Rumor: Blizzard to Announce New StarCraft Shooter at Blizzcon 2026 - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 07 January 2026 / 7,065 Views
Blizzard will reportedly announce a new StarCraft third-person shooter at BlizzCon 2026 in September, according to Windows Central's Jez Corden.
"The headline for Blizzcon 2026 is most likely going to be StarCraft," said Corden. "It was previously reported that StarCraft is getting the third-person shooter treatment, and I confirmed these rumors true via my own sources a while back."
This title was first reported on in September 2024 by Bloomberg's Jason Schreier in his latest book Play Nice: The Rise, Fall, and Future Of Blizzard Entertainment.
This should be treated as a rumor until an official announcement is made.
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012 and taking over the hardware estimates in 2017. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel. You can follow the author on Bluesky.
More Articles
Uh. StarCraft 3, Blizzard. That's what we want.
It's still rather sad that the best and most populous RTS game today is still StarCraft 2, 16 years after release.
Same.
I played the first game the day it came out in 1998.
It took 12 years to get a sequel.
I played the Sequel the day it came out in 2010.
I am still waiting 16 years later for a threquel.
I actually still go back and play the OG StarCraft today, which is damn impressive for a game that is walking towards being 30 years old, which is a testament of how solid the games are... But also a reminder of how much Blizzard doesn't care about their premier eSports RTS title.
I love the game. But as far as the best RTS game ever?
It would have to go to Sacrifice or Homeworld 2.
With some other bangers like Dark Reign, Company of Heroes, Black and White, Sins of a Solar Empire, Dungeon Keeper, Age of Empires 2 being other RTS games that are in similar cahoots.
At least the Age of Empires franchise has all its remakes out and the sequel Age 4 with almost all games getting DLCs every year
That is very true.
Only thing that I am pissed about with the Age of Empires franchise is Microsoft closed down Ensemble studios, which shouldn't have happened... But on the flipside, the franchise is still well supported.
Doubt it, blizzard always disappoints.
Starcraft Ghost 2:Vanished
Who cares?
Starcraft shooter sounds awesome until you remember Blizzard hasn't made a game that isn't a live service since Warcraft 3. Maybe if they followed through with Ghost back in the day, but is anybody really gonna be down for this in 2026?
True, most games since W3 launched great and has declined with time. Not that I don't still love some of them though including SC2.
Remembering that does not really change the fact that most of those games are amazing... Starcraft 2, Heroes of the Storm, Diablo 3, 4, etc... I do not see any problem with that.
I'll accept the starcraft 2 and even diablo 3 love (what was that shit with the marketplace), even if they've been seriously marred over time. But HotS and Diablo 4? What's next, Overwatch? Diablo Immortal? Warcraft Rumble? I mean lets be so for real.
Speaking plainly I'm just so over their shit. I don't care if the skinner box is good, I want them to be making tight experiences again, but they just haven't been interested in that in over 20 years. We just get Products designed to take our money for forever instead of anything interesting. Watch. That Starcraft 3 third person shooter? It'll be a WWZ/Back for Blood/Vermintide type game with endless monetization. If it turns out we get a Space Marines 2 instead, I will be so pleasantly surprised, but I seriously doubt it.
Please, Overwatch and Hots were great at launch, not everyone's cup of tea to be sure but definitely well made. I'm no fan of what happened to Overwatch further down the line but it's the multiplayer game that won most GotY awards in the last decade (yes more than It Takes Two).
Can't speak for D4 as I haven't played it yet.
Yeah.
Overwatch was huge on release.
It was a barebones game however, it took them over a year just to add a couple of maps and a couple of heroes to an already barebones experience, so it did get stale, it did bleed users.
But what they got right with Overwatch on release, they got really really really right.
I hadn't played an FPS that religiously in many years before it dropped.
Overwatch 2 is just a waste of time. It's more like an expansion to Overwatch. A-La. Overwatch 1.5.
At-least its free.
I could somewhat understand calling it barebones on maps, but there was already a lot of heroes at launch, I think it was a mistake to up the pace they added them at, the first few were most more something to look forward to. And yeah Overwatch 2 was handled very poorly that goes without saying. Sad that the original state of the game is no longer available.
