Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Starcraft Ghost Put On Hold 110

After numerous previous delays, Blizzard has made the likelihood we'll ever play Starcraft: Ghost effectively nil. They've announced they're putting game development on hold indefinitely, as they're reconsidering options for the next generation of consoles. From the Gamespy article: "Like many in the industry, we've been impressed with the potential of the new consoles, and we're looking forward to exploring that potential further ... In addition to allowing us to determine the best course for StarCraft: Ghost, this review period will help us lay the groundwork for our future console games."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Starcraft Ghost Put On Hold

Comments Filter:
  • by gEvil (beta) ( 945888 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @06:43PM (#14995230)
    So, the game that was announced five years ago that was going to run on the then "next generation consoles" (ps2, gc, xbox) is now being put on hold to decide if it will run on the current "next generation consoles" (ps3, 360, rev)? Just turn the thing into a damn PC game and get it out the door!
    • by flyingsquid ( 813711 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @06:48PM (#14995252)
      "So, the game that was announced five years ago that was going to run on the then "next generation consoles" (ps2, gc, xbox) is now being put on hold to decide if it will run on the current "next generation consoles" (ps3, 360, rev)

      Maybe their production facilities are running low on crystals and vespene gas.

      • Then just hire a rich rapper that has eaten a lot of beans!

        Jeez, do we have to think of everything??
      • Maybe their production facilities are running low on crystals and vespene gas.
        Ohhh, perfect! Time to launch my zerg rush!

        Kekekekekekekekekekekekeke ^___^
      • It's called, "Oh, shit. We could make World of Starcraft on these Consoles and make bank."
      • I think its that they have too many customers playing WoW and have reached their farm limit. Spawn more overlords!

        No, seriously, that wasn't just a joke. Where is the higher return on investment for a couple million dollars and thousands of hours of programmer time -- improving WoW's sales by 5% or delivering a smash-hit console FPS? When you sell a box of FPS: The Killing for the PlayCube360, you have to split the pie with the console manufacturer (license fees) and the retail store. When you sell an

        • the rest is almost pure profit directly in your pocket

          Profit is what's left over when you take salary bill, maintenance, taxes, etc off the money you have coming in. In the case of WoW, they'll have server maintenance, bandwidth bills, possibly hosting charges, staff salaries, etc.

          I know what point you were trying to make - that they get more of the money - but it's wrong to describe it as being "pure profit".
          • At 5 million subscribes x $15/month = $75,000,000 million / year, I'd say it's "pure profit."

            (Yes, I know their currency is spread is across USD, Yen, and Euro's. That doesn't change the fact that the 1st generation of MMORPG proved that you can sustain profitability with as little as 200,000 subscribes, which they are well past.)
      • They have one SCV, they'll never surrender...
    • Why bother finishing off the game when they have just realised (with World of Warcraft) how much money a single MMORPG game can make them?!

      From Blizzard's point of view, they've just discovered a Warcraft goldmine that has 999,999,999,999 gold!

      That means it's time to... SEND THE PEONS!
    • Just turn the thing into a damn PC game and get it out the door!

      Don't say that! Having worked at Atari for six years, I've seen a lot of PC titles tossed out the door before they were ready. If the game sold a lot, it would get a patch. Otherwise, the patch gets cancelled because the corporate office didn't want to waste money. (Never mind that if more effort went into avoiding a patch in the first place, the bean counters wouldn't be crying about wasted money.) Blizzard should do it right or not do it a
    • So, the game that was announced five years ago

      I knew it was quite awhile ago and was curious about exactly when. Then i saw the "Related Stories" section which contained a link to an article about the original announcement and figured i could check that out. You know, as long as they're going to start putting links to old articles right at the top they really need to update the dates to include the year, rather than make us decypher it from the URL.

      Incidentally, said URL claims it was announced around N

  • by Anonymous Coward
    I'm not so sure about putting it on hold indefinitely. I heard it was coming out right after Duke Nukem Forever! Man it will be a great time for gaming then!
  • Damn, just damn (Score:3, Insightful)

    by larry bagina ( 561269 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @06:45PM (#14995236) Journal
    Of course, I love starcraft. So the good news is we can imagine how awesome this game would be without the disappointment of it not living up to our expectations.
    • Re:Damn, just damn (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MustardMan ( 52102 )
      Me, I actually thought it sounded kind of lame... a starcraft FPS? Come on, I don't want them wasting their time on this. I want them building STARCRAFT TWO.

