Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

How Much Did Blizzard Spend On StarCraft II?

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 73 comments

StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty may top the chart as "most expensive game to develop."

So how much did it cost Blizzard to develop StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty over the last seven years? According to Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, the company has already dumped over $100 million into the highly-anticipated sci-fi RTS game, possibly making it one of the most expensive titles to date.

But the number shouldn't be surprising. Blizzard president Mike Morhaine said back in 2007--during the game's official unveiling--that the company really didn't have a budget to begin with. It seemed that an abundance of funds were on standby. "We'll spend as much time and resources as we need to make this game great," he said at the time.

Both Blizzard and analysts predict that consumers will quickly make up for the costs. "There is no shortage of consumers for StarCraft," said Kotick. "For a game that is more than ten years old, there's millions of people still playing it."

As for the analysts, they predict that StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty could sell five million units during its first year of release. We predict that the number will be even greater.

As it stands, StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty will beat out the development budget set aside for Grand Theft Auto IV--an alleged 100 million. Red Dead Redemption was also said to rack in a development cost of $100 million.

Kotick didn't specify whether Battle.net was part of the $100 million spent on the StarCraft II project.

Display 73 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 25 Hide
    buddhav1 , July 19, 2010 6:15 PM
    You'd think with 100 mil in expenses, that full LAN support would be an afterthought...
  • 19 Hide
    cekasone , July 19, 2010 6:42 PM
    And Blizzard will still have $100,000,000,000 x 100 left due to all the WoW subscriptions.
  • 17 Hide
    hydric , July 19, 2010 6:51 PM
    most poeple are 100% complete idiots. They are not releasing the game 3 times. come july 27th the game will be release 100% followed by 2 expansions. ALl blizzard games in the past have come with an expansion other than diablo 1 and warcraft 1. I dont see what the big deal is. They are doing what they always do. However, not having LAN is lame.
Other Comments
  • 25 Hide
    buddhav1 , July 19, 2010 6:15 PM
    You'd think with 100 mil in expenses, that full LAN support would be an afterthought...
  • 15 Hide
    FATAL STR1K3 , July 19, 2010 6:27 PM
    morons... lol.

    clearly this is going to be one of the best games in the genre and will be worth the money. I don't know why people complain that's it is 3 separate parts. It will be so much game content.
  • 9 Hide
    prozium42 , July 19, 2010 6:31 PM
    zarko90Doesn't matter when SC2 is going to be released 3 times and there will be more than enough morons who will buy the 2nd and 3rd installments....oh and of course come the expansions, I'd guess at least 2-3 of them, if not more, Blizz love to stretch the lifespan of their retail games and their new graphics engines.... 100mil is a drop in the ocean for the company raking in the revenues from World of Warcrack...


    I wish people would understand what they read. Starcraft 2 is releasing with FULL multiplayer and editor capabilities along with a campaign that makes the original tremble. Why is there two more EXPANSIONS after it for the respective other races? So that each race gets a full story, a massive experience. If you just play multiplayer(as i know many do), then you won't have to buy the other installments.

    Its like the difference between Warcraft III and its Frozen Throne expansion, little difference in that the campaigns simply focus on one race each with the others getting cameo missions.
  • -6 Hide
    Anonymous , July 19, 2010 6:32 PM
    Pocket change to blizzard couple of months wow subs for deveoplment ;s.
    Not going to buy it im afraid lack of lan play and stupid idea to split the game and monitise it even more, 1 lot of development money for 3 games then they will probably start charging for maps, Bobby Kotick biggest software destroyer on the planet, only worried about monitising the whole game experience they better not do this with diablo 3, ill seriously head hunt the guy.
  • -4 Hide
    aaron92 , July 19, 2010 6:32 PM
    No LAN = No buy. I'll just wait for a crack LAN, Bobby Kotick has the worst future set for Blizzard.
  • 19 Hide
    cekasone , July 19, 2010 6:42 PM
    And Blizzard will still have $100,000,000,000 x 100 left due to all the WoW subscriptions.
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , July 19, 2010 6:43 PM
    @aaron92

    so when the cracked LAN comes out your going to buy the game and then download the crack, or just not going to buy the game? weak.....
  • 5 Hide
    aaron92 , July 19, 2010 6:48 PM
    crackittobuyit@aaron92so when the cracked LAN comes out your going to buy the game and then download the crack, or just not going to buy the game? weak.....


