http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=45181

read, then weep, then bow to Blizzard.

Isn't that what all RTS games do... I mean... Age of Empires had two expansions.

I'm definitely weeping, mostly because the game seems to be going down the wrong path. That interview still did not answer the question why they didn't do the 10-10-10 split in each game instead of 30 per race. Ultimately it would all come down to 30 in total, and Zerg or Protoss players won't have to wait for their turn for a year or 2.

And you are more than welcome to bow to them all you want, it will make it that much easier on them to stick their tactics up your ass.

I linked you an interview and a clip that pretty much explained everything about it, yet you still can't seem to comprehend... not my fault.

And Zerg and Protoss players won't have to wait because they CAN play as zerg/protoss with the original version!!!

People want the story, not the skirmish/online type of play. Plenty of people don't touch MP and play through the stories. Given that, poeple wouldn't want to wait 2 years for a Protoss campaign. Also what you linked to me is the same thing you have been saying earlier. They want to make the campaign epic, and I'm telling you, ultimately both way will have 90 missions worth of content. How is one more in-depth and more epic than the other type?  You are still repeating the same thing while parroting the same epic phrase.

Twestern, I think you're overstating your case.

I agree with DKII that playing 30 missions with one race is, all else being equal, less worthwhile than 10 missions with each of three races, but it's hardly the end of the world. With what we know now, it's very possible that, when all is said and done, we'll have a main game and two expansion packs' worth of single- and multiplayer content for the price of one main game and two expansion packs. It's entirely possible that what we're getting is the same amount of value that we always get from Blizzard RTSs, just distributed differently across SKUs. While I prefer WC3 the way it is, if the original game had included all of the Human and Undead single player content found in both releases while the expansion pack included all of the Orc and Night Elf single player content found in both releases, it wouldn't be the end of the world.

While this is a curious and, on face, suboptimal design decision, there are a few possible reasons for them to do this. The most obvious is that they've learned a lesson from Warcraft 3 and The Frozen Throne. If you'll recall, the Orc Frozen Throne 'campaign' was largely tacked on. The Orcs couldn't easily be incorporated into the larger story and so they got a glorified custom map. Perhaps, in working out the plot of SC2, Blizzard encountered a similar problem - perhaps the Terrans are bit players in the arc planned for the second or third expansion. What if the Orc campaign in WC3 had been twice as long at the expense of another race's campaign (which then had a double-length campaign in Frozen Throne)? That presents problems with the WC3 story as it was presented, but, if that had been the design goal from the beginning, perhaps the Orc Frozen Throne dilemma could have been avoided.

Also, you really reach in places. Are you seriously concerned that Terran players will be at a significant advantage because they've played through a campaign while Zerg players haven't? I can't be alone in thinking that the campaigns in typical RTSs (and Blizzard's games are no exception) are relatively poor preparation for multiplayer battles. Skirmishes against the computer aren't even great practice, but they're much, much better than playing the story mode (and they'll be available from the get-go). On the first page, you denounce them for saying that each expansion will make changes to the multiplayer. But isn't that what expansions are for? Beyond the Dark Portal, Brood War, and The Frozen Throne all added new units and abilities to each race. You seem to be attacking the very idea of expansion packs here.

It occurs to me that the rage from various people could just be the weird hatred of 'incompleteness' that you see in the gaming world.  Is that what's going on here?  Expansion packs are only okay as long as the developer pretends like it's not planning them until after the main game releases?  People are way too inclined to think of games as art and game makers as artists, and to feel betrayed when the developer has an idea for making a game better (at a nonnegligible cost in development time) while not implementing it straight away.  Gamers need to realize that, given a game and its eventual expansion, it's often impossible to determine which of the expansion's modifications were conceived before the release of the main game - the actual content that you're getting is identical.

They haven't even finished the Terran campaign, and you want them to only release Starcraft 2 when all 3 campaigns are done?? That would delay the game to 2010 atleast!!

And again, their intention was always to have a singleplayer of around 30 missions. the only thing they changed was to switch from 3 small campaigns (10 missions each) to a huge campaign (30 missions). They also thought that this change allows for a better story, so I'm all for it.

Also, I'm not buying the "bad for people who wait for protoss campaign", because I heard no such complaints when it was about Starcraft 1 since Protoss' campaign only amounted to 1/3 of the entire singleplayer. Are you telling me that those pro-protoss people did not enjoy the Terran and Zerg campaigns?

I don't see just how you got that I want them to finish all campaigns before releasing the games out of what I said. What I'm saying is to have them release everything with 10 missions from each race, but still have 3 releases. Instead of the 30 per race per release. It would still be an epic campaign, and the story would be unaffected. In fact you could have some awesome non0linear story where if you do something specific on a mission as Terran it would carry over to the Zerg and Protoss campaign as well and change those, it'd be awesomel.

Protoss was 1/3rd of the game, but in this case it's 0% of the game, and a year later it's still 0%, and only afterwards does it come out to 1/3rd. Frankly this feels like they are forcing people to buy all 3 so they can get a complete campaign experience, meanwhile there DO exist people who have played SC but not BW and have enjoyed the campaign just fine. Thus still forcing people, esp. Protoss players, to buy all 3. Oh and big surprise, I can't jsut buy the Protoss campaign, I haave to buy the 2 before it.

If Blizzard had decided to do what you said, it would still be the same thing for the people who want to play the protoss campaign since they would be forced to buy all 3 titles because each had a part of the protoss campaign.

And putting it the way you suggested does hurt the story: fragmentation hurts. Thus the ending of SC2's singleplayer would likely leave you cliff hanging, and so would the first expansion.

Fragmentation hurts... and you don't realize that having 1 race's story is a much bigger fragmentation than having 10 missions each and ahve a nice ending but with a fe loose ends to expand upon? And it won't be the same since they'd be able  to play the Protoss from day 1 of the first SC2 release, not 2 years from it.