Why Starcraft 2 will not be on console

With the recent emergence of "good scores" for RTS games like C&C3, this won't work for Starcraft.  Take this touchscreen interface that someone made for playing Starcraft.  I have to say that touchscreen is objectively superior to controlling units than a controller.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYY-g6ionzM

It looks pretty smooth, but slow by the standards of progaming.  If a touchscreen can't manage to handle the speed of a keyboard and mouse, how would a controller hold up?

Here's NaDa, the 2nd best currently ranked in Korea Starcraft League.  He teaches a thing or two about build Terran bases. (I uploaded the video myself.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gT-pcLIUdw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCARmphyGu4

In 10 seconds, he already put in 80 keystrokes.  C&C3 is much more slower than Starcraft and is more viable to controls that don't require speed or micro management.

Explain to me how you can do that with a controller? 

I think the easiest answer is... "because Blizzard said so." :P

http://starcraft2.com/faq.xml
foxhound_fox

Doesn't work well in SW.  Must crush the hopes of the ignorant. 

i hate games that have a lot of micro.

maybe that's why i didn't like sc that much. at a certain point it became so much about who follows a built routine the fastest.  

i hate games that have a lot of micro.

maybe that's why i didn't like sc that much. at a certain point it became so much about who follows a built routine the fastest.

Ontain

Ummm economy and building are macro.  Micro is controlling units for small tasks.

They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?qead

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why. 

[QUOTE="Ontain"]

i hate games that have a lot of micro.

maybe that's why i didn't like sc that much. at a certain point it became so much about who follows a built routine the fastest.

NobuoMusicMaker

Ummm economy and building are macro. Micro is controlling units for small tasks.

not the way it looks like he's doing. :) he's doing something every second. i'd say that's micro managing to me. 

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?Redmoonxl2

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why. 

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?qead

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why.

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.  

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.

Redmoonxl2

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.

foxhound_fox

Indeed. Take away the speed and you're left with a slow moving RTS lacking the depth and excitement it can have with a kb/mouse.

In my opinion, consoles should attempt to create a RTS model that works well for controllers, not attempt to adapt the PC way of doing things. Pikmin is a great example of this. 

[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?Redmoonxl2

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why.

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.  

Starcraft 64 actaully did have a minimap.

 And those issues can be solved by simply pluging a usb kb + m into your console. (I'm not sure if xbox360 suports this but i know ps3 does)

Starcraft 64 actaully did have a minimap.

8clip*

And those issues can be solved by simply pluging a usb kb + m into your console. (I'm not sure if xbox360 suports this but i know ps3 does)

qead

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?qead

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why.

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.

Starcraft 64 actaully did have a minimap.

And those issues can be solved by simply pluging a usb kb + m into your console. (I'm not sure if xbox360 suports this but i know ps3 does)

Funny because the videos I saw had no minimap in sight. Tickle me wrong in that regard. Question: Can you control the box within the minimap with your cursor? If not, it kills a major use of the minimap.

Also, the USB keyboard/mouse excuse is not going to fly. The game's pacing and speed will be dictated by the controller since that is the standard.

[QUOTE="qead"]Starcraft 64 actaully did have a minimap.

8clip*

And those issues can be solved by simply pluging a usb kb + m into your console. (I'm not sure if xbox360 suports this but i know ps3 does)

foxhound_fox

Yeah, thats true. To be honest I'm still a little sore blizzard scraped ghost

I think the real answer is that Starcraft is ridiculous for how much clicking there is. You just don't need to click that much. Everything about asigning groups because you can only select 12 units and stuff. I think it's just bad setup. C&C is streamlined.

 Starcraft just because a keyboard words-per-minute race...

[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?Redmoonxl2

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why.

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.

[QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?Redmoonxl2

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why.

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.

Starcraft 64 actaully did have a minimap.

And those issues can be solved by simply pluging a usb kb + m into your console. (I'm not sure if xbox360 suports this but i know ps3 does)

Funny because the videos I saw had no minimap in sight. Tickle me wrong in that regard. Question: Can you control the box within the minimap with your cursor? If not, it kills a major use of the minimap.

Also, the USB keyboard/mouse excuse is not going to fly. The game's pacing and speed will be dictated by the controller since that is the standard.