      I lived for starcraft over battle.net, and I'd love to see an updated version. Warcraft 3 was OK, but I liked the scifi feel of starcraft much better.
      • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @07:09PM (#14995345)
        Warcraft 3 was OK, but I liked the scifi feel of starcraft much better.
        I liked the "send 400 Zerglings hurtling towards the enemy base all at once" feel better, as opposed to Warcraft 3's "micromanage 2 units" feel.
        • I've always hoped that Starcraft 2 would be more Battlezone [planetbattlezone.com]-esque, with the player managing/building/leading from the ground.
        • Re:Damn, just damn (Score:3, Interesting)

          by drxray ( 839725 )
          "send 400 Zerglings hurtling towards the enemy base all at once" Don't you mean: Select 12 zerglings, send to enemy Select 12 zerglings, send to enemy Select 12 zerglings, send to enemy Select 12 zerglings, send to enemy... Starcraft is great in many ways, but awful in several others. Instead of Ghost can't we just have a version with better squad handling, order queues, and not locked to 640x480*? It'd take them a month to make, and me and half a million other fans would buy it. It's like they have so m
          • It's the same difference, since they'd just bunch up if you really sent them at once anyway.

            But yeah, I agree with you on all points. Also, regarding the resolution: that's where 3D rendering would come in handy, because they could make the game display a consistently-sized area of the map but scale everything on it to whatever resolution you want.
        • 400 Unit rushes? I think you mispelled Total Annihilation. StarCraft was the pinnacle of the old-style of midscale RTS, whereas WC3 cut the scale down further - but make no mistake, StarCraft was very limited in scale, partly because of the 12 unit limit, but also because of hte excruciating pain of managing spellcasters.

          TA is the large scale game. Go play TA spring to see a real monstrous war.
          • Well, the 400 zerglings is an extreme example, because they're only a half-unit each. Also, to get that many you'd have to kill off all your workers, and to execute the "strategy" without being killed you'd have to have already crippled your opponent.
      • Duke Nukem was the last FPS I really enjoyed, but I was hoping SC Ghost could pull it off. To be honest, I expected it to mediocre, like Matrix 2, or Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel.

        I agree about SC vs WCIII.

        • Duke Nukem was the last FPS I really enjoyed, but I was hoping SC Ghost could pull it off. To be honest, I expected it to mediocre, like Matrix 2, or Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel
          Blizzard do their best to keep their fans happy, especially in this regard. I have it on good authority that the new release date for SC:Ghost is planned 4 weeks after Duke Nukem Forever comes out.
      • I agree. Starcraft was much better than WC3, and is probably the best RTS made so far. However, I also really hope Starcraft is not the end of the genre and Blizzard actually tries to make Starcraft2.

        As such their refocusing on cosnoles is really worrying. It is well known that RTSs have always sucked on consoles. If Blizzard decides to go to consoles they will probably abandon the RTS genre.
        • I don't understand all the haters of of WC3. The game is superior in many gameplay ways. I understand some people don't like having to micro a little more but cry me a river. Hero management and having a reasonable amount of units you can pay attention seems to involve a lot more skill and strategy (not to mention turtling doesn't draw the game out for dozens of minutes). oh well. Just don't hate on the hero concept simply because you don't "get it"

          Give me Starcraft II and a 2nd WC3 expansion. k, thx
    • I don't know, I was always surprised that Blizzard was working on a StarCraft spinoff rather than a sequel. I don't love Blizzard, but I would certainly buy StarCraft 2 and Diablo 3. But a StarCraft FPS? Nah.
    • So...you are going to get in line with the DNF folks, huh?
  • I thought Starcraft ghost was simply going to be released to run on windows PCs.
    I don't see why the latest consoles are a big deal.
    • installed base.