If you are going to be light on content like maps, game modes, single player etc'.
Then the amount of heroes needs to be huge to ensure variety.
Remember the game released in 2016... In the following year they added two characters:
- Ana.
-
Sombra.
And two maps. - Eichenwalde.
-
Estadio das Ras.
2 characters, 2 maps.... In a year.
Not exactly a good content release cadence out of the gate to keep people vested and interested.
Thankfully things got a little better... But a week ago I fired the game up and honestly... Considering it's been 10 years, it doesn't really have 10 years worth of additional content I feel... Let alone justify the "2" moniker to signify it's a sequel.
It's a good game, but like I pointed out on release, it's a small game.
Overwatch had a fun enough gameplay loop at launch but I still hated it for its monetization 10 years ago. I know people who still swear by it, so honestly I could probably hop on a match and have a fine enough time. HotS was fine at launch but is just a super derivative cash grab that wanted in on the League/Dota money. Creatively boring. If you're a spurned Ex-Dota player I guess it's something. I just can't abide by them being endless money pits for users. Really this is 80% of AAA right now.
Trust me I'm well aware that Overwatch won GOTY over Doom 2016 and Titanfall 2, which contain some of the tightest shooter campaigns ever made. It was dumb as fuck then too, even when the game was 'good'. The money is always going to enshitify an online game. Time after time. So I'm asking you to look at the state of the games industry, and the historic output of the company, and ask yourself if you really think they're going to come out with something that isn't going to suck ass either at launch, or in a couple of years.
I did check and it looks like the starcraft shooter is described as a 'PvE third person shooter' which screaaaaams Left 4 Dead. They are 100% making a Vermintide and shoving a season pass in it. Is that really what you want? To spend 40 dollars on a 'freemium experience' so that you can buy a battle pass and cosmetics at the same time? And then you've dropped 100 dollars before you've put 8 hours into it? Because that's what this looks like. Even if the game is 'good' it'll be overproduced garbage designed to never have you play anything else ever again.
I feel like you haven't been playing mobas (or maybe Hots) much if you think it was creatively boring, it was one of the most original games of the genre, it reconsidered what a moba could be, got rid of items in favor of individual hero talents and was much more team and object focused. Honestly both League and Dota 2 were closer to Dota 1 at launch than Hots were to them. Obviously it didn't end up as popular because the wide audience still preferred the classic formula, but personally I preferred it vastly.
This is precisely what im talking about when i say 'spurned dota players like it'.
I mean it was a moba. It was another one. They did some gameplay twists. It was crafted fine enough and with a lot of money because there was a lot of money in dota. Is that really exciting to you? Maybe if you hate the balancing decisions that Riot is making.
I mean you're really not arguing your case anymore. You agree that it's different but imply that people can only like it if they're annoyed with the old ones. Maybe some just actually like the things that are different?
Okay obviously I'm being a little hyperbolic about it. Peeling back the rhetoric: I think that a big appeal of that game was that it was Not Dota. You don't have to be tired of the big two to be a fan, but there's definitely some overlap. There's absolutely people that just enjoy it for what it is (though 'what it is' is a stripped down version of a pre-existing game).
That said, no I don't think that a handful of design decisions make it not derrivitive. Yeah obviously it's not going to play 1:1 like Dota. League doesn't play 1:1 like Dota. It doesn't change the fact that Blizzard wanted in on the cash cow and made a stripped down, approachable version of it, that they could monetize the hell out of. Getting rid of items doesn't somehow make it interesting in the artistic sense. Heroes of the Storm is boring aesthetically and really in most ways that I think matter.
You're also ignoring the larger point, which is that this is not a company which is going to make things worth a damn in 2026.
Diablo 4? Also boring aesthetically. 'Hello we made a new shiny diablo with a budget of 200 million and by god we're going to recoup our investment. A single set of armor is 28 dollars. You're welcome'. Are you really excited about that? That??? This is the company you're going to bat for?
