Blizzard: Our new, secret project is "totally awesome"

by Justin McElroy { Jul 16th 2007 at 10:00AM }

It's not World of Warcraft, it's not Starcraft II, but it is, according to Blizzard, totally awesome, and it's in super-secret development by a super-secret sect of the company called Team 3. It was during a conversation about workforce with Gamasutra when Frank Pearce, senior vice president of product development for Blizzard, semi-spilled the proverbial beans. After mentioning the 40-person Team 3, Pearce would only add "Team 3 is working on something really awesome. I can't give you any hints, but it's totally awesome."

Oh, no hints? Too bad that we've already cracked the case. With Blizzcon just around the bend, hopefully we'll find out if our hunch holds water. What's your theory?

Tags: blizzard, e307, starcraftii, wow

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Vidikron @ Jul 16th 2007 10:03AM

Please let it be Diablo III.

JodyAnthony @ Jul 16th 2007 10:11AM

that is the single greatest piece of artwork the world has ever seen.

BPM @ Jul 16th 2007 1:58PM

I want Awesome: The Game... D:

Cal @ Jul 16th 2007 4:07PM

It looks like "Awesome: The Jame" to me.

Greg @ Jul 16th 2007 10:13AM

Of course it's "totally awesome." I'd love to hear this: "We have a top-secret project... I can't give you any hints, but I can tell you that it's just OK. Wait a few months and buy it when it's down to $20."

Geist @ Jul 16th 2007 10:15AM

Ugh. Some new IP please. No more Warcraft this, Starcraft that, and Diablo this other thing.

Stevo @ Jul 16th 2007 10:17AM

I LOVE all three franchises, but I agree. I'll get the next SC, WC, and Diablo on the day they release, regardless of reviews--but I want to see some new stuff.

It seems like everything Blizzard releases is pure gold, and I'm sure any new IP's they develop will be no different.

Jonathan Tran @ Jul 16th 2007 10:14AM

Well considering it either has to be Diablo 3 or some new IP, I don't think there's too much guessing.

Several ex Blizz employees said Diablo 3 WAS in the works a while ago, so.... on verra

Zertoss @ Jul 16th 2007 10:17AM

Can you imagine if we got both Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 next year? I think the entire population of South Korea would explode. Hell, the whole universe might.

EihBeir @ Jul 16th 2007 10:21AM

I think it'll be a new IP with "craft" in the title.

"BoatCraft" or "DudeCraft" or "CakeCraft"

JodyAnthony @ Jul 16th 2007 10:24AM

I'm waiting for World of CakeCraft.

I can't wait to start my Coconut Cake Guild

ymmv @ Jul 16th 2007 10:26AM

What I was wondering about ... He said: "In terms of development staff it’s probably around 350. World of Warcraft is about 135 people, 40 for Starcraft II, 40 for team 3, our cinematics team is about 85 guys."

So why do they have twice as many people working on cinematics compared to teams 2 and 3? Blizzard has released two full games and two expansion sets in five years. That's not enough cinemtatics to keep so many people busy for so long. Is Blizzard doing a full length World of Warcraft CGI movie?

Crono @ Jul 16th 2007 11:03AM

Cinematics of the quality that Blizzard has for its game takes alot of people. 85 people is not nearly enough for a full length film. Just IMDB any one of pixars films and see how many people that have working on those.

I'm not suprized that there are more on the Cinematic team than the programming team. Those movies take alot of manpower.

JLobes @ Jul 17th 2007 2:19AM

Have you seen the StarCraft II trailer? Granted, its much shorter than a full length feature, but compare the quality and depth of that trailer (Or any of Blizzard's cinematics) and you'll see its a wonder they don't need double that. Not to mention that the 85 person team is making cinematics for SCII and Team 3, and made some (absolutely stunning) cinematics for WoW.

Blizzard has always done great CGI, not only their realism, but the effect and depth that the scenes have. Think back to StarCraft when you had the Battlecruiser leaving the Terrans behind, to get pwned by the Zerg, or the Act 2 cinematic in Diablo 2. Truly stunning work.

Anam @ Jul 16th 2007 10:29AM

What I would love to see is a Bioware-style RPG made by Blizzard, simply because Blizzard is one of the few companies that would take the time to make it perfect, rather than Bioware's "great idea, but it feels unfinished" games.

Of course, that's just me dreaming. It'll probably be Diablo III, which understandable, considering that Diablo fans have been waiting for a sequel nearly as long as StarCraft fans.

JLobes @ Jul 17th 2007 2:21AM

I don't know. The Blizzard guy sounded... excited about what he was talking about. Though Diablo 3 would be great, I have to think that this is a new IP

Hawke @ Jul 16th 2007 10:50AM

They will hint at it first few days at BlizzCon; anyone who ever had to track down foreshadowing statements in books will likely hear the hints after a minuteof speculation.

Oh, and who says its a new game? It could easily be an update - maybe a Diablo 2 for a next gen system, prepared for online play, with updated graphics and obviously controls. To me, that'd totally kick arse.

Blizzard hasn't done a console game in a while - the last being their port of the lost vikings, IIRC.

s256 @ Jul 16th 2007 2:58PM

StarCraft 64. Now let us never speak of this again.

Jonathan Tran @ Jul 16th 2007 10:57AM

If they make Diablo 3, can they finally make most of the skills useful AT LAUNCH? I mean, sure they made Holy Bolt do 14,000 damage in Diablo 2... in patch 1.11, like 5 years after release

and it still sucked

look at Guild Wars for example, where skill strength only matters on your investment in its "attribute", so that all (90%) skills suck at 0 attrib and rock at 16. Diablo should do something like that.

Crono @ Jul 16th 2007 11:06AM

Guild Wars IS diablo 3, just done by a different developer.

I mean honestly, what would you want diablo 3 to look like? And how is that different from GW.

Sederien @ Jul 16th 2007 11:12AM

As a person who has not played Guild Wars, this comparison is lost on me.

How exactly is the MMO like Diablo 2 in terms of playstyle?

Stevo @ Jul 16th 2007 11:16AM

I strongly disagree. While NCSoft is made up of a lot of ex-Blizzard devs...the atmosphere, polish, and overall detail inherent in Blizzard games aren't present in Guild Wars.

I love Guild Wars--it's a great game, especially for those not wanting to make the monthly payments to play WoW, but it isn't Diablo.

tcc3 @ Jul 16th 2007 12:02PM

Guild Wars playstyle is much more akin to Wow. All the timed, turn based attacks for example. Diablo feels alot more like realtime combat.

JLobes @ Jul 17th 2007 11:32PM

In Diablo, things have always progressed around you, the character. The world changed around your character, which is what made it such an immersing experience. All the quests seemed to fit together in a realistic, believable sence.

MMOs, because of their persistant world, and recycled quests, cant come close to duplicating what Diablo is.

dark54555 @ Jul 16th 2007 11:14AM

Team 3
Diablo 3

Seems to make sense to me.

FermitTheKrog @ Jul 16th 2007 11:18AM

Please let it be World Of My Little Pony

Jonathan Tran @ Jul 16th 2007 11:19AM

Sederian:

Guild Wars is like diablo in that you run around and slash stuff to complete quests and gain exp

it is not a "true MMO" in that there are players everywhere, mostly instances of zones, similar to diablo2's instanced games. However unlike Diablo you don't have to leave games into lobbies to find people to play, you can just go to any town (walking or map teleporting) and meet up with people there to do quests or missions or whatever.