      While the number of PCs out there is huge, the number of game consoles is huge as well, and console games have been selling better than PC games for several years now.
    • Starcraft Ghost was being made to target just consoles, with no PC version planned.
    • There was once a game released multiplatform for PC and PS2. The PC version sold 50000 copies, not bad for a PC game. the PS2 version sold 500000, not enough for it to be considered a blockbuster but enough to do a sequel, which was PS2 only.

      When you can sell 10x as many copies on a console as you can a PC that's the reason.

      Blizzard got their start doing console development, as Silicon and Synapse. Rock and Roll Racing for the SNES, that's Blizzard. I don't know why they abandoned them but abandon they
  • In other words... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Psiven ( 302490 )
    "We're going to wait and see how the PS3 shakes out compared to the Xbox 360. The 2 platforms are so different that we can't afford publish on both of them."
  • by Perseid ( 660451 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @06:46PM (#14995246)
    The sequel to Starcraft: Ghost, tentatively named Starcraft: Ghost Forever, is tentatively slated for early 2007...
    • This is actually something that I admire about Blizzard. If they think a game isn't working, they can it, even if it's been in development for years. See: Warcraft Aventures.
      • Hu? Didn't Warcraft Adventures get turned into World of Warcraft?
        • No, no no no no no! Warcraft Adventures was a point-and-click 2D adventure game, much like the old Monkey Island games, or The Dig and other LucasArts titles. It was essentially completed, but needed a lot of tuning for puzzle difficulty and "fun factor".

          While it was still in development, a Monkey Island 4 came out and basically made every 2D adventure game look obsolete. Blizzard realized that Warcraft Adventuers didn't meet the new bar for adventure games, and they were having a lot of trouble fine-tun
  • Great. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    So instead of innovative games offering multifaceted gameplay we get online environments where people can yell at each other [ytmnd.com]. Suck.
  • I believe that makes the release schedule as follows:
    1) Nintendo Revolution/Go
    2) Playstation 3
    3) Duke Nukem Forever
    4) Phantom Console
    5) Starcraft Ghost
  • by MagicDude ( 727944 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @06:58PM (#14995291)
    This is a brilliant move to promote the stealthyness of SCG. What kind of stealth based game would it be if you could see it coming from 6 months ahead of time? Come christmas time, you'll walk into your local Best Buy, and there will be a huge display which just appeared overnight. Even the register biscuits [penny-arcade.com] won't know how it got there. It'll be beautiful.
  • It appears that the success of WoW has made Blizzard even lazier than they were before.

    Blizz Guy A: "Hey Bob, should we, uh, you know... start programming Ghost again? (Beavis laugh)"

    Blizz Guy B:"What's the point, Dick... we're making more money than we know what to do with in subscription fees... just go look at more night elf porn, dumbass. (Butthead laugh)"
    • Re:Curses. (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Heh-heh-heh.... You said "Dick".

    • Re:Curses. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by feyhunde ( 700477 )
      Remember that their parent company VU is one of the world's largest media companies now, has had losses in the range of Bill Gates's entire wealth, and the good chunk of one billion USD that Wow pulls in is the only thing keeping their gaming division afloat. Folks who play wow know that it's not getting alot of it's profits reinvested. Player theory is like Sony Games keeping Sony's other divisions up, VU is using Wow to get urgent hard cash. Because they're such fucking sad sacks of shit, instead of usin
      • There are very few things that get me riled up, but one of them is how lots of really good game companies are bought out by big corporations run by useless MBA hotshots. Then, the management of the big corporation uses up all the profits from the good gaming company to cover its big and corporate fuck ups, then they have the balls to say "Hey, games aren't an art form, why isn't there more going on, more innovation?? HURRR!"
  • I gave $5 to GameStop over 2 years ago to reserve a copy of this... guess I should go get the money back, or use it towards Kingdom Hearts 2, or something. :-p
  • This is news? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Rendo ( 918276 )
    Much like the delay with Diablo 2, this doesn't surprise me coming from Blizzard. Their lack of dedication and work ethic makes me want to boycott all Blizzard games now. It's disgusting how they only focus on ONE game, and we all know what game that is, because it generates the most income for them. Maybe one day Blizzard will regain a reputation again that will make me want to buy their games. DIGUSTING.
    • Re:This is news? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by MBraynard ( 653724 )
      Looking at the same events with a different perspective, they are looking to generate money by making people the most happy. (Very different from how government's generate money).