I mean at that point it's a purely personal take. It's no more right to call hots derivative than any other moba that isn't Dota 1, but fair enough if you don't find it interesting. I wasn't arguing about the other part, I'm skeptical about Blizzards future though not 100 % dismissive, so I'll leave it here.
Well, I disagree with you :) Simple as that.
I mean your statement is just plain wrong... After Warcraft 3, Blizzard came up with a LOT of good games and the fact that you do not like them or some of them, is a you problem not a Blizzard one.
Starcraft 2 - Amazing game, probably one of the best solo sci-fi campaigns out there.
Diablo 3 - Very good game, you are pointing the Auction House like an issue but they removed it AND it does not make it a bad game. They tried something that's all.
Diablo 4 - Very good game. Getting better SEASON after SEASON, and the micro-transactions are 100% for cosmetics. It does not make the game "bad". (agan, you finding it boring does not make it a bad game, just not 'your' cup of tea)
Diablo 2 - Resurrected : Amazing remake (probably one template other publishers should follow for remakes)
Heroes of the Storm - One of the best and most diverse MOBAs out there (the only reason it did not work is that LOL/DOTA2 are simply too dominant), but the game is pretty damn good, and if anything, Microsoft should reboot it and add the whole Xbox characters.
Overwatch 1/2 - This is one of the best MP team-based shooters out there...
World of Warcraft - They came up with a LOT of good expansions for WOW, and the game is at its best today. And for the nostalgic, there is Warcraft Classic.
Then you have the 2 mobile games, so what? They wanted to have mobile games, and like any mobile games, they are cash-oriented. This does not make Blizzard a bad developer, and it does not make all their other games bad...
Overall, you seem to have specific tastes, and for some reason, Blizzard's games after Warcraft 3 do not fit it... This is okay, but if anything, when Blizzard announces an FPS in the Starcraft universe, based on their track record, there are good reasons to be excited.
Would have preferred Starcraft 3, sure... But I'll take an FPS made by Blizzard for sure.
All the hate based on the fact that they have games with micro-transactions or wanted to also have mobile games is ridiculous.
Agree with a lot of this stuff but just had to throw in that Diablo 2 Resurrected is not called Reforged nor a remake :P
haha good call :D I was actually not sure and almost open by Battle.Net Client to check but did not feel like it ;) Let me fix it so it does not because the focus on a reply ;P
It's def a taste thing. But writing 'in my opinion' is headass because I'm writing it. It's my opinion.
Like I said earlier, I'll accept the Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 love. And yea I know they removed the marketplace, but it shows where the company was at. It's definitely the least egrigious game the company's put out in a minute, though.
Diablo 2 Resurrected is going back to their old well of games, so the groundwork had already been done, and also was not developed in house (it was Vicarious Visions. I think Blizard still had a credit though because they handled back end stuff and also they used original source code). This is just an old game that was already good.
re: HotS I think the idea of begging a huge corporation to bring back a money pit and add more IP is the most boring thing you could do.
As I've BEEN saying, the issue is not that the gameplay is bad. Each of those games is a fine skinner box. It's that they've crossed the border into being Products for you to turn into second jobs.
It's also not just about them having microtransactions, but about the microtransactions dictating the gameplay and progression. It's not like you have The Game and then you have The Monetization. They're connected. They all employ FOMO tactics with shit like rotating stores or limited time events with huge buttons and it's cheap. Older games are 'less' bad about it, but it's all kind of the same problem.
Looking at one of the easier targets, Diablo 4 is a 50 dollar game (which is fine) with a 40 dollar expansion (hrm) and 28 dollar armor (what). It uses a freemium currency that only unlocks shitty armor. It has a battle pass. Buying the battle pass nets you items that speed up progression, so you pay to play the game less. There's a more expensive accelerated version of the battle pass, so you can pay even MORE money to play the game less. Basically, Diablo 4 has always been enshitified.
Heroes of the Storm has pretty standard MOBA monetization which is to say it's really shitty. Like imagine if you were playing a fighting game where each character is like 8 dollars or just hours and hours of grinding and also there's 200 of them. And also each of them had a dozen skins that cost upwards of 16 dollars. It's shitty on the face of it. Also visually it looks like ass.