Unless of course the developers included an option to switch between different methods of controll witch would change cursor's speed and sensitivity. Not unlike console racers that suport both a steering wheel and controller

Blizzard isnt really interested in going into the console market because thats not the crowd they are catering to. It really serves more of a benefit to bring a console gamer to game on a PC than it would for Blizzard to potentially lose a PC gamer to a console since it hurts future and prior impact of their titles.XaosII

Starcraft on consoles would be terrible.. it would marke the real begining for a terrible trend for RTSs on consoles. RTSs on consoles are terrible, no one should ever buy any RTS on any console.DA_B0MB

[QUOTE="XaosII"]Blizzard isnt really interested in going into the console market because thats not the crowd they are catering to. It really serves more of a benefit to bring a console gamer to game on a PC than it would for Blizzard to potentially lose a PC gamer to a console since it hurts future and prior impact of their titles.AfterShafter

I didnt they they were catering to PC gamers. I said they cater to the PC gaming market. A console gamer who decides to pick up Starcraft 2 may be interested in picking up WoW if they enjoyed Starcraft 2. Now they have a gamer interested in following both their PC and/or console based products they release instead of just on the console side.

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"][QUOTE="qead"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

[QUOTE="qead"]They made a starcraft for n64 so why not xbox360?AfterShafter

Starcraft for the N64 was a watered down port, that's why.

The only problem it had was occasional slowdown. A problem that could easily be fixed with today's technologies

How about the lack of hotkeys? The inability to hotkey units? No minimap? Pisspoor cursor when used by the analog stick? The lack of microing in general?

Starcraft 64 had more issues than just slowdown.

Still doesn't change the fact that Starcraft 64 not only did poorly in sales, it was an inferior port of the PC version. 

There's a big difference between then and now, especially with the addition of console online play. Either Blizzard will have to even the playing field if they go cross platform when it comes to competition or Blizzard will have to put out an inferior version of Starcraft 2 to be played on consoles alone without knowing whether or not it can support itself, killing off features that will be introduced in Bnet. 

Yeah, I don't think Blizzard is going to do that.  

I didnt they they were catering to PC gamers. I said they cater to the PC gaming market. A console gamer who decides to pick up Starcraft 2 may be interested in picking up WoW if they enjoyed Starcraft 2. Now they have a gamer interested in following both their PC and/or console based products they release instead of just on the console side.

XaosII

Unless of course the developers included an option to switch between different methods of controll witch would change cursor's speed and sensitivity. Not unlike console racers that suport both a steering wheel and controller

qead

Sorry but the accuracy of a analog stick is simply no match for the accuracy of a mouse. There's no substitute.

Also, if there was no K/M support for C&C3 and BFME2 for the 360, I'm not expecting it in a SC2 port.

Still doesn't change the fact that Starcraft 64 not only did poorly in sales, it was an inferior port of the PC version.

There's a big difference between then and now, especially with the addition of console online play. Either Blizzard will have to even the playing field if they go cross platform when it comes to competition or Blizzard will have to put out an inferior version of Starcraft 2 to be played on consoles alone without knowing whether or not it can support itself, killing off features that will be introduced in Bnet.

Yeah, I don't think Blizzard is going to do that.

Redmoonxl2

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

I didnt they they were catering to PC gamers. I said they cater to the PC gaming market. A console gamer who decides to pick up Starcraft 2 may be interested in picking up WoW if they enjoyed Starcraft 2. Now they have a gamer interested in following both their PC and/or console based products they release instead of just on the console side.

AfterShafter

PC gaming market = people that play games on the PC casually (because they are primarly console gamers or not gamers at all) as well as the hardcore. Thats not just "PC gamers" which implies primarly people that play on the PC over other platforms.

If Starcraft 2 is released on console, which is perfectly feasible to do, it gives a console gamer less incentive to play games on the PC which is Blizzards primary gaming platform. If they can get some primarily console gamers to try out SC 2, due to interest, on the PC they have a customer who will be interested in their product regardless if its on a console or the PC.

Same reason why many Xbox gamers and PC gamers dont tend switch between the two due to the high levels of multiplatforms among the two. If Blizzard can get a console gamer on the PC, they'll get more out of it if they just make him stick to console. 

If Starcraft 2 is released on console, which is perfectly feasible to do, it gives a console gamer less incentive to play games on the PC which is Blizzards primary gaming platform. If they can get some primarily console gamers to try out SC 2, due to interest, on the PC they have a customer who will be interested in their product regardless if its on a console or the PC.XaosII

PC gaming market = people that play games on the PC casually (because they are primarly console gamers or not gamers at all) as well as the hardcore. Thats not just "PC gamers" which implies primarly people that play on the PC over other platforms.

If Starcraft 2 is released on console, which is perfectly feasible to do, it gives a console gamer less incentive to play games on the PC which is Blizzards primary gaming platform. If they can get some primarily console gamers to try out SC 2, due to interest, on the PC they have a customer who will be interested in their product regardless if its on a console or the PC.

