Jump to navigation
Advertisement

Blizzard on the future Interview

PC PlayStation 2 Xbox
Interview by Kieron Gillen

7 November, 2005

Downstairs there's a massed crowd of Blizzard acolytes. Upstairs, it's different. Quieter. With more tea.

Behind elderly security guards is the press room. It's here over the weekend Eurogamer gets the chance to chat extensively with some of the higher members of the Blizzard hierarchy. We talk about what it feels like to stand in front of a huge crowd, who are here just because of your games, and to speak to them. We ask how you keep a straight face while someone has just said, "I play a Rogue, and you said that my damage rate would drop by three-per cent - and for me, it's nearer six per cent". And we asked them and anyone where we could get more tapes for our dictaphone, as we chatted so much we ran out.

None of which is here. Here we talk to Blizzard about the future. It's currently on top of the world, with a breakthrough massively-multiplayer game under its already powerful belt, with a string of nine number-one games-of-the-year hits behind it and probably the ability to lay golden eggs. Where is it going next? Because wherever it decides that is, it's sure that the industry will follow.

Obviously, the question everyone wants to know is about its next game. And it's equally obvious that the developer is not going to talk about it until it's good and ready. However, avoiding specifics, it is certainly happy to talk about generalities. For example, with three developed universes under its belt - Diablo, Warcraft and Starcraft - is it interested in creating another? "We do want to expand and create additional universes... but at the same time, we want to support our current universes," answers Mike Morhaime, Blizzard's President, "Generally that happens is that we have ideas for the next game, and think about what would be the best setting for the game. If we have a universe which fits the game, our first instinct would be to use that. But if we have a new universe which would be a better fit, we would go with that".

'Blizzard on the future' Screenshot 1

"Want to Party?" "I thought you'd never ask" "Oh, my heart's a flutter"

It's worth noting that a new franchise doesn't necessarily imply an entirely new genre. When approaching its updated nethack game, it had already created a perfectly serviceable fantasy world in the shape of Warcraft. There was no need to conceive of a new one for Diablo - except that it served the game better. There are lots of different sorts of fantasy worlds, after all. So is it possible that a new theoretical franchise wouldn't be a complete change of genre? "Absolutely. If we do, it's going to be what speaks to us," Paul Sams, senior VP of business development argues, "And we're a fantasy and science-fiction based company, and it's those types of offerings which speak to us. I absolutely envision it happening. I would envisage us bringing it off in a way which hasn't necessarily been shown before, but in a way that's accessible. We've introduced a variety of things in our current games. If you look at the races in Warcraft, and some of them have similarities to other fantasy stuff and some are entirely new. And you'll see that in the new stuff we bring out, but we try to keep that accessible. If we were ever to make a new franchise, we'd work hard to include a lot of the things people are accustomed to - whether it's science-fiction or fantasy - and things they're comfortable with, but also weave in new cool and fresh stuff which make it very Blizzard-esque".

The next-generation consoles are also looming on the company's plans. What excites Blizzard about it?

"Well - it's substantially better technology," Mike answers, "There's a lot of limitations on what we can do. We spend a lot of time working and iterating and trying to make it look good. With next-gen graphics hardware and the power of the system, there's a lot more we can do visually. There's a lot more you can do from a processing standpoint, in terms of game-logic. And of course connectivity, as what you can do from a multiplayer standpoint is going to be better to. We're going to have to look at how those things will translate"

'Blizzard on the future' Screenshot 2

A day-night cycle. Yesterday (At night).

