Blizzard to Rape Your Wallet

[NeoXY]

First of all, they haven't annouced any prices. The only thing they've said is that each of the campaigns will be as epic and deep as a standalone campaign.

Yeah, thats what I'm sorta counting on too. Its kinda like Valve and their 3 part HL2. Each episode is not full price. I'm hoping for something of the sort

[qdave]

It would have been a smart move in a world where there in no piracy. But would people really cash out $50 for each game?

how do you know it will be priced 50 for each..maybe 20$..making 60 totally. which would be quite acceptable.

[shakey]

for some reason i really dont see this as being a 20 dollar each game though, unless they come out with just single player only disc for those who already have a multiplayer one.... this whole thing is just so stupid. lol

[Argi]

for some reason i really dont see this as being a 20 dollar each game though, unless they come out with just single player only disc for those who already have a multiplayer one.... this whole thing is just so stupid. lol

If you look at my post on the last page I think it was - those are the three options Blizzard had. Which would you prefer? Three average campaigns, extreme delay or episodic campaigns.

[PyX]

Wow... first I was pretty sure it would be released within Sept. 2008, then news about Diablo 3 come out, so I'm saying, wow they will finish SC real quick and put all their efforts on Diablo, but no. They ALREADY put all their effort on Diablo, and SC seems dead, like Ghost.

The date on every site is still TBA and the same goes for Diablo. What's wrong with that?

Also, if I buy like one of these 3 games, I will only be able to play like... Terran vs Terran vs Terran vs Terran in multiplayer? It's a great marketing, but for a strategy game like this? ... Fail.

[shakey]

If you look at my post on the last page I think it was - those are the three options Blizzard had. Which would you prefer? Three average campaigns, extreme delay or episodic campaigns.

how long do they need to make a game? its an rts, not too many mission variety there. Build base, attack. Build base, defend. Build bigger base then other. Take certain number of troops and wipe out this. Allie with this base and take out that other base there. They say its on an epic scale. So what does that mean? like 90 of those same types of missions over and over?

Really though, they should take their time and make everything instead of selling it piece by piece. Im living just fine without the game, and could care less if i had to wait another 3 years. If its a good game, waiting isnt a problem. Its when stuff is rushed out that is the problem. Which would be sort of what is happening here. Or are they going to just release the other 2 single player races a year later, like how we are waiting for valves episodes?

If its not complete, dont sell it, cause I wont buy it. Some people have principles about things, others could care less, so this may work for blizzard with some, but not with me.

[remix17]

how do you know it will be priced 50 for each..maybe 20$..making 60 totally. which would be quite acceptable.

Sure. But what about all the people who will buy just one game to try it out and end up not liking it enough to buy 2 more? Than Blizzard ends up loosing money. They would be better off releasing a single title for $50.

[lalalawawawa]

The multiplayer component will be the same for all three parts. You will be able to play multiplayer and single player with AI (not campaign) with all three races.

[Crompee]

I like how many people are surprised about this. Don't you know that this isn't the same company and these aren't the same people who made the first game? An incredible number of people left Blizzard when Vivendi bought them.

Havent read anywhere that any members of Blizzard Development team left after the merge.

but you are spot on about this not being the Blizzard we learnt to love. Shortly after the merge, Activision announced (or slipped out) the Starcraft 2 Rough Release date being 2009.. While up until then Blizzard was doing its usual method of 'Its done when its Done'.

Then now we get an announcement that Blizzard are cutting out content in order to reach that 2009 release date? Something Blizzard has never done before, they never usually even set release dates that they need to achieve.

This would only be acceptable if you only got 1 campaign + multiplayer for say, $50 and then each additional campaign would cost like $10-15 and be released when it's done.

Lots of people will just want the multiplayer, and that way we don't have to buy the multiplayer component each time.

Thats not going to happen.

They've announced that Episode 2 and Episode 3 (Zerg and Protoss) arnt likely to be completed within one year of Episode 1. They are also treating is as an 'expansion' rather than an 'addon' so it'll be priced like a new game. They arnt going to spend that long developing the Zerg/Protoss Missons for little $$, rather they'll just offer more incentives to buy it.

The multiplayer component will be the same for all three parts. You will be able to play multiplayer and single player with AI (not campaign) with all three races.

You're living in a dream world if you think the only incentive or marketting they'll do for Episode 2/3 will be 'just a campaign for Zerg/Protoss'. They'll put more things into the expansions, so if you like Starcraft 2.. you'll buy the expansions.

I'll quote:

Lastly, Chris has mentioned that the development time of each installment of the trilogy would likely exceed one year due to the significant amount of extra content being developed for each one. On top of the singleplayer content, there will be additional multiplayer content and improvements, similar to what most expansion packs provide.

[Shadrack]

Blizzard is/was best game company around too~ haven't decided yet if I will even buy SC2 as I haven't played the original in years, but this is just a dick move. Whoever cheered for this in the audience is retarded...SC1's campaign sucked (imo) mainly because it was very drawn out and got boring halfway through each race. How do you suppose they have fixed that issue? There's only so many elements you can introduce to the story per mission before it gets repetitive.