OW2's system SOUNDS better than OW1's until you think about it for a half second. OW1s was paid and had loot boxes and that shit sucked ass for SURE. You did get a pretty steady stream of stuff, though. So you got a good amount of cosmetics for free after the price of admission. OW2 went free to play, and has a battle pass and purchasable cosmetics. Cool, no more gambling. They backtracked on the decision to not make each character available to everyone off the bat, which is good. But then you notice that the price of a skin can be 20-50 dollars, which is fairly egrigious. So you can get the battle pass and one skin and have spent 60 dollars hypothetically, more than the original game (or as much if you got the special edition), and get so much less for it. The game has been enshitified.
WoW is still a subscription based game, which I don't mind. It's an online game with continuous development. Buuuut then you're paying for the expansions. Which is what that continuous development is primarily on. And then you're dealing with microtransactions that cost 20 dollars for armor. I'm asking you to consider how much it costs to make the game, which you can access for 15 dollars a month, and then consider much much it costs to make one texture, which is a 20 dollar purchase on top of that. They're also getting them more rapidly, and they look worse than they used to.
And yeah I brought up the mobile shit because unlike the Diablo 2 remaster, they DID develop that shit in house. That was them. Those are games they made.
Blizzard games just get enshitified over time because of money. All of them. No exceptions.
You have some sort of fixation on monetization even if aside from their mobile game it is 100% for cosmetic stuff AND NONE of them are driving gameplay and progression, that's 100% made up stuff, either you did not play any of those games or you are listening to too many YouTube videos because that's simply not the case AT ALL, and please give me any exemple (other than mobile games) where monetization is driving progression or even gameplay (other than expansion obviously). If you really believe that cosmetics are something driving progression/gameplay, again, that's a "you" problem...
The only games that is really driven by monetization are the both mobile games (esp. Diablo Immortal that is going nuts about it).
I mean almost ALL your points again game A, or game B is about monetization. Same goes for your WOW argument, we are talking about the game behind GOOD here, not how you would want to pay less for it based on what "you" believe a company should charge for... And yes, like any big publisher out there, I'm looking for Microsoft to revive Heroes of the Storm, why would I not if I like the game lol
So yes, let's agree to disagree because, none (and I mean it) of your points makes any sense to me :D
So yah, Let's agree to disagree. None (and I mean it), of your points make any sense to me :)
Do you think that cosmetic progression counts as a form of progression or are you stupid
Also HotS? Overwatch for a period if tine? Hearthstone?
I mean, wow that escalted quickly :)
But fine, if you want to go this way: Maybe you are the stupid one cause you said that "Buying the battle pass nets you items that speed up progression, so you pay to play the game less.". I did not, and I was ASKING you to give exemple for it; as EVERY game you mentioned does not have anything else but cosmetics and none of this non-sense. And this is simply BS at this point.
The only games with this are mobile games but that's how most mobile games are.
Anyway, at this point you are just starting to become very rude anyway so go on with your ridiculous non-sense and I'll be waiting for the new game from Blizzard and enjoy it while you keep bitching about micro-transactions or whatever is not your cup of tea.
You literally buy characters in HotS which is not a mobile game
Are you serious? That's your exemple of "pay to win"? Unlockable characters in a MOBA? Like someone else already said, either you never played a MOBA if you think that's pay to win or you just very bad at it (and probably blame the "character" your opponent is kicking your ass with for the win). And from ALL the games you are blasting; this is probably one single exemple (still not pay to win) of what is pushing you to make a big drama about how Blizzard became corrupted, evil and so bad at making games :D LOL
Look, your initial non-sense about how Blizzard did not make any good game after Warcraft 3 has been proven wrong a long time ago and now you are just trying to move the goal post to "win" your argument.
I'm done with you; my Heroes game is finally starting anyway (queues are pretty long in Master/GM) and you are just going to throw any random and ridiculous things to make your point.
I leave it there and let you argue with yourself at this point :D
Ciao
Shooter? Not StarCraft 3?