However, there are still plenty of reasons why it's planning on supporting the PC. "First of all, everyone has one. That's really good," Mike grins. "It's a continuingly evolving platform, which is also good from a gamer's standpoint. The business model is great, as we don't have to pay fees to Microsoft or Sony. Piracy is an issue, but it's not an issue for World of Warcraft. It is an issue for our other boxed games, and we're always looking at other ways to minimalise piracy, but it's certainly not an issue enough to make us consider not developing for the platform"

Obviously with the 4.5 million and counting subscribers, World of Warcraft features prominently in Blizzard's plans, for the foreseeable future. "We've seen with previous MMOs that they've had a very long lifespan, and while at some point they start powering down in terms of subscribers, they're still a viable business for a very long time," notes WoW's lead designer Tom Chilton, "It could be a year from now. It could be five years from now. Your guess is as good as mine." In terms of the areas Blizzard wants to push in its continuing development, Tom's got a host of desires, outside of the context of the Burning Crusade expansion. "We still have a lot of work to do on the PvP honour system so it incentivises team-play rather than individual play," Tom notes, "We want to not necessarily reward people for time-investment instead of skill. In terms of ongoing material, we want to provide more content for players who aren't necessarily getting into the raid game, and make the raid game more attractive to people who aren't currently raiding. We feel as if there's a lot of value in terms of how heavily-scripted the encounters are. It's very fun once you overcome the barriers to entry."

'Blizzard on the future' Screenshot 3

These sort of structures full of monsters on main maps are called mini-dungeons. Apparently.

With Blizzcon a seeming success, thoughts would turn to other possibilities. A Blizzcon Europe, however, would seem to be relatively unlikely - at least in a form similar to the Blizzcon event itself.

"The challenge is we have several hundred developers which are working in the Irvine office, 20 minutes from here," Senior vice-president Frank Pearce explains, "Part of what makes this experience enjoyable for the community is the ability to interact with all these employees, and it's difficult to host an event like this remotely and bring the same experience to the community there."

And looking to the far future? Blizzard has existed for fifteen years already. What would the next - say - ten bring them? "One of the things I'd like to see is to expand and broaden the player base further, so gaming becomes more mainstream, so that more people outside of the core audience are familiar with our gaming world," Mike states, before turning onto something. "I would love for us to release feature-length films in each of the worlds. I think that the universes are rich and strong enough to support that kind of thing, and it'd enhance the connection that players have with the game. I think World of Warcraft has opened a lot of doors for us, being so popular and having such a large community. And I hope that we'll able to see something happen in the next five years."

Eurogamer agrees, with the obvious proviso: no Uwe Boll's World of Warcraft, thankyouverymuch.

Advertisement

Are you excited about World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-23 of 23 in total

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Whitewalker
07/11/05 @ 07:26
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Feature length Warcraft Motion Pictures? Hmm...sounds enticing!
Wobble
07/11/05 @ 07:31
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
*too
jlaakso
07/11/05 @ 07:46
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I would really rather have gamemakers stick to games and moviemakers stick to movies. Well, Blizzard's stable enough to take a beating on a movie misstep (see: Square).
Xerx3s
07/11/05 @ 08:19
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
/hopes that the next game wont be another crappy mmo, but a good rocksolid singleplayer game with good mp elements.

/fears the worst.
DeveloperPump
07/11/05 @ 09:45
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
World of StarCraft anyone?
Dizzy
07/11/05 @ 10:19
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
WoW is great until you hit 60, after that it becomes a power player game (basically grinding for your epic gear). If Blizzard can transform WoW into a game where even the high level content is fun and do-able for casual players, they might have found the holy grail of MMORPGs. They seem to be commited to trying this.

What can be next? I am betting on World of Starcraft in 2-3 years. The next logical thing for Blizzard and what a great idea it would be! 3 sides instead of 2, some amazing Battlegrounds and possible space travel/combat.

/hopes that the next game wont be another crappy mmo, but a good rocksolid singleplayer game with good mp elements.

You can argue that WoW *is* a good singleplayer game until 60. It actually has everything Diablo has and most quests can be considered solo-able (except for the instances and elite quests). I think a fair amount of players are coming from the "single-player" side, having enjoyed Warcraft and Diablo.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 07/11/05 @ 10:15
Bertie [staff]
07/11/05 @ 10:29
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I just love that Murloc costume :D

There are a full bunch of pictures linked from Blizzard's homepage of the event, you should really check out some people's costumes!
jlaakso
07/11/05 @ 11:15
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't think World of Starcraft so likely. Science fiction generally doesn't sell much - to genre hardcore, yes, but Blizzard is after the large masses. (Star Wars Galaxies is the exception to the rule, and naturally it can't be used as an example due to the enormous name recognition it has.)