      So to maximize profits/happiness, they have decided to scrap a game that seemed a little unoriginal. It read like a combo between Halo and splinter Cell. It might have come out a little like Brute Force - a great game, but not Blizzard Worthy.

      These guys have never failed to hit it out of the park and they are the only company I w

    • Re:This is news? (Score:4, Informative)

      by code-e255 ( 670104 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @09:16PM (#14995790)
      Blizzard has several different studios. The main one's working on World of Warcraft (they're working on the expansion, The Burning Crusade atm); Blizzard North, which made the Diablo games, is working on some new unannounced project, and Swinging Ape Studios are working on SC: Ghost. So no, the company isn't really focusing on only one game. Lack of dedication and work ethic? Get a clue, mate. Blizzard is arguably the best game developer in the world. The reason why they're indefinitely delaying Starcraft: Ghost is probably because it's not amazingly great, not because they just can't be bothered working on it anymore. Blizzard, unlike Electronic Arts, don't make games for the same of making money per se; they make games because they love games. Because their games have all been extremely successful, and because they've got millions of die-hard fans, releasing something that's below their quality standard would only tarnish their name. They've got enough money, so they can afford to indefinitely delay a project. Ever heard of Warcraft Adventures? They completely cancelled that game after years of development because it didn't live up to their standards.
      • Best game developer in the world that's made, essentially, 4 games? Starcraft was a nice RTS, yes, but it's not the be-all, end-all of the genre. It might not even be the best! *gasp*. One of those games was Diablo (1/2, same difference), which wasn't a game so much as an interactive right forefinger exercise. Fun, perhaps. But while fun may make a game enjoyable or good, it alone cannot make a game great. WoW didn't do anything innovative, just refined what others had done. It made things easier on the pla
        • As opposed to, say, Enix, or Nintendo, or hell, even an oldie like Hudson. Companies that have made more than just 7 games, and in most cases did something new and spectacular with them. Sure, Blizzard may make solid games. But they make so few, and the few they make are by no means head and shoulders above the rest, that calling them the best is a joke.

          PC devs are lazy bums compared to the console dev houses. 7 games in how many years. You'd never catch Squeenix, Zipper, Insomniac, or even SOE with sucky

        • Also, they made the lost vikings and rock and roll racing for the super nintendo. I loved those games when I was a kid.
    • Their lack of dedication and work ethic makes me want to boycott all Blizzard games now.
      And their extermination of bnetd and FreeCraft didn't??!
    • Re:This is news? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by shumway ( 411915 )
      Err. Wouldn't a lazy and undedicated team just poop out games to exploit the licenses? I never understood why people get so hung up on release dates...Haven't all the games that are released with show-stopping bugs or tacked-on endings just to make a financial quarter taught us anything? For me the quality of the game is the main issue, and apparently for Blizzard as well.

      Also, these are completely separate dev teams I believe. Diablo II was definitely Blizzard North, and I believe that Ghost is their c
    • *Ahem*

      1. It's disgusting how they only focus on ONE game, and we all know what game that is, because it generates the most income for them.

      Reread that sentence. Pretend you are running a business.

      2. How do you think Blizzard developed the reputation it has? It hasn't rushed games out, traditionally having only one or two in development at a time, and they all have -long- development cycles to ensure they're ground-breaking games.

    • Re:This is news? (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A little disappointment I can understand, but I'd rather any media company cancel an inferior product instead of unloading it on the market. You're talking about the release date of a video game, which was completely arbitrary in the first place. It's not a service promised to you, it's not a delayed FedEx package or a repairman who didn't show up to fix your utility. You aren't out time or money and there's absolutely no reason you should be so hostile. Blizzard doesn't OWE you Starcraft Ghost. You don
    • Have they even been able to be arsed to release any new games since WoW launched?
    • Starcraft Ghost development has been in and out of Blizzards hands enough that its ever being published is not terribly likely. The head honchos at blizzard have an extreme control complex, so all the parts that were done out of house will no doubt need to be trashed before they'll feel satisfied to release it. At the same time, they don't like to throw work away, so actually trashing the out of house parts will be hard for them to do.