    Blizzard use to be a great company, ever since Activision partnered with them, their game marketing and design has been all about maximum profits at the cost of game quality.

    I'm not feeding the greed machine.
  • 17 Hide
    hydric , July 19, 2010 6:51 PM
    most poeple are 100% complete idiots. They are not releasing the game 3 times. come july 27th the game will be release 100% followed by 2 expansions. ALl blizzard games in the past have come with an expansion other than diablo 1 and warcraft 1. I dont see what the big deal is. They are doing what they always do. However, not having LAN is lame.
  • 0 Hide
    nekoangel , July 19, 2010 6:56 PM
    prozium42I wish people would understand what they read. Starcraft 2 is releasing with FULL multiplayer ... along with a campaign that makes the original tremble. Why is there two more EXPANSIONS after it for the respective other races? So that each race gets a full story, a massive experience. If you just play multiplayer(as i know many do), then you won't have to buy the other installments. Its like the difference between Warcraft III and its Frozen Throne expansion, little difference in that the campaigns simply focus on one race each with the others getting cameo missions.

    starcraft2 FAQ
    Quote:
    How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay?

    The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.
    If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online?

    Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft.


    Yes what you are getting is potentially a much more fulfilled single player experience, yet as of this time if you are serious about multi player you will have to buy each expansion and because Blizzard now requires their permission first before a SC2 tournament is held and the lack of lan the user will have to use their own account which they have all expansion to be able to compete in the tournament.

    And there are three factions in Warcraft III so following your logic there would have to have been two expansions.
  • 3 Hide
    captainnemojr , July 19, 2010 7:03 PM
    $100MM to develop a video game? What the hell has happened? I miss the days of simple, good story-line/music, fun games...
  • 5 Hide
    aaron92 , July 19, 2010 7:09 PM
    Hydric...I know Blizzard needs to make money, they don't need to maximize their profits if they are treating this like an art and enjoy creating quality games instead of inserting X number of micro-transitions to milk the game into the ground, or not Including LAN play? That is just ridiculous.

    (P.S. They were doing fine before partnering with Activision)
  • 4 Hide
    miloo , July 19, 2010 7:11 PM
    aaron92No LAN = No buy. I'll just wait for a crack LAN, Bobby Kotick has the worst future set for Blizzard.


    Same mate, no LAN no LOVE~
    PC game for 60 bucks is a lot for me
  • -4 Hide
    rooket , July 19, 2010 7:11 PM
    100 million on THAT? LOL that shows a buck doesn't go far. The concept was already there and it almost looks the same as the first one. I'm not buying this game LOL
  • 2 Hide
    g00fysmiley , July 19, 2010 7:12 PM
    I for one am looking forward to SC2 alot, from blizzard i have come to expect great things always extremely polished gameplay and visuals that scale from looking ok on low end computers to great on high end ones. on the development front I'd also be curious to see how much they have spend on keeping wow updated and full of good content. i bet that would in and of itself dwarf SC2 costs but have obviously more than paid for the initian investment.

    to the haters on multiple expantions... all blizzard games have expantions and so far they have at least to me been more than worth the money in entertainment value out of the box. i really don't think it'd be much different even if activition wasn't involved.

    as for no lan... whiel this sucks i bet there will be cracks and i'll probably be installing this myself if it happens but until then its not goign to be that rediculous to stay connected to internet to lan. i mean i can play starcraft the origional on battlenet right now over a 3g phone connection tethered to a old laptop with 1 bar without lag so i think that part is seriously being blown out of proportion
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , July 19, 2010 7:13 PM
    Don't they make $100M per month just off WOW?
  • 2 Hide
    hellwig , July 19, 2010 7:25 PM
    So, once they recoup their $100mil, will they add back in LAN support?

    Of course, if they don't make back their $100 mill (for some unforeseen reason, most likely involving Activision upper management), will they blame their own stupidity or piracy? "If only we had taken out the single player campaign, and forced everyone to play multiplayer on Battle.Net, we could have saved the company".
  • 1 Hide
    rooket , July 19, 2010 7:25 PM
    anondudeDon't they make $100M per month just off WOW?


    probably more than that but corporations have to justify the cost of everything they do, hence the hefty $60 price tag on this game which I will not pay. I'd pay 29 for it.
  • 5 Hide
    donovands , July 19, 2010 7:29 PM
    Wish the Terran installment was last. Would be nice to see them win for a change.
Display more comments