Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

StarCraft II Trisected

The big news today out of BlizzCon is that StarCraft II is being divided into Terrans: Wings of Liberty, Zerg: Heart of the Swarm, and Protoss: Legacy of the Void, three separate standalone campaigns that will be sold separately, each highlighting one of the game's races, with the decision to subdivide the real-time strategy sequel said to be the alternative to either delaying or scaling back the release. Shacknews quotes Blizzard's Rob Pardo saying the second and third games "will be like expansion packs, but we really want them to feel like standalone products." Word is the Zerg campaign will emphasize RPG elements, the Protoss campaign will focus on diplomacy, and the Terran campaign will also feature a Protoss mini-campaign. Shacknews also offers a couple of cut-scenes, one fully rendered, and the other using the game engine.

View
109 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >

109. Re: No subject Oct 14, 2008, 22:24 Creston
 
Where did they announce that? Because I'm not seeing it in the linked story. It says that each will be released with "Enough content to justify a stand-alone release."



It's in the video of the BlizzCon announcement.


Okay, fair enough then. Thanks fellas.

Creston

 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
108. No subject Oct 14, 2008, 19:55 Verno
 
I have never seen a Blizzard product(debut or expansion) retail at less than $39.95 at launch up here in Canada, so I sincerely doubt they will change that trend. In terms of the release schedule I've never seen a Blizzard product trail another one in a 2 year period, so I'd be it would be at least a year if not 2 before you see the second release. No we don't have "facts" but it's not really hard to guesstimate since Blizzard is pretty predictable and there's a long history to follow.

 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Destiny, Fire Emblem
Watching: Continuum, Star Trek TNG, Haunt
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
107. Re: No subject Oct 14, 2008, 15:04 Wowbagger_TIP
 
So now, taking all that into consideration - skyrocketing budgets and all - these so-called "fans" expect Starcraft II's campaign to not only be ridiculously ambitious and completely overhauled, but three times as long as well?

And the second they announce this decision, these so-called "fans" immediately shun Blizzard as "changing"? That they're suddenly influenced by Activision even though it was a MERGER, not an ACQUISITION?

These so-called "fans" want an incredibly promising game from a developer that has never disappointed in a decade, but refuse to spend even 20 seconds understanding how this decision was even reached?
Until we know what the release schedule looks like, as well as the pricing for each installation, I expect that people will remain suspicious. While Blizzard has a good rep, that was before they were bought by a company with a bad rep. A company that simply wants to exploit its properties on an annual basis.

I think it's Activision and Blizzard's responsibility to explain themselves fully on this one if they hope to assuage those fans that fear that, once again, a big publisher will purchase and destroy a good developer. It's happened too many times in the past for it to be overlooked.

Taking the words of publishers or developers at face value is stupid, as we've been lied to more times than we can count. Of course they're going to spin it as a good thing. But we don't know enough yet to believe that it is. If they explain it all and justify the price, then they'll probably get the benefit of the doubt that they'll deliver on it.

 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
106. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 15:51 Mr. Tact
 
Someone who has looked into the facts inform me.
In multiplayer if you don't have one of the expansions what does that mean for you?
Ok, this might be a legitimate complaint. If you have no interest in doing the single player campaigns, then while the second and third installments will likely add some small number of units, I haven't seen or heard of there would be a significant change for multi-player.

If Blizzard is smart, they'll simply make the installments version upgrades. Anyone interested in multi-player only can buy the first installment and version upgrades with come with new units. You'll only have to buy the second and third installments if you want the single player campaign content.
 
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
105. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 15:45 Prez
 
Had Blizzard not done expansions for Warcraft 2 and 3, Starcraft, Diablo2, and WOW, I might agree with you.

Point taken. Yet even with those expansions, they still have released a ton of new content, updates, fixes, and support. I am somewhat disappointed by this news, though Blizzard can certainly change my mind by working their magic. I wouldn't write off a blizzard game so easily. (Except for World of Warcraft; I absolutely loathe MMO's.)

In other words, SC1 + 3D graphics (*snore*).

Me, I'd think that was the greatest thing since sliced bread.


This comment was edited on Oct 13, 2008, 15:49.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
104. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 15:39 ShadyPete
 
This game shall now be known as "Starcraft 150"


 
Avatar 18283
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
103. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 13:32 wolve
 
Had Blizzard not done expansions for Warcraft 2 and 3, Starcraft, Diablo2, and WOW, I might agree with you
You can say that again. I really don't see much difference between Blizzard releasing SC2 as 1 game + 2 expansions versus planning SC2 as a trilogy. Either way, one could say they are milking the franchise. I guess the lesson to be learned is that Blizzard should have stuck to the old formula so we could all the play the same old crap again. In other words, SC1 + 3D graphics (*snore*).

 
Avatar 1182
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
102. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 12:56 nin
 
I can't shake the feeling that the Blizzard of old would have made the extra campaigns free to those who bought the original game.

Had Blizzard not done expansions for Warcraft 2 and 3, Starcraft, Diablo2, and WOW, I might agree with you.
 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
101. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 12:38 Prez
 
I can't shake the feeling that the Blizzard of old would have made the extra campaigns free to those who bought the original game. I don't expect developers to work for free, but Blizzard has supported the original Starcraft with free updates and patches for 10 years . I do know that they never would broken apart a game that was supposed to be taken as a complete whole.  
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
100. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 10:35 Overon
 
The way I see it, we have yet another company trying to charge extra for things that did not cost extra before. Collectively the industry is trying to change the way software is purchased which does not benefit us but benefits them.