World of Warcraft didn't sell so much simply because people knew their Warcraft (the masses don't), a lot of it had to do with the very easily graspable fantasy elements common to most bulk fantasy.

Then again, I think *I'd* enjoy World Of Stracraft over Warcraft.
Pirotic
07/11/05 @ 11:41
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Warcraft IV - RTS game please.
UncleLou
07/11/05 @ 13:04
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Warcraft IV - RTS game please.

Noooooooooooooo!

Starcraft 2 or Diablo 3, pretty please!
Genji
07/11/05 @ 13:09
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Something... new? Please?

Pretty please?
regmund
07/11/05 @ 13:15
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Forget mmo. How about Rock'n'Roll Racing 2?
shamblemonkee
07/11/05 @ 13:18
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If anyone can do a good cg movie it's Blizzard. They've had the best cut scenes for as long as i care to remember :)
Freek
07/11/05 @ 13:44
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Rock 'N Roll Racing 2 is a PSone game and it's crap, wasn't made by Blizzard I think.
Still you can get the original and best one for the GBA. A next gen RnR 3 would be awsome, but lets face it, it'll never happen.
Glitch
07/11/05 @ 16:48
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
WoW could well be a great game etc etc but monthly payments? rofl sack that right off!

Guild Wars is free (once you have purchased the game) and makes me want to ask the question, why the monthly payments for WoW?

robbing b*st*rds imo
spindizzy
07/11/05 @ 17:04
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Glitch: they have 4.5 million people playing on their servers. Are you seriously suggesting they should make that available for free? For years? To everyone who bought their game?

You're mad. And frankly, it's astoundingly good value for money since this is the only game I've played (or wanted to play) for months and months. It's actually saved me money ;-)
UncleLou
07/11/05 @ 17:09
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
WoW could well be a great game etc etc but monthly payments? rofl sack that right off!

Guild Wars is free (once you have purchased the game) and makes me want to ask the question, why the monthly payments for WoW?

robbing b*st*rds imo


How many times have you seen a party bigger than 5 people do something in GW? Oh, never? Because you can only get together in a few selected zones that are restricted to finding a party and trading, while the real game is multiplayer, not massively multiplayer?

Exactly. The servers GW needs cost a tiny fraction from what the WoW servers cost.

Well, you did ask. :)
Tyronne
07/11/05 @ 21:00
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Moving from games to movies,my well didnt origin do such a great job with the wing commander movie,take everything that had gone before in the games and then throw it up the wall by having no real connection to it whatsoever aside from rather aggressive teddybears at the end of it.
Kostabi
07/11/05 @ 23:31
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
" World of StarCraft anyone?"

If only, I'm sick to death of the endless stream of orc bashing MMOs. EVE and Anarchy Online are really the only options for sci-fi fans who don't want to suckle the teet of Mr. Lucas.
speedstars13
08/11/05 @ 01:32
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Forget Blizard, just go buy Hellgate and Warhammer! I lost my patience.
UncleLou
08/11/05 @ 11:01
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Hellgate isn't out for ages.

And what's wrong about playing Warhammer and looking forward to the next Blizzard RTS?
Mervinas
08/11/05 @ 17:00
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Damn it with that Starcraft2. We have waiting too long! Relic did great job with warhammer making exactly I have waited for. Well, not exactly. That's different. But with that sweet flavour Blizzard titles do have (if only it had tyranids).
Now Blizzard will have some hard time trying to make Starcraft2 be such success like first game was. Didn't they say marines were made after space marines from warhammer universe? And zergs seem to have some relationships withs nyds.
Anyway, if next title won't be Starcraft, bye, guys - my money are with Relic!
matty_art
08/11/05 @ 21:57
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'd look the way of the Diablo if I were you guys..

Comments: 1-23 of 23 in total

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Metaboli

X View gallery