So the war begins..

Yaaay, sounds exciting, however I keep on hearing that Battle.net will be pay-to-play for all blizzard games?!? Really?.....Nooo, reallly??!?

Can anybody confirm that?

HEY!!! If anyone wants a free beta code just go to GAMESTOP.

You don't REALLY have to preorder to get it. The clerk just has a barcode they can scan and it will print out a reciept with a beta code on it. If the clerk is nice they'll just give you one, cuz they don't have to verify anything to give it to you.

LOL yeah, no way in hell spawn copies will still fly in 2010. I still can't wait, I don't care how many "no LAN- $60 price point- 1/3 a game" lines the usual suspects throw out in despair, this game is going to fucking rock!

MattyC wrote on May 6, 2010, 15:28:
Blizzard used to allow 'spawn' multiplayer copies as a sort of play with a friend demo. Hopefully they will do the same with SC2.

Hahahahahahaha

eRe4s3r wrote on May 5, 2010, 09:09:
Well, thats true i guess. I just don't trust that Blizzard can put out anything in a decent timeframe.

And as long as theres no demo for the campaign we don't actually know that the campaign is even remotely close to a good story.

Well we can go off of StarCraft 1, the WarCraft series, and Diablo titles. It not going to win any writing awards, but they usually pull together pretty interesting stories. Not like a demo would show you the quality of the story anyway. It would be what... a tutorial and maybe 2 other missions?


Blizzard used to allow 'spawn' multiplayer copies as a sort of play with a friend demo. Hopefully they will do the same with SC2.

Well, thats true i guess. I just don't trust that Blizzard can put out anything in a decent timeframe.

And as long as theres no demo for the campaign we don't actually know that the campaign is even remotely close to a good story.

I suppose I also need to learn how to use Blue's threaded system. Sigh. Sorry everyone.

Doh! I need to update my Blue's address. I'm using a many years old hotmail account here that I don't check. Sorry man!

Hey there. I am just now re-visiting this thread. I just forwarded the email to you. Have fun and please let us know if it works out for you.

Malacai

Well yeah, so this isn't any different from waiting to play Mass Effect until 1-2 years from now or whenever Mass Effect 3 comes out. Maybe some people will just wait for an entire series to be complete, but to say that there is "no point" in playing the first part on release is pretty damn silly.

Uh, its part 1 of 3 in terms of story.... I didn't say its 1/3 the size, i am saying its a trilogy and that means their campaign story is split (as in spans) over 3 games, or 1 game and 2 expansions, or whatever Thats what was said in that keynote anyway..

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

eRe4s3r wrote on May 4, 2010, 18:03:
Mhh, thanks for the link

Still think it would be better to wait for a pack, no point in buying part 1 of 3 and then have to wait for part 2 for years only to then forget the story of part 1 before part 2 gets out.

Blizzard doesn't release unpolished stuff, thats good. But Now that they split the game into 3 i sure as hell hope they are faster then 3 years for part 2 and 3 ^^

I certainly don't care if you purchase a game now, later, or ignore it entirely, but it's just plain bullshit to continue spreading this nonsense about how it's "only part 1 of 3" or that they "split a single game into 3 parts".


Maybe if Starcraft 2 was 1/3 the size of the game as Starcraft, it would make sense......but....well....it's not.

nin wrote on May 4, 2010, 07:53:

For 10 bucks more than I paid for SC

While you may have gotten it for $50, the MSRP for Starcraft was...



The same price SC2 is going for now.

Hey! What did I say?

http://mirror.servut.us/kuvat/meinung/my_hair_is_a_bird_your_argument_is_invalid.jpg

Couldn't find the pic of the "My hat is black" one, but this will do.

Creston

Mhh, thanks for the link

Still think it would be better to wait for a pack, no point in buying part 1 of 3 and then have to wait for part 2 for years only to then forget the story of part 1 before part 2 gets out.

Blizzard doesn't release unpolished stuff, thats good. But Now that they split the game into 3 i sure as hell hope they are faster then 3 years for part 2 and 3 ^^

nin wrote on May 4, 2010, 07:53:
While you may have gotten it for $50, the MSRP for Starcraft was...


The same price SC2 is going for now.

And $60 was the MSRP of Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3 as well. You can bet plenty of people in this thread bought at least one of those games.

elefunk wrote on May 4, 2010, 03:58:
Perhaps if you guys spent less time bitching about "OMG ONLY ONE RACE" and more time actually reading about what the game has perhaps you'd learn a thing or two? Stupid situations like this are why the gaming world laughs at petulant PC gamers - they'd rather bitch and whine about flawed and incomplete information than actually learn about amazing games being put out by one of the best developers on the planet that's never created a bad game in its entire existence.

Well stated... I'm so tired of hearing people bitch about SC2 while hardly knowing anything about the game. I guess I should be glad this thread isn't filled with posts spouting bs about the 3 part idea being pushed onto Blizzard by Bobby Kotick.

Oh yeah, console gamers aren't any better when it comes to whining.

This comment was edited on May 4, 2010, 15:37.

eRe4s3r wrote on May 4, 2010, 06:56:
Its still only 1 race though. And Terrans of all things. If the Map Editor is really as powerful as they claim then maybe it will not be a boring campaign, we'll see.

The reason for the split is a mystery. But fact is that its not a Zerg campaign and not a Protoss campaign. So all we get to do with Zerg and Protoss in SP is play skirmish. Not cool.

As a SP gamer that means the game is worth 20$ max (to me) ^^ Maybe if the trilogy is complete it'll be worth full price for SP only.

The reason for splitting SC2 into 3 parts isn't a mystery at all. Blizzard explained their options at Blizzcon 2008. They could either:

(A) Scale down the scope of the game
(B) Make each campaign huge and release 3 parts
(C) Do a little bit of everything and delay the game for a long time

Check out this video of the Blizzcon panel where Rob Pardo explained the whole thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjnJqXy_qFs

It's quite sad how you're incapable of disagreeing without insulting people. There's no "lake of bullshit". What the fuck is your problem?

Dawn of War II has a single campaign that takes 10-15 hours to complete with very repetitive missions, Starcraft II has 29 missions, all of which should be pretty different and unique from one another based on the multitude they've shown so far. Starcraft II also has an entirely different training mode specifically meant to teach you online strategies. Starcraft II also has a totally revamped Battle.NET which is eons beyond anything Games for Windows Live can do.


I've played both games. A lot. The production values and quality of the online systems are vastly different from one another. Dawn of War II is well worth $40-50. Starcraft II will easily be worth the $60.