Someone who has looked into the facts inform me.
In multiplayer if you don't have one of the expansions what does that mean for you?

This comment was edited on Oct 13, 2008, 12:37.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
99. Re: No subject Oct 13, 2008, 03:15 wolve
 
Here's a few more videos from the same Blizzcon panel which where Rob Pardo demo'ed the single player (which precedes the Trilogy announcement). I think if a lot of naysayers actually saw the in-game cutscenes and adventure aspects of single player gameplay, they might just understand the huge scope of SC2.

Then again, most people like playing the same old shit.

Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j6Kz-EH51c
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMqoz1eEmU8
Part 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9JOKhoI9nY


 
Avatar 1182
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
98. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 19:22 Mr. Tact
 
Where did they announce that? Because I'm not seeing it in the linked story. It says that each will be released with "Enough content to justify a stand-alone release."

It's in the video of the BlizzCon announcement.
 
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
97. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 17:33 Talisorn
 
I'm really curious where everyone is getting this whole "Each of the three releases will be longer than the original starcraft!" from?
If you can, try and track down a video panel that was held at Blizzcon where they announced this (Comment #82 has a cut down version, but is missing all the cool demos that preceded the actual announcement). You'll get all the answers you need there.

 
Avatar 19028
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
96. So Oct 12, 2008, 16:24 IQ
 
Somebody gave them a deadline, and for the first time ever it can't be "when its ready" - this is the beginning of the end.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
95. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 15:44 Prez
 
I'm really curious where everyone is getting this whole "Each of the three releases will be longer than the original starcraft!" from?

I thought I was just missing it myself. I went back and looked after some said that, and other than the quote Creston posted, I can't find it explicitly stated that one of the new campaigns will be as long as all of the previous 3.

Another thing; one of the things that made the original Starcraft's campaign brilliant was how they cleverly intertwined the races and their stories. Just when you got tired of playing Terran, things were switched up and you played the starkly different Zerg. Just when that that started to get old, it was time to play the again altogether different Protoss. And in the final missions, you got to play with more than one. This is what made me play through the entire campaign, which is a rarity indeed since I almost never finish the single player portion of an RTS. All of this is lost by splitting the races into different releases.The game still has a good chance of being an all-time classic like the original; regardless, I am a lot less excited about this game than I was a few days ago.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
94. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 14:56 Creston
 
Blizzard really did announce they were releasing 3 times the content that was expected.

Where did they announce that? Because I'm not seeing it in the linked story. It says that each will be released with "Enough content to justify a stand-alone release."

But that means fuck all. Portal is deemed to have enough content for a stand-alone release, and it's 2 fucking hours long. (2 very good hours, admittedly, but still.)

They could release 3 five hour campaigns and call it "justifiable."

I'm really curious where everyone is getting this whole "Each of the three releases will be longer than the original starcraft!" from? And no, wishful thinking doesn't count.

Creston

 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
93. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 13:35 Hafakat
 
Blizzard added that the plans for the multiplayer component are unchanged by the splitting of the campaigns. However, some units will now be unique to the campaigns and will not be playable in multiplayer.

I would say this means all three games have identical multiplayer, including units. The unique units in single player are nothing new (starcraft had them too, like raynor, duke). It seems like the only content being "split" is the campaign, so maybe the second and third titles will be quite cheap, especially if downloaded. Possibly they'll have discounts for people who bought the terran box too, so who knows?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
92. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 13:11 Prez
 
Way to make a decision based on completely unfounded information about a game that probably won't even come out for another half year. Nice one.

How is it unfounded? The information is directly from Blizzard! And to announce something this radical only a 'half a year' prior to release is worrying.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
91. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 13:03 Verno
 
No prices have been announced yet, so you're basically talking out of your asses.
How do you know it won't be $50 + $25 + $25 = $100 or even less??

Going by the price of every Blizzard expansion pack I've ever purchased being at least $40.00 and usually $50.00 up here. It's not an unfair assumption, especially given that they seem to be treating all three as separate games.

Way to make a decision based on completely unfounded information about a game that probably won't even come out for another half year. Nice one.

You mean way to make a decision based on information directly from Blizzard? Ok thanks for your validation captain snarky.

 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Destiny, Fire Emblem
Watching: Continuum, Star Trek TNG, Haunt
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
90. Re: No subject Oct 12, 2008, 12:53 Hafakat
 
Instead they are basically forcing you to spend $150.00 on all three.

For the folks defending this by pointing to what Blizzard announced, do you really blame people for not believing the marketing speak of a company who has every reason to sell us on the fact that its a good thing we are going to have to pay $130.00 for the game Blizzard originally promised and planned?

No prices have been announced yet, so you're basically talking out of your asses.
How do you know it won't be $50 + $25 + $25 = $100 or even less??

I believe they already said that each product will also introduce new multiplayer units as well as the singleplayer campaigns. So that means you are forced to purchase all three for the complete multiplayer experience. I'm skipping SC2 as a result and no I don't care that it's a Blizzard game.

Way to make a decision based on completely unfounded information about a game that probably won't even come out for another half year. Nice one.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
109 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo