Comment on Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal gets preliminary approval from UK regulator
theKalash@feddit.ch 1 year agoWhat can they do that ActiBlizzKing cannot?
Literally anything.
There is currently a handful of devs doing the occational balance patch for SC2 otherwise the game is complelty dead from the developer side. On the MS side, AoE2 and other even older games are doing so much better.
echo64@lemmy.world 1 year ago
… that game came out 13 years ago and was supported with expansions for 6 years
theKalash@feddit.ch 1 year ago
And AoE2 cam out 24 years ago and is supported with expansions to this day.
Carighan@lemmy.world 1 year ago
And SS1 came out 29 years ago and just got a remaster. This isn’t a years-pissing context. Starcraft II was supported way long, and extensively. And like all good games, eventually the vast vast majority of players have moved on, and then the devs might move on, too.
theKalash@feddit.ch 1 year ago
The issue is not not players of dev, but the management that probably doesn’t think it’s profitable enough anymore. But Microsoft manages to keep AoE2 going with an even smaller playerbase than SC2.
So MS taking over an abandon francise I care about sounds pretty sweet to me.
That was 6 years ago, btw.
AnonTwo@kbin.social 1 year ago
Isn't the expansion content between SCII's expansions and AoE2's expansions significantly different?
theKalash@feddit.ch 1 year ago
Not that much. Yes, AoE2 usually adds new factions, that won’t happen in StarCraft II. But introducing new units or reworking existing one is possible.
Adding singleplayer mission is pretty mich the same.
Also the Co-op mode of SC2 is quite popular and there is room to add a “new faction” there.
echo64@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Comparing one thing to an exception is dumb in the best of times
tryptaminev@feddit.de 1 year ago
The original AoE or the rereleases? Because i had to pay for the definite edition.
theKalash@feddit.ch 1 year ago
Doesn’t matter. The option to pay for some more content is literally what I’m hopeing for.