bouzane said:
Starcraft is my all time favorite RTS game and I'll buy any quality title as opposed to pirating. However, this new revelation means that I may not be purchasing Starcraft II, a thought that never even crossed my mind prior to this announcement. Even if each SKU is reasonably priced this still means that I may have to wait an additional period of time to play as the Zerg again which sucks. I find it illogical that Starcraft II is being divided into three SKU's based upon single-player content when the original was clearly focused on multi-player. This has cash grab written all over it and I won't be paying any price that seems unreasonable. |
Starcraft is your favorite RTS game, yet you are angry at Blizzard for doing the same thing they did with Starcraft 1?? So now you are opposed to expansions, but not when Broodwar came out?
Starcraft 2 is NOT being divided into 3 versions!!!! There is only ONE version of Starcraft 2, and the other two are EXPANSIONS!! Because of that each campaign will be BIGGER than ALL of SC1's campaigns combined!!
Punisher said:
@Shio
Shio, i can't understand why you do defend Blizzard's actions to release Terran's "EPIC" campaign first and after that Zerg and Protoss.
Tell me couple good reasons why this is better compared to release it like SC1+expansion pack
@bouzane
Agreed.
Most likely Terran "EPIC" campaign will cost 45-50 euros, those "EPIC" EXPANSION" packs for the same amount. |
I support Blizzard's decision because I want Big Epic Masterpiece campaigns, and the only to get it is by doing the way Blizzard is doing now.
Remember Starcraft 1 and it's cliff hangerish ending? Well, with the way Blizzard is doing it won't happen, and they will have enough time to make it as awesome as possible. The fact that each SC2 campaign will be 3-to-4 times bigger than SC1 campaigns is also a plus.
An expansion has never cost more than 40 euros, so Blizzard will never make it cost more than that. If anything they could make it cheaper.
Duke Of Darkness said:
What is the problem Warhammer Down of War did the same thing didn't it besides games that require much work should cost a little more anyways. |
Exactly! With the way Blizzard is doing the campaigns will be 3x-4x times bigger than originally intended, and I don't how some people think this is bad. Relic already did it with Dawn of War, and it's campaigns were far smaller than SC2 will be.
vlad321 said:
@shio
It says it right there that they want them to be like standalone products. There really is no set price on expansions, so if the deem like the games are standalone products then they probably will charge for them accodringly.
@Ail
All games get pirated no matter what, whether it's earlier or not doesn't really matter. People who have decided to pirate it will wait anyways. It all depends on how many people actually download the pirated game. Like with SPORE, they were complaining about the DRM and lo and behold no more drm in their subsequent games. If people are discontent with Starcraft 2 and Blizzard really does pull the worst case scenario then I will even fully encourage people to pirate the games instead of buying them. Don't support bullshit business practices by buying their games, pirate to show discontent with the companies.
@bouzane
Agreed. |
You are officialy trolling. They said that they want their expansions to FEEL like full games, not be priced as one. Blizzard are already known to make the best expansions with the best value for money in the industry, and they never priced their expansions more than $40.
WC3: Frozen Throne was an expansion that felt like a full game, and was way better than 95% of the full games that came out that year. It also had the best story of that year.