Same reason why many Xbox gamers and PC gamers dont tend switch between the two due to the high levels of multiplatforms among the two. If Blizzard can get a console gamer on the PC, they'll get more out of it if they just make him stick to console.

XaosII

Why wouldn't they? They did it before... And "sold poorly" in this case equals "sold enough to make them a hefty chunk of change from console sales."AfterShafter

In your dreams...If we were to line up the PC sales versus the consoles sales of Starcraft 64, I bet the 64 version wouldn't even make up 2% of Starcraft's total sales.

Also, if their console ports were selling so great, where's the console version of Diablo 2? Warcraft 3? How about WoW?

And why don't you think Blizzard would do that (the second one)? They have a long standing history of porting games to consoles with diminished features.AfterShafter

So you actually want watered down Blizzard ports?

This next statement is great...

They're even openly stated that they're in talks about making a console version of WoW, showing that they definetly are interested in making games for this audience.AfterShafter

http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/15-01-2007-4497.html

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=22605

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3157008

Try not to make up stuff that can easily be disproven, 'k?

So we have a history of releasing console ports + a contemporary interest in moving their games to console... Why don't you think Blizzard is going to do something they've done before and have shown some interest in doing again now? I'm not sayin it will happen, but is it so far fetched?AfterShafter

Yes, it's far fetched that Blizzard will continue down a road of failure by porting PC games to the console. If they are going to make a console game, they'll make an exclusive console game. That's why they were making Ghost, because it fit the console audience.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]I think the easiest answer is... "because Blizzard said so." :P

http://starcraft2.com/faq.xml
NobuoMusicMaker

Doesn't work well in SW.  Must crush the hopes of the ignorant. 

You do know that everyone with a console also owns a PC right? Some don't play games on them but they do have one.

i honestly don't see why you guys post these kind of things here. It's really weird....

[QUOTE="AfterShafter"]

Why wouldn't they? They did it before... And "sold poorly" in this case equals "sold enough to make them a hefty chunk of change from console sales."Redmoonxl2

In your dreams...If we were to line up the PC sales versus the consoles sales of Starcraft 64, I bet the 64 version wouldn't even make up 2% of Starcraft's total sales.

Also, if their console ports were selling so great, where the console version of Diablo 2? Warcraft 3? How about WoW?

And why don't you think Blizzard would do that (the second one)? They have a long standing history of porting games to consoles with diminished features.AfterShafter

So you actually want watered down Blizzard ports?

This next statement is great...

They're even openly stated that they're in talks about making a console version of WoW, showing that they definetly are interested in making games for this audience.AfterShafter

http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/15-01-2007-4497.html

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=22605

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3157008

Try not to make up stuff that can easily be disproven, 'k?

So we have a history of releasing console ports + a contemporary interest in moving their games to console... Why don't you think Blizzard is going to do something they've done before and have shown some interest in doing again now? I'm not sayin it will happen, but is it so far fetched?AfterShafter

Yes, it's far fetched that Blizzard will continue down a road of failure but porting PC games to the console. If they are going to make a console game, they'll make an exclusive console game. That's why they were making Ghost, because it fit the console audience.

Because Star Craft 64 sucked compared to the original?

P.S. I also have a demo disc of a Star Craft game that was in development for PS1 but got cancelled. Wonder what that would be worth today?

*rant*AfterShafter

I love how you play the victim, AS. Either you debate or don't bother. Don't pin your time spent on me or anyone else. I presented my thoughts and facts, it's your business whether you can deal with it and how long you spend arguing with me based on that info.

Anyways, bye.

Because Star Craft 64 sucked compared to the original?

P.S. I also have a demo disc of a Star Craft game that was in development for PS1 but got cancelled. Wonder what that would be worth today?

Runningflame570

Hey, some people are willing to validate the game (And any Blizzard console port) despite it sucking, as you can see in this thread.

As for the demo disc, that's a rarity. I'd say a hardcore SC fan that lacks any sense will buy it for $300, especially after the announcement of SC2. Check around, you might get a pretty penny from it.

You shoulda taken into account that the PS3 can use usb keyboards and usb mouses

"it gives a console gamer less incentive to play games on the PC"... Do you think Blizzard really cares if people are only playing their games on one platform, so long as more people play their games? If going PC only, they end up with 4 million people buying SCII, while with a dual release they would get 4.5 million, do you think they're going to say "Well, we don't want that last 0.5 million - they're console gamers"? A Blizzard addict is a Blizzard addict, and that's something they want regardless of platform.AfterShafter

If that means 0.5 million people may not pick up the next iteration of a future PC-only MMO subcription based title, then you bet. Half a million lost gamers in subcription revenues is much greater than the revenue of half a million sales of a console port.

All they have to do is look at companies like Bethesda or the plethora of FPS makers out there to realize that, yes, there is more money to be made by spreading the love around than by being platform exclusive. Blizzard has even shown recent interest in moving their PC games to consoles - why? Because they know there is a notable cash benefit in doing so, reaching an audience that may never have made the jump to PC's to play their games at all.AfterShafter

Lets look at it this way: If Blizzard has always been multiplat, even to the point of favoring consoles due to high profitability, do you really think they could have had the same success for a title like WoW given the failure of MMO's on the console market? I doubt it. Even if you claim that theres a potential larger userbase, the net result wouldnt be greater. WoW isnt even that big compared to other existing MMO's in Asia. See? Its not just a matter or making a quick buck now.

It's win-win for them. A console gamer who wasn't going to play SC II, ever, may play it if they release a console gamer... While someone who was going to try and get it on the PC will have an easier option - securing a sale, not decreasing the likelihood of one. The people playing it on the PC will play it on the PC and totally ignore the console version. Everyone wins, Blizzard included.

( http://news.softpedia.com/news/Blizzard-is-Considering-a-World-of-Warcraft-Console-Port-34357.shtml - before someone starts getting on my case about my repeatedly citing Blizzard's "recent interest" in releasing games on consoles)AfterShafter

Your point seems to fly against the obvious things like "system seller" titles like Gears of War and Halo. Do you think every person that picked up a copy of GeoW for the 360 and Halo for the Xbox already owned one? Doubt it. That would be a pretty foolish claim to make. A good amount of them probably bought the system from that title alone - and made them into an Xbox player. Why would it not be any different for SC2? Or do you honestly believe that everyone buying SC2 was already going to be a PC gamer?

While i understand its in your nature to run away after being beaten logically hiding under your veil of arrogance and short-sightedness, do think about it a little more clearly before making your claims. You arent working for Blizzards marketing department for a reason. I dont work for them either, but my points are validated by the reality of what they are doing, unlike yours. Blizzard hasnt made a console title or port for 7 years. Theres seem to be very good reasons for them not doing so, especially consdering that Warcraft 3 would have been, arguably, easier to port and translate for console gamers than Starcraft 2.

I think the real answer is that Starcraft is ridiculous for how much clicking there is. You just don't need to click that much. Everything about asigning groups because you can only select 12 units and stuff. I think it's just bad setup. C&C is streamlined.

Starcraft just because a keyboard words-per-minute race...

Kalel559

You could play without constantly clicking.  It's just that the best in the world show us how to always win.  Your C&C units have extremely dumb AI and usually spend a whole second to turn the other way around.  There's no strategy in C&C.  It's build massive defence, and build superweapons.  That's all. 

You know, I was working on a long response to this, but after you going for several hours arguing last night, I'm going to keep it relatively short and sweet.

Blizzard has, for over a decade now, been one of the most unreliable companies when it comes to press releases. They have spent years hyping games that have completely gone off the radar. They have given release dates which they revised and revised again over a period of years. They have almost simultaneously expressed interest in doing things while claming it would never happen. They have made comments to the extent that they have "nothing to announce on a subject" months before a game has been released. In a generation which many, many previously PC based companies are making huge profits porting to console, and with Blizzard having a very successful background in making console games, I'm not writing this off whatever they say.


This is not an issue of me wanting watered down ports. I will likely never play a console Blizzard game simply because I've been playing their games on PC's since the very beginning and I still am an avid PC gamer. This is an issue of me looking at the state of console/PC gaming right now, looking at Blizzard's track record with being about as trusthworthy as my clepto uncle in their official announcements, and thinking "hey, this could happen. It might happen." Also, I don't see anything bad in it happening, since it won't affect me at all.


I'm done here. I'm not going to get dragged into another debate with either of you two which will tie me up for hours. Unfortunately, PC fanboys are just as obstinate as console fanboys.AfterShafter

First, you have to learn how much time and money it takes to port.  The amount sold did not cover an average cost to port a game.  Recoding everything to a specific console takes a lot of cash.

Blizzard hasn't been unreliable.  They cancelled Starcraft Ghost because it wasn't perfect.  They rather cancel imperfect games than release them because they are the best.  They also cancelled that single player Warcraft stories game.  And, for ages, we all know Blizzard's release model is "It's done when it's done."  If you expect a certain release date like you would for Sony, MS, Nintendo, then you're expecting a game that's not perfect.

So, ignorantboy, I hope you learned your lesson.  We wouldn't want perfect games be tainted by your idealogy. 