It's a multiplayer game. That's where Starcraft was meant to shine. Let it continue to be that way with SC2 imo.

Thats true. It will be hard to learn how to play the other races if you only have access to one campaign.

[shakey]

this works with valve, because they released hl2 basically in that format. They warned us as soon as hl2 was in production. They then packaged great additional content with the extras, and sold them at very very reasonable prices. But hl2 was an FPS. There wasnt another story that needed to be told. With an RTS, we are only going to get 1 side, then wait a year and another year for the other 2? Its supposed to be all in 1 game for this type of game.

I certainly wont be buying sc2 if this is how its going to be. Hopefully diablo 3 wont be a let down. Seems that all the good games coming out now are really aiming to screw us all over. Spore and red alert drm, and now this. I cant wait for penny arcades prediction of live snakes in boxes for copy protection comes true lol.

[(Spork)]

WTF

[Golferjim]

Wow :o ..... I didnt think that it was true when my mate told me that they were going to be doing this with the up coming Starcraft2, as someone has said before Blizz is doing this because they know that people will pay for this game even though its coming out in three different parts..

I thought to myself that Blizz has gone down the path of E.A and pulled something strange on us, but no just Blizz doing their thing trying to get the max amount of money out of the gamers... Since that its coming out in three different parts can I play all three teams in the first pack that will becoming out, Say that the first one that comes out is the Zerg one will I be able to play Terrian or Protos with that? How will online play work with only one team?

Looking at this gaming and seeing it as a major flop at the moment, unless Blizz is having us on?

Not saying that the whole game is a flop just the Fact that we have to wait Three years to play the final team :s

[KeR]

Come on when hasn't Blizzard been raping our wallets? They make awesome games, but they do like their money.

[Crompee]

The multiplayer component will be the same for all three parts. You will be able to play multiplayer and single player with AI (not campaign) with all three races.

Actually, Dustin has announced that they are going with the 'expansion' feel and not just new campaigns. Like Broodwar was to Starcraft or Frozen throne to WC3.

Episode 2 and 3 arnt just singleplayer campaigns but also adding new things to multiplayer as well. So in effect, Singleplayer and Multiplayer gamers are being screwed over by this, as you wont get the finished multiplayer side until Episode 3 is out.. As each episode will bring new things in and mess up the balance so you need to relearn everything.

Wow :o ..... I didnt think that it was true when my mate told me that they were going to be doing this with the up coming Starcraft2, as someone has said before Blizz is doing this because they know that people will pay for this game even though its coming out in three different parts..

I thought to myself that Blizz has gone down the path of E.A and pulled something strange on us, but no just Blizz doing their thing trying to get the max amount of money out of the gamers... Since that its coming out in three different parts can I play all three teams in the first pack that will becoming out, Say that the first one that comes out is the Zerg one will I be able to play Terrian or Protos with that? How will online play work with only one team?

Looking at this gaming and seeing it as a major flop at the moment, unless Blizz is having us on?

Not saying that the whole game is a flop just the Fact that we have to wait Three years to play the final team :s

The first pack (or Starcraft 2 Episode 1) will be Terran. You will be able to play Zerg/Protoss in Multiplayer and Singleplayer Skirmish. The single player campaign will be Terran only, so no Single Player Story/Campaign for Zerg/Protoss.

Im godsmacked that a developer like Blizzard who is coming from Starcraft into Starcraft 2, which almost gaurentee's them e-sports success.. are deciding to shoot themselves in the foot.

Edited October 12, 2008 by Crompee

[Phalesafe]

Soooo did anyone actually watch the panel when this was announced? They said they had 3 options.

1. Release 3 campigns that didn't feel epic

2. Create and release each campaign individually but have them feel each like a standalone product

3. Create all 3 epic campaigns in the single product but delay the product significantly

Rob Pardo asked the crowd which one they'd prefer, everyone cheered at 2 and that's when he announced that that's what they had chosen.

All this "Blizzard falling from grace" is funny though.

Considering the IP is over 10 years old they had plenty of time to come up with this ****.

[Crompee]

Just to sum up whats announced:

1. Starcraft 2 will be split up into 3 releases.

2. The first release will be Terran only single player (no Zerg/Protoss).

3. The first release will contain normal multiplayer (So you can play with Terran/Protoss/Zerg in multiplayer)

4. The first release will contain normal skirmish mode (So you can play Terran/Protoss/Zerg in Skirmishes)

5. The second/third release will contain multiplayer updates

6. The second/third release will contain NEW UNITS

7. The second release will contain the Zerg Singleplayer campaign.

8. The third release will contain the Protoss Singleplayer campaign.

9. The second/third release will contain updates for the editor.

10. Think of the Second/Third release's as expansions like Brood war was to Starcraft or Frozen Throne to Warcraft 3. They are standalone expansions/games just instead of 3 new campaigns (1 for each race) you get 1 bigger campaign for 1 race only.