      There are basically four (and a half) development teams at blizzard the
    • - Blizzard has SEVERAL teams, just like any other big gaming studio, that work on different projects at the same time. The only time I know of when they've lent development time from other teams (in relatively large scale) was when they were pushing the deadline for World of Warcraft about a year ago (this is as I've heard, so take it with a grain of salt).

      - Diablo 2 was delayed because it simply wasn't finished (Just look at Act 4. It was promised to be the largest out of all the four acts, yet it was t
  • If you've checked the latest (!) graphics and platforms (PS2...), you'll see it's a yesterday's-generation game and looking about as good as Unreal Tournament 2003.

    It would be perfect if it was released just about the end of 2006 / early 2007, but with an entirely different engine + art and geared for Xbox 360 and/or PS3. But Blizzard would never have time for *that* in such a short time, and if taking more time, then the game would stand out too much, now would it?
  • Screw Ghost (Score:4, Informative)

    by Doomstalk ( 629173 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @09:11PM (#14995778)
    I'm still waiting for Warcraft Adventures [wikipedia.org]!
    • Looks like Starcraft Ghost is going to earn a place right next to Warcraft Adventures as a cancelled project. A shame...I was really looking forward to Warcraft Adventures. Ah well, at least they more or less released its story in a book: Lord of the Clans.
    • You should stop waiting. It just wasn't any fun. Nor was it funny. Or well drawn. Really, it was crap.
  • Not surprising (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shoptroll ( 544006 ) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @10:06PM (#14995953)
    I really think the problem with Ghost is that they know that it isn't going to whet any Starcraft fan's appetite. On the other hand, they've invested so much (as it seems) into building this that they can't axe it like they did Warcraft Adventures.

    Unfortunately, having announced this before the Xbox was originally released and now with the XBox on its way to its deathbed I'm not entirely surprised to see this getting put on hold permenantly or for the next gen depending on which story you want to believe. With it's only target platforms getting phased out at the end of the year is not a good time to release especially if you want to get anything back on a title thats been in development as long as this has.

    Let's not forget that its shifted development teams twice and then brought internal when they acquired the last development studio that was working on it. Also, I believe the gameplay and style was different at every E3 it was shown at (based on reports), which doesn't help either.

    Sadly, the name is quite fitting now.
    • Nooo! I think the game will turn out exactly as we all hope it would be. a Mass Multi Player Real Time Strategy Game. Here is the check list: 1 - Subscription Engine 2 - 3D Model of SC Characters To do: 1 - Shared service with the monthly subscription between SC and WC. a little bit like you would be able to play SC/WC/Diablo on Battle.net (this would ensure you increase your fan base from SC to the paying world, while not reducing the gametime on the WC World. Sony makes it that you would have to play f
  • they're generating so much revenue from warcraft online subscriptions that they can sit around and twiddle their thumbs.
  • Yay! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Sunday March 26, 2006 @01:16AM (#14996506)
    So now the Phantom will have two pack-in games!

    This is going to be the best N64 game ever!
  • by Over00 ( 591403 )
    Why do they even care to announce games. Is it proven that hyped raised sales%
  • I guess there was more to it than counting all the money [penny-arcade.com].

    However, remember that a lot of the background of Warcraft 3 came from the WarCraft Adventures: Lord of the Clans adventure game so maybe we might see some of Starcraft: Ghost in say Starcraft 2.

  • by hellfire ( 86129 ) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `vdalived'> on Sunday March 26, 2006 @02:37AM (#14996705) Homepage
    I'll admit, I'm not following SCG because I don't general play FPS. However, I will say this is not the first time Blizzard has axed a game well into development, and frankly, I applaud them.

    They had some kind of weird video RPG story game (it kind of looked like the 80s dragonslayer) that had Thrall as a young orc in a slave camp, and you played him growing up or some weird stuff like that. Weird premise for a game at that time, and they were right to think "no one will buy this it's so 80s, lets kill this crap."

    How much crap has been hyped, delayed, delayed again, put on hold, taken off, and then finally brought to market and shown to be the crap it really was. Why put us all through that?

