2009 Vaporware Awards

[bhamv3]

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/12/vaporware-2009-inhale-the-fail/

I was gonna post this in Games but apparently it's not just software.

And I say the number 1 spot should have been jointly shared between Black Mesa and Episode 3.

 

[Joe Johnson]

Maybe for Black Mesa. For Episode 3 - everyone knows that Valve dates need to be adjusted accordingly:

http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Valve_Time

 

[@Li3n]

There should be no number one as no game can ever dethrone DNF...


Also, the fact that SCII twitter updates nowadays are about them adding doodads and making trees have better shadows makes it pretty obvious that the game is finished, they're just waiting on bnet 2.0... i blame WoW.

 

[LordRavage]

I thought the title said...2009 Vampire awards.

I was like "They have award shows now?"

 

[Joe Johnson]

LOL - between all the vampire and zombie movies we've had the past few years, there SHOULD be awards.

 

[Iaculus]

LOL - between all the vampire and zombie movies we've had the past few years, there SHOULD be awards.

With lots of glitter for the Twilight fans!

 

[Chazwozel]

I'm enjoying the Blizzard Fanboi response to why the fuck StarCraft 2 isn't out yet. Really, it's not that much more of a step up from Warcraft 3.

 

[Vagabond]

Oh Crunchpad, what a spectacular failure you've turned out to be.

Where is my gaming streaming service, via OnLive?

And damn it I still want to play Blur.

 

[@Li3n]

I'm enjoying the Blizzard Fanboi response to why the fuck StarCraft 2 isn't out yet. Really, it's not that much more of a step up from Warcraft 3.

Hmmm...

WC2 - dec 1995
WC2x- april 1996
WC3 - july 2003

SC1 - march 1998
SC1x - nov 1998
SC2 - Q1/Q2 2010

8 years vs 12 years... plus they released Starcraft and Diablo 2 and exps in the meantime... while WoW came out in 2004... with the first exp in 2007...

And i'm pretty sure WC3 came out somewhat less then 2 years after it was first announced.


Sure, they always delay their games (Starcraft was no exception, the "operation cwal" cheat code was a nod to a group that called itself that as in "can't wait any longer"), but at least they had some announced deadlines so one could at least a approximate how many months after that the game would come out.

 

[Chazwozel]

I'm enjoying the Blizzard Fanboi response to why the fuck StarCraft 2 isn't out yet. Really, it's not that much more of a step up from Warcraft 3.

Hmmm...

WC2 - dec 1995
WC2x- april 1996
WC3 - july 2003

SC1 - march 1998
SC1x - nov 1998
SC2 - Q1/Q2 2010

8 years vs 12 years... plus they released Starcraft and Diablo 2 and exps in the meantime... while WoW came out in 2004... with the first exp in 2007...

And i'm pretty sure WC3 came out somewhat less then 2 years after it was first announced.


Sure, they always delay their games (Starcraft was no exception, the "operation cwal" cheat code was a nod to a group that called itself that as in "can't wait any longer"), but at least they had some announced deadlines so one could at least a approximate how many months after that the game would come out.[/QUOTE]

I meant that the graphics and gameplay are very, very similar to the Warcraft 3 engine. Blizzard Devs are lazy as fuck.

 

[Troll]

I meant that the graphics and gameplay are very, very similar to the Warcraft 3 engine. Blizzard Devs are lazy as fuck.

They have a fan base of rabid junkies who will scoop up whatever they put out and declare it to be the best ever. Why should they work hard when they don't have to?

 

[Twitch]

I meant that the graphics and gameplay are very, very similar to the Warcraft 3 engine. Blizzard Devs are lazy as fuck.

They have a fan base of rabid junkies who will scoop up whatever they put out and declare it to be the best ever. Why should they work hard when they don't have to?[/quote]
Because they've done that so far with anything they've made. They have fans for a reason.

 

[@Li3n]

I meant that the graphics and gameplay are very, very similar to the Warcraft 3 engine. Blizzard Devs are lazy as fuck.

That was years ago... and the entire blizz forum was up in arms about it... the game looks way better now. http://www.starcraft2.com/features/battlereports/4.xml Still is meant to work on lower end PC's though, so it's probably not graphics whore material...

And the gameplay is closer to SC1, and let's face it, changing it would get them murdered by a rush of koreans sneaking in the back of the base by dropship.

---------- Post added at 11:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 PM ----------

I believe this is the lates graphics upgrade:

 

[LordRendar]

Is that concept art? or are the in-game unit actually gonna look like that?

 

[General Specific]

Heh, for anyone complaining about SC2's release date, they haven't been paying attention to Blizzard's development processes, have they? Blizzard are perfectionists, but they know when a game is good enough. As a result, their games constantly get pushed back, but are always of high quality.

My parents paid for Diablo 2 for me as a Christmas present one year and I actually got the game a few weeks before my birthday... in July.

 

[@Li3n]

@General Specific

Thing is, for SC2 they didn't even bother to announce any release dates, and the game has looked more finished then many released ones for over a year now and there's still no beta. And the reason the beta was delayed to 2010 is because of bnet 2.0, and not because of the state of the game (like i said before, they're now working of sp doodads and better shadows for trees).

Is that concept art? or are the in-game unit actually gonna look like that?

How can that look like concept art to you when it's clearly rendered on a computer?!

And i linked to the latest battle report, go see for yourself (you can d/l in HD).