Jump to content

Starcraft II - THE TRILOGY?!


Antipode
 Share

Recommended Posts

Figured you all might like to know about this...just passing along the word. (I'm aware there's a SC2 thread already but I figured this was pretty big news and that thread is old. If they need to be merged, merge away!)

IGN has just posted an article which I found really disappointing. Basically, it means Blizzard (or perhaps Activision) is, in my opinion, potentially ruining our perfect game with awful marketing strategies.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/918/918895p1.html

"StarCraft II now consists of three different stand-alone titles--one for each faction campaign. The first of the StarCraft II trilogy will be StarCraft II Terrans: Wings of Liberty. The second will be StarCraft II Zerg: Heart of the Swarm, with the third and final installment of the main trilogy being StarCraft II Protoss: Legacy of the Void. Blizzard says it made the change to make each story that much more epic and to flesh out the StarCraft universe. By splitting the game, the company says players will access more story content, more characters, and more customization. Each game will be a stand-alone installment – not an expansion."

- My guess is "not an expansion" means each one will likely be full price (I hope maybe it will be cheaper to buy more than one).

- Each game will only have one race and one of the three campaigns - I can only hope the multiplayer is identical.

- This will only be acceptable to me if each game is like $20, which is pretty much impossible.

- Think of how amazing this game would be if all three were in one huge, epic piece of software. But it's not.

Granted, there aren't too many details known yet, so I'm just making this doomsday post based on what they've told us from blizzcon.

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Haha, Blizzard is making so much money they do things how they want to do it now.

Meh, I'll wait until there's more details.

If the campaigns are so huge and expansive that they warrant separate games, it won't be big deal for me... or if there's a way that you can get a discount for buying multiple games online or something. Not holding my breath though.

Maybe this is a new way of battling piracy... force people to buy 3 copies of a game to offset the losses caused by piracy. lol. Kidding. Kidding. I keed. I keed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The company said that StarCraft II now consists of three different stand-alone titles--one for each faction campaign. The first of the StarCraft II trilogy

That means a person is going to have to purchase 3 seperate games to get the full story. If there arent a SHITLOAD of details in the next week i am canceling my pre order and may lose all faith in gaming outside of valve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is terrible. I'm no longer looking forward to the game nearly as much -- I sincerely hope Blizzard knows what they're doing with this one.

If each seperate one is packed with enough goodies to justify the tag on it they do. But with what little has been shown on playtests given to the videogame news industry at the moment there ISNT.

Blizzard needs to put out details of why this is being done FAST

They need to show just how many units a person is going to be able to play with.

They need to explain how many missions there are and fill in a lot of holes FAST.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, each installment is supposed to have something like 36 missions each. If I recall correctly, the original StarCraft game had a bit less than that many missions across the entire campaign (same goes for Brood War). So in essence, we're getting more single player time this way, and Blizzard gets more money that will help cover the costs of running the multiplayer servers for FREE. Keep that in mind.

Mind you, I don't like the idea of paying more money, but all things considered, it's not too bad of a trade-off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, each installment is supposed to have something like 36 missions each. If I recall correctly, the original StarCraft game had a bit less than that many missions across the entire campaign (same goes for Brood War). So in essence, we're getting more single player time this way, and Blizzard gets more money that will help cover the costs of running the multiplayer servers for FREE. Keep that in mind.

Mind you, I don't like the idea of paying more money, but all things considered, it's not too bad of a trade-off.

I pray to god your right. But we need more information on this and very fast. If they let this hang there i know i wont be the only one canceling a preorder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this is a new way of battling piracy... force people to buy 3 copies of a game to offset the losses caused by piracy. lol. Kidding. Kidding. I keed. I keed.

Since you'll only be missing the single player segments if you only buy one, that makes it even more efficient to pirate the other two since you won't need to worry about online authentication. Oh, and I don't think financing online capabilities for non-MMOs have ever been an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm, sounds greedy to me. This makes no sense. And what are they going to do? Release them separately? If that's the case, screw Blizzard, I'll wait for a "battle chest". Let's hope they don't do this to Diablo III. That would be a travesty.