    If Ghost is not going to be a game we can expect something different, fun, or unique of, then lets kill it and move on. I never did like the marketing department at Blizzard as their marketing always comes out like everyone of them has an upper cocktail for breakfast and hype there stuff waaaaaaay too much, but kudos to the people at Blizzard who have the balls to say "this is crap, shut it down and stop the bleeding now. We aren't going to make money." And that's the real thing, will SCG be any real breakout exciting title? Or will it look like a Halo clone based off of a PC strategy game who's only fans will be fans of that strategy game?

    Real corporations start projects and kill them all the time without releasing to market. Unfortunately software companies push these projects too hard and announce them very very early as compared to the rest of the business world. It's a skill to know when to kill a project just as much as when to start it.
    • They had some kind of weird video RPG story game (it kind of looked like the 80s dragonslayer) that had Thrall as a young orc in a slave camp, and you played him growing up or some weird stuff like that. Weird premise for a game at that time, and they were right to think "no one will buy this it's so 80s, lets kill this crap."

      It was an ADVENTURE GAME! How old are you, 15?

    • Warcraft Adventures: Lord of the Clans was an adventure game.

      it was axed because adventure games suck.

      in order for an adventure game to be good it has to be an oscar-worthy movie.
      games that play out like movies suck.

      Starcraft Ghost is at the very least, a stealthy adventure game, which is a hell of a lot better than a movie. If you've ever played the Hitman series, or anything remotely similar, you'll know that they are a very different kind of game from an adventure game. The same premise is there: there
    • I dunno, people seemed to buy Vice City in decent enough numbers, and that was very '80s...
    • This is completely true. Blizzard has a reputation for high quality games - Warcraft, Warcraft II & III, and Starcraft were revolutionary in their respective times. Blizzard's devs aren't superhuman, they just have very high standards. I applaud them for axing this game. I am a huge fan of the Starcraft RTS, but just because they can carry the universe over to a FPS doesn't mean they should. Holding their company to standards high enough to cancel a game this far into development just restores my faith
    • They had some kind of weird video RPG story game (it kind of looked like the 80s dragonslayer)

      Adventure game. Adventure game. You know, like Final Fantasy but with all of the statistics and weapons and random encounters and combat and shit replaced with impossible logical-after-the-fact puzzles [oldmanmurray.com] and pixel-hunting problems. Just as many cutscenes (no FMVs, though ones that included that tended to suck even more) and as much aimless wandering. If you want a good example of the genre, check out ScummVM [sourceforge.net] - th

  • Thank goodness I didn't buy that Blizzard Software Assurance contract...
  • It's almost creepy how I just played through the first 3 episodes of Starcraft last night (okay, so I cheated through some of the Protoss missions - hate em). Then I uninstalled it and asked myself why the hell I even bothered. I seem to be the one guy on this planet who isn't in love with Starcraft. Once my disk was wiped I proceeded to load C&C and Red Alert instead ;)
  • Stick the Starcraft units in teh Warcraft III engine and we'll all be happy.
    • No thanks, I don't want to deal with quasi-RPG "hero" unit bullshit in StarCraft as well. Gimme me my marines and I'm a happy camper.
      • You raise a valid point for Starcraft 2, but think about what Starcraft Ghost was originally supposed to be: you're a ghost and you've got to sneak in and do sneaky things without being seen.
    • *cough* Warcraft 3 has an editor. you can do that already by creating your own custom models.

      even if the custom model is a big floating purple box labeled "Battlecruiser".
  • Who really cares if Ghost doesn't come out....it wouldn't have been Starcraft anyway. And they stated that too. From what I recall, it would have been more like MG:S and the only thing Starcrafty about it would be the name.

    This is one thing I never understood about Blizzard: They had a hugely successful franchise in the *craft games and let one MAJOR part of it (Starcraft) just rot. The game was released (if I recall correctly) in April of 1998 - and have even have an updated patch for it dated January
  • 1.-Blizzard IS NOT coding SC:Ghost, Nihilist (or something like that) is. they are probably the ones who pulled the plug on the project NOT blizzard. 2.-SC:Ghost was built for LAST generation consoles, they are changing that, SC:Ghost will be built for NEXT generation consoles.

Due to lack of disk space, this fortune database has been discontinued.