11. The second/third releases wont come quickly, you can expect them to take one year-two years each.

12. The price for the expansions is not confirmed, the only word is that if they feel like a standalone game.. they will be priced like one.

In conclusion, Blizzard is treating is like this. Starcraft 2 is being released as a full game, just that instead of three small campaigns, it will contain one large campaign. Then they will release an expansion with acouple new units, new balance, new updates, new editors, new tools and a new large campaign for Zerg. Then they will release another expansion with acouple new units, new balance, new updates, new editors, new tools and a new large campaign for Protoss.

What this means in real-terms.. Is that Starcraft 2 multiplayer is getting an overhaul every year/two years with new units and balance changes.

Source for expansions containing new units, as some people here seem to think the expansions wont affect multiplayer:

http://www.mymym.com/en/coverage/529/18.html (Says it at the end, 8:10)

[Ayepecks]

Excuses, excuses.

Again: if this were any major publisher, people would be raising hell. But because it's Blizzard everyone gives them a free pass. When I buy a game, I expect a COMPLETE game. I don't care if it has new units... they're all essentially expansion packs, and unless they're priced as such I most definitely will not be buying any of them.

You say "multiplayer updates"... I say those are normally FREE, through patches and new maps. Same with updates to the editor. New units are expected in expansions, and again, these better be priced as expansions if they're going to pull that.

[Crompee]

Excuses, excuses.

Again: if this were any major publisher, people would be raising hell. But because it's Blizzard everyone gives them a free pass. When I buy a game, I expect a COMPLETE game. I don't care if it has new units... they're all essentially expansion packs, and unless they're priced as such I most definitely will not be buying any of them.

You say "multiplayer updates"... I say those are normally FREE, through patches and new maps. Same with updates to the editor. New units are expected in expansions, and again, these better be priced as expansions if they're going to pull that.

Yeah, i'd consider myself a fanboy of Blizzard. So when viewing this choice, i just think of what i'd say if EA announced RA3 was only being released with the Allies Campaign (And no Soviet/Empire).. I'd laugh.

[bokajinn]

This thread is great laffs, Blizzard has the best reputation for taking care of its players. They wouldnt do something if they knew that the MAJORITY of the player base would be dissapointed. And in this case, the MAJORITY of people that play sc2 are playing it for multiplayer. So, since the first game will ship with full multiplayer, then the MAJORITY of the player base will be satisfied.

I wouldnt look at this as blizz sucking down money, but as Blizz giving themselves the most effective way to breath new life into an old game every year for the first couple of years. If they say they want it epic, then it is going to be epic.

And whoever said that b.net is going to cost money, is wrong. Blizz has said at many confrences that bnet was free when it was created and is going to continue to be free.

[Ayepecks]

So as long as 51% like the idea, the other 49% don't matter? :rolleyes:

[Argi]

So as long as 51% like the idea, the other 49% don't matter? :rolleyes:

It's called an overreaction tbh. :\

Edited October 13, 2008 by chAos972

[spacer]

or, on the other hand.. its buy one version, pirate the other two.

This.

Blizzard better not screw up Diablo3 like they're doing with SC2, or I will seriously set fire to their home office.

[ANON86364]

My brother is a developer w/ Blizz. Here's what he said:

"The game is huge. The Terrian Campaign itself is longer then all 3 from SC1 combined...and the other 2 reflect a similar length. With the game engine, graphics, cinematics, etc they'd have to make 3 or 4 seperate discs anyway. This way, you can buy whichever Single Player Campaign you want and still have access to all the Multiplayer modes."

Ever heard of a DVD? They hold more than 6x the data of CDs! Imagine that!

[Crompee]

This thread is great laffs, Blizzard has the best reputation for taking care of its players. They wouldnt do something if they knew that the MAJORITY of the player base would be dissapointed. And in this case, the MAJORITY of people that play sc2 are playing it for multiplayer. So, since the first game will ship with full multiplayer, then the MAJORITY of the player base will be satisfied.

I wouldnt look at this as blizz sucking down money, but as Blizz giving themselves the most effective way to breath new life into an old game every year for the first couple of years. If they say they want it epic, then it is going to be epic.

And whoever said that b.net is going to cost money, is wrong. Blizz has said at many confrences that bnet was free when it was created and is going to continue to be free.

Actually, Starcraft2 is being marketted for E-Sports and its Blizzards sole aim for it to be successful at E-Sports; Its also the one thing which will judge weither Starcraft2 was a hit or not.

So your definition that the majority is playing for multiplayer is correct, your conclusion that the majority will be satisfied is however.. wrong. What expansions do, is to re-design for the game. Every year now, E-sports is going to be shook up and broken.. It also means that at expansion three, there will be three versions of multiplayer online, which again is very bad for E-sports as you've now effectively split up the community.

On your arguement that B.Net is not going to cost money, is half right. It will always be free to play on Battle.Net but they are going to add features which they will charge for (Avatars, Private Ladders, etc).