care to elaborate?

But either way, my point is that there are plenty of casual players–tourneys are done via lan, so that’s at least 35,000 casual players during a relatively inactive time.

SNIPER · April 10, 2007, 2:00am

As in:
SC = 1000000000 players
WC3 = 3.14159 insert rest of Pie here

And yes, SC has tourneys, but it’s page isn’t updated with news of major events as much as WC3.

Dazuro · April 10, 2007, 2:01am

WC3 isn’t nearly as popular as SC, at least in the serious melee scene. WC3 is most loved for its editor and for custom maps. And it’s the standard game players that would want an expansion most.

Also, none of what you just said had any relevance to what I asked for to begin with.

SNIPER · April 10, 2007, 2:04am

Unbelievably rediculously unnecessarily too true. WC3 is all mass. SC is all skilled mass. The WC3 custom games are amazingly fun and addicting. And for the record, I do believe WC3 has more players on B.NET. Include more local tourneys and LAN parties and you might have a larger number than SC

But, will the less diehard fans really return to a 2D relic just to spend $50 (or w/e) on when they can play other, more recent, 3D RTSs?

Dazuro · April 10, 2007, 2:12am

Gotta love how you try to put a biased spin on a masterpiece by using such derogatory terms for it. Can’t you make your point just by saying “StarCraft”? Or do you lack any serious backup so you have to resort to saying “old 2d relic” etc in the hopes that no one will call you on it?

Also, it wouldn’t be nearly that expensive. SC and BW together are only 20 bucks any more.

SNIPER · April 10, 2007, 2:15am

lol you’re right. But you see, relic = good. relic = old. It fits everything I believe it to be. And yes, SC:BattleChest is $20-30, but a NEW expansion would have to be more if Blizzard wants to pay it’s workers.
Just so you all know, Daz and I have been taking up around one page just debating from 8:30 to 9:15 Central time. IDK 'bout you Daz, but I have school tomorrow.

Timmeh · April 10, 2007, 5:41am

SNIPER, give it up already. The only two games you think have any chance of competing for “best RTS” are SC and WC3, right?
Well, SC is more popular. End of story. Even if it wasn’t, the fact is that millions of people would want another SC game. If WoW was successful, then StarCraft 2 will just be… the thing. I dunno any other way of putting it.

Dazuro · April 10, 2007, 6:13am

He isn’t denying that. He’s denying a second expansion.

Timmeh · April 10, 2007, 8:24am

SNIPER, give it up already. The only two games you think have any chance of competing for “best RTS” are SC and WC3, right?
Well, SC is more popular. End of story. Even if it wasn’t, the fact is that millions of people would want another SC release. If WoW was successful, then another SC expansion will just be… the thing. I dunno any other way of putting it.

Fixed? <_<

SNIPER · April 11, 2007, 1:11am

Was! Was! Was! Was! Was! Was! Was! Was!
copy and paste ten more times. Then copy and paste that ten more times

Yes, an updated game with an updated engine.

Timmeh · April 11, 2007, 1:30am

No, is. Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is! Is!
Yes, they would prefer a new game. But they would love an expansion, too.

SNIPER · April 11, 2007, 1:34am

Do you have stats?

Would you like a game released using the Quake engine today?

Timmeh · April 11, 2007, 2:25am

Yes(see Daz’s posts). Do you?
…FPS engines have improved. RTS engines haven’t, really. The only thing wrong with SC is perhaps the AI. Daz will attest to that >_>

SNIPER · April 11, 2007, 2:27am

Again, stats compared to other stats. RTS Engines have also improved. They aren’t 2D anymore to start.

Timmeh · April 11, 2007, 2:40am

So they can run less objects. Whee?

Dazuro · April 11, 2007, 3:08am

The recent 2D Castlevanias are hailed time and time again as the amongst greatest games of all time.

The 3D entries get panned constantly.

The DS’s 2D-focused lineup sells infinitely better than the PSP’s 3D-focus–and one of the most common uses of a PSP is to emulate old, 2D games.

The 2D Warcrafts (and their space-themed successor) are amongst the most influential and popular RTS’s of all time.

The 3D Warcraft, editor aside, was a flop.

…

Yet a SC expansion being 2D is your main reason that it wouldn’t sell?

SNIPER · April 13, 2007, 12:52am

No, I said it was to start. Here is some more:
New RTSs are adopting the “Hero” thing. SC is as of right now, “hero-less” and will remain “hero-less”.
New RTSs are adding more varieties. SC re-released would be a cliche.

The “2D WCs” and their space successors aren’t on the top “to-buy” list. WC3: BC is still ranked on Top 10.

You can’t make a 2D platformer 3D without a lot of change. RTSs can be 2D or 3D with relatively no difference.

You guys might still be living in the ancient gaming ages, but the rest of the world has evolved.

Dazuro · April 13, 2007, 1:32am

Um, SC isnt a top seller any more because everyone already HAS it. >_>