They need to go back to the original formula of what worked for Starcraft. Create a great RTS, with high replay value, and build an expansion that adds to it. Besides, who the hell plays for the CAMPAIGN? Seriously. Multiplayer is where it's at, and Starcraft's was great. I seriously hope they keep custom map building in as well, it would be horrible if they didn't put that in the package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch. Blizzard is going to have to act fast to prevent the potential fan speculation/backlash from killing the hype.

It's bad enough they haven't updated with any new units or significant information in some time, and now this corporate "screw you" announcement feels like a slap to the face. Not even a conciliatory announcement like an actual release date.

Are all three coming out the same time, reasonably close, or are we going to have a wait between each episode?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with this really. If they want to make the single campaigns really long and epic, all the more power to them. They probably figured out by now that the longevity of Starcraft didn't come from it's amazing single player, but its multiplayer. Assuming you can do all the fun campaign/map building, online play, and "instant action" stuff with just ONE of the packages, this is all the better for someone like me who doesn't care enough to play through every campaign to its finish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am apprehensive about this. While I like the idea of increasing the length of the campaigns and deepening the story, making three separate games for it seems ludicrous to me, especially if you have to pay full price ($30-50) for all three titles individually. If the the price for an individual campaign was about $20, I might be more willing to accept this as a good plan.

I for one loved the campaign missions and right now this feels like a kick in the balls to me. Granted, pricing details have not been released, but it's going to be a real bullshit-fest if I have to pay upwards of $100 to play this story to its entirety. Don't get any bright ideas about WarCraft IV, Blizzard! ><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These had better be three REALLY long campaigns. None of that crapping out and making the human/terran campaign too easy (or simply incomplete--Frozen Throne). Otherwise, Blizzard is going to find that some people interpret their marketing strategy as buy one, pirate two free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

potentially ruining our perfect game

The sense of entitlement held by Blizzard fans is unparalleled.

It's not your game. It's their game. You just get to play it.

Anyway rather than working yourself up into a frenzy speculating about details you don't have, why not wait until there's more solid info before turning on the waterworks?

And anyway, come on. It's StarCraft. This isn't going to stop anyone from buying all three versions. Science fiction fans are notoriously obsessive-compulsive, and science-fiction fans who are gamers are even more so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see where blizzard is coming from here. I mean, splitting up the games by race would allow them to pack more in the games, yes. But seriously, it is kinda fucking the average gamer. And this will encourage piracy to some extent as well. I've been irritated at blizzard for a long time, and I know a lot of people see this as flat out greed (IE hey we make money every month off people, lets get more off SC2 than we would if we just released it as one game, people will buy it!). But Ill see what the announcements are about it in the coming weeks before I judge if I will not buy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that worries me about this is the multiplayer. When SC first came out, you could get a handle on each races thanks to the single player campaign and being able to choose which race's campaign to play whenever.

With this, you won't be able to, you'll have to do that IN multiplayer mode; learning as you go.

Huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't suppose I really have any issue with it if each game has as many missions as the original Starcraft. I know as far as single player went, I vastly preferred playing Terrans and Zerg to Protoss in the original Starcraft, and I'm all about having a CRAPLOAD of missions for both. I think what probably happened is that Blizzard has gotten used to making massive, sweeping, epic stories over the years, and it would've been too much of a cram to pack them all into one game.

In a sense, what this could do for multiplayer would be quite interesting. There are people who play ONE race and one race alone in multiplayer, and have for over a decade. You now have an entire game dedicated to each race. What better way to hone your skills with that race? By making each game separate, Blizzard has the ability to modify the structure of EVERYTHING to be tailor made for that race. Not that they'll change the engine or anything, but I expect the Terran game will be different from the Zerg game will be different from the Protoss game in perhaps more than looks.

So will I pay for all 3? Heck yes, as soon as I pay for the new rig I'm putting together in 09 just to play Starcraft II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...