Transmog yourself into an Avenger!
6 blue posts to read before Diablo 3's launch
Cross-realm zones coming soon
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsBlizzard's third project: Hydra
by Mike Schramm 
Sep 11th 2007 at 11:29AM
We already know Blizzard has three games in development right now. One of them is Wrath of the Lich King, the next WoW expansion. The second is Starcraft II. And the third is an as-of-yet-unannounced title... called Hydra.That's what the Inquirer overheard at the Austin GDC. One Blizzard employee asked another what they were working on, and the overheard reply was "I'm working on Hydra."
So now we have an internal name for Blizzard's third project. Let the speculation begin. I'll start: the Hydra is a creature from Greek mythology, so maybe we're looking at a Diabloesque game set in Greece? Like Titan Quest (which is really Diablo anyway) or God of War, but made by Blizzard? And Hydras also appear in World of Warcraft (notably in BFD, where a Hydra is the final boss), so could it be possible that this is actually another WoW expansion, maybe the Maelstrom expansion we've been waiting for?
Thanks, James!
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Blizzard, News items
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Matt Sep 11th 2007 11:32AM
Reading way into this, but the Diablo hydra had 3 heads, so hydra = Diablo 3
:-P
Bentas Sep 11th 2007 11:36AM
Or it's just a random code name for a project completely unrelated and therefore meaningless.
Rich Sep 11th 2007 11:41AM
#2 Agreed.
Blizzard isn't stupid and wouldn't be so obvious to have the code name be something to do with the game.
Also, its not going to be Diablo 3. Most of that team left and is working on Hellgate: London. This new project is another MMO. Blizzard's been looking for people for a "next gen MMO" so that's the new project.
Makavelli Sep 11th 2007 11:43AM
Anything from The Inquirer should be taken with a bucket of salt...
Mike Schramm Sep 11th 2007 11:49AM
Yeah, Makavelli, I couldn't agree more-- the Inquirer hasn't been exactly trustworthy in the past. But then again, this is an overheard comment about an internal project name at a videogame convention-- even if I saw it in the New York Times, I'd take it with quite a lot of salt.
Urthal Sep 11th 2007 11:54AM
Hydra..lisk?
Dave Sep 11th 2007 11:52AM
hydra sounds like either Diablo 3 or WoW Expansion 3.
Or, Starcraft 2 Expansion 1. Either way.
Blizzard has gone down the route of being horribly uncreative and just recycling their old IP that the people who don't work there anymore created, so I see no reason to assume there's going to be a new original Blizzard game ever. It's all going to be derivative sequel things until they run it all into the ground. All they need to do is turn Starcraft into an MMO, Diablo into an MMO and live off those profits of upgrading those games forever basically.
Most game companies would love to have a single really profitable MMO, Blizzard can make 3 and hook maybe upwards of 20 million worldwide per month. Why make something new?
Nightravyn Sep 11th 2007 11:56AM
Well if you go by the traditional description of the Hydra, wherein if you cut off one of it's heads, two more grew in it's place, it very well could lend itself to Diablo. After all, in Diablo 1, you killed Diablo then became him. Diablo 2, you went off and killed Prime Evils and their minions, but the more you killed, the more cropped up (D2: LOD expansion). So for Diablo 3, it could be a case of "oh crap... they have more that we just made angry/room to take over in hell?"
Buuuut that's just my thoughts/random musings/wishful thinkings.
Ian Sep 11th 2007 12:21PM
StarCraft 2 = Medusa. It was purely a code word, and I doubt Hydra is any different.
Alyxia Dec 3rd 2007 5:35PM
Medusa was actually a reference to Kerrigan, an important character of the Starcraft serie.
"Aspects of Kerrigan's infested character, especially her hair, are inspired by the Greek gorgon Medusa."
Todd Sep 11th 2007 12:10PM
Um, "The Lost Vikings: Hydra"?
Alright, so just wishful thinking.
native Sep 11th 2007 12:12PM
Hydras are big.
So i bet its a King Kong based MMO.
And Hydra's are Mythological.
So I bet you defeat King Kong by rolling one of the members of "Mythbusters" on the Discovery Channel.
We have an overheard word at a convention. Stop shooting in the dark. You're wasting ammunition.
Deavon Phoenix Sep 11th 2007 12:21PM
Hydra could be anything.
You have to remember that StarCraft II codename is/was Medusa. They're probably taking mythological beasts to name their projects so that even if info does leak out, nobody will have any idea what it is about.
Regis Sep 11th 2007 12:22PM
World of Diablo, I could go for that :)
SeiferTim Sep 11th 2007 12:34PM
#13: Not entirely sure how a World of Diablo would be much different then WoW... more demons? Major aspects of WoW seem to have been evolved from Diablo in the first place.
Marcus Sep 11th 2007 12:49PM
Hydra = WoW on the Xbox 360
Preston Sep 11th 2007 1:04PM
For all we know, it's just a boss in Warcraft or Starcraft II.
mrobin604 Sep 11th 2007 1:06PM
I am sure that "Hydra" is a code name that has NOTHING to do with the actual content. Blizzard is pretty good at keeping secrets, and this is one of the basic things you do to avoid people finding out, in case your employees are talking about the game in public and you overhear them :)
The game I'm working on had a very small meaningless code name before we announced it as well.
Candina@WH Sep 11th 2007 1:25PM
Hydra, like Medusa, is just a code name (Longhorn anybody?).
However. Lets say, theoretically, that they chose a mythical beast with multiple heads for a reason (as opposed to project Perseus, Pegusus or Kraken).
How about WoW on multiple console systems? Xbox Live, PS3?
Why not try to push the franchise out to the console?
But odds are, it is the MMO to replace WoW in the future. which makes it pointless to even attempt to speculate on any details.
Coherent Sep 11th 2007 1:24PM
I would tend to believe that it's a MMO'ish project, since they've kind of hinted at expanded MMO inclinations in the past. It's been a goldmine for them, now that they have the technical kinks worked out.
The profit potential from a fresh MMO is simply a magnitude above anything else they can produce.
Also, the development lead time is years. In order to create a strong foundation for a future MMO, you have to start planning 4-5 years ahead of launch to build a creative framework that can be filled out by artists and code monkeys in the final 3 years of development. It saves money: a small team working steadily ahead of time to nail down the universe and gameplay specifics is equivalent to 30-40 mil of late-cycle development cash. It allows you to be more ambitious and provide richer gameplay on an efficient budget.
I'm thinking that it's probably a Starcraft MMO. Blizzard has a model to follow: Warcraft III establishes the stage, creates epic characters, lore, and an overarching conflict for World of Warcraft to fulfill.
Of course they could do Diablo, an older game but very well respected. But it's been pointed out correctly that the key Diablo team is gone now. Blizz owns the IP, they could exploit it, but that would be spitting in the faces of people they still remember very well. This is probably why Diablo was a no-show at Blizzcon.
Maybe they hope for some sort of creative reconciliation. They're afraid that if they tried to do a Diablo product now, it wouldn't feel like Diablo at all.
No. Tearing the company in three directions would be utterly stupid, and Blizzard isn't stupid. They will "leverage their synergies" (ack, buzzword poisoning!) and put an MMO team to work expanding the Starcraft universe while the core RTS team builds a winning RTS game.