You shoulda taken into account that the PS3 can use usb keyboards and usb mouses

chaos-SD

As standard? No I don't see a KB+M in my PS3 box.  You don't force consumers to buy peripherals.  It's a terrible thing.  Blizzard isn't Nintendo. 

Funny because the videos I saw had no minimap in sight. Tickle me wrong in that regard. Question: Can you control the box within the minimap with your cursor? If not, it kills a major use of the minimap.

Redmoonxl2

Ah, very very funny. In that long thread we had the other night (in case you forgot, this thread http://www.gamespot.com/forums/show_msgs.php?board_id=314159282&topic_id=25649177 ) you swore up and down that you played StarCraft 64 and it in no way felt anything like the PC version, which you preach is the untouchable, flawless version that no console could ever touch. In fact you used the whole 'no minimap' reason against me, which I replied that it did in fact have a minimap. You replied some incoherent nonsense that completely ignored what I was trying to tell you. In fact it was "No minimap = Slower gameplay. Without the ability to quickly check over a particular site on the map, the game speed fails." Of course I then thought you were either insane or had no reading comprehension skills, cause I tried to tell you that it did have a minimap. And it also had hotkeys, waypoints, and your analog stick acted like the mouse. Which are other things you said "robbed the important StarCraft experience on the consoles" or some other insane banter.

Whats funny is you said you only watched videos. Ah thats convenient. So you have no experience playing the actual StarCraft for the N64. Well then nothing you have to say about StarCraft on the consoles matters then, does it? You can be quiet now, you have no voice.

If history repeats itself then SC2 will be phenomenal and become the new institution in S. Korea, and almost no one will ever play the console version.

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]Funny because the videos I saw had no minimap in sight. Tickle me wrong in that regard. Question: Can you control the box within the minimap with your cursor? If not, it kills a major use of the minimap.

RossRichard

Ah, very very funny. In that long thread we had the other night (in case you forgot, this thread http://www.gamespot.com/forums/show_msgs.php?board_id=314159282&topic_id=25649177 ) you swore up and down that you played StarCraft 64 and it in no way felt anything like the PC version, which you preach is the untouchable, flawless version that no console could ever touch. In fact you used the whole 'no minimap' reason against me, which I replied that it did in fact have a minimap. You replied some incoherent nonsense that completely ignored what I was trying to tell you. In fact it was "No minimap = Slower gameplay. Without the ability to quickly check over a particular site on the map, the game speed fails." Of course I then thought you were either insane or had no reading comprehension skills, cause I tried to tell you that it did have a minimap. And it also had hotkeys, waypoints, and your analog stick acted like the mouse. Which are other things you said "robbed the important StarCraft experience on the consoles" or some other insane banter.

Whats funny is you said you only watched videos. Ah thats convenient. So you have no experience playing the actual StarCraft for the N64. Well then nothing you have to say about StarCraft on the consoles matters then, does it? You can be quiet now, you have no voice.

Can hardly blame a guy for a miscall because NO ONE IN THE WORLD WANTS TO PLAY STARCRAFT ON CONSOLES!

Watch my videos and tell me, can you move 3 dozen units in unison in a millisecond with a controller? 

Can hardly blame a guy for a miscall because NO ONE IN THE WORLD WANTS TO PLAY STARCRAFT ON CONSOLES!

Watch my videos and tell me, can you move 3 dozen units in unison in a millisecond with a controller?

NobuoMusicMaker

doesnt mean blizzard wont try to milk SC2 by having it go on consoles. You never know. RTS games on consoles are horrible. Needs keyboard and mouse, but still it wont stop blizzard. 

Can hardly blame a guy for a miscall because NO ONE IN THE WORLD WANTS TO PLAY STARCRAFT ON CONSOLES!

Watch my videos and tell me, can you move 3 dozen units in unison in a millisecond with a controller? 

NobuoMusicMaker

You can if you set your hotkeys right. Which, in case you dont know, your hotkeys are your yellow buttons in the N64 version. Oh and I dont need to watch your videos, I have StarCraft 64.

[QUOTE="NobuoMusicMaker"]

Can hardly blame a guy for a miscall because NO ONE IN THE WORLD WANTS TO PLAY STARCRAFT ON CONSOLES!

Watch my videos and tell me, can you move 3 dozen units in unison in a millisecond with a controller?

istreakforfood

doesnt mean blizzard wont try to milk SC2 by having it go on consoles. You never know. RTS games on consoles are horrible. Needs keyboard and mouse, but still it wont stop blizzard.

Sorry, but Blizzard doesn't do that.  They are not cash cows.  Battle.net is completely free.