Starcraft II!

[catchafire]

Sins of the Solar Empire is nothing like Starcraft at all. That and real games last days and more, that's not even to account for the largest map that could take weeks to finish.

And yes, the Zerg are here! Too bad the Hydralisk got lost in the translation. It's full glory has not yet been realized.

Truth. I'm not quite sure why the hell people even compared it to Starcraft. While the game is 'entertaining', playing a game for over 2 hours is damn tiring.

[Geese Pants]

Some SC2 News (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/55267).....

StarCraft 2 Now A Trilogy, Three Campaigns to Be Split Into Separate Games
by Nick Breckon Oct 10, 2008 5:40pm CST


Blizzard today announced that StarCraft II will be released as a trilogy of separate games, each concentrating on one of the universe's three factions.

The first game in the trilogy will consist of the Terran campaign, and is set to be titled "Terrans: Wings of Liberty."

The second Zerg-focused title will be "Zerg: Heart of the Swarm," with the third game being "Protoss: Legacy of the Void."


"[The second and third games] will be like expansion packs, but we really want them to feel like standalone products," said Blizzard's Rob Pardo.

Each campaign will be very different, with Pardo announcing the Zerg campaign will contain RPG elements. The Protoss campaigin will likewise be differentiated by elements of diplomacy. In addition, the Terran campaign will feature a Protoss mini-campaign.

The campaigns are planned as concentrated, epic storylines, with enough content to justify a full release. As a result, the games will now feature more in-game cinematics and story content.

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.

Pardo noted that the decision was necessary to maintain the quality of the product, the alternatives either being a long delay of the game, or a scaling back of the campaigns.

More details may become available during BlizzCon, which continues through this weekend.

I don't know what ot think of this.

Either the 3 seperate games are reasonably priced.........or there will be alot more missions than SC.

[Night]

Ah, not a bad gouging strategy there.

Since lots of people will buy it for multiplayer, it forces them to buy the game three times because they still want the completeness of getting the trilogy!

[TheSix]

Nah.

If people want MP, they will pick and choose one.

Highly doubt they will chop up the MP experience in all three. If they did, that would be stupid.

I really hope they aren't planning on charging $50 for all of them.

[Kajiki]

I just saw this on kotaku.

Ridiculously fucking bad idea.

I was really really hyped for SC2, and this is just extremely dissapointing. I like the multiplayer more than singleplayer, but that doesn't change the fact that i want to get a complete game instead of 1/2 a game.

SC2 needs Single player for each race and multiplayer.

[Seta]

I like this idea as long as the other games aren't too expensive ($20-30?) and the first one has the full multiplayer experience. Wouldn't hurt if the other two games had Brood War type content to it too. If there really is going to be a very long delay of the game for Blizzard to complete the other two, then I would rather take this.

[Harem]

Terran campaign is supposed to have like 26 missions or something lol.

But it's all about the multiplayerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

(also fuck yeah savior)

[Geese Pants]

Nah.

If people want MP, they will pick and choose one.

Highly doubt they will chop up the MP experience in all three. If they did, that would be stupid.

I really hope they aren't planning on charging $50 for all of them.

I wouldn't mind paying $50 for all of them............I'd rather not pay $30 or more for each of them if they have minimal content.
As far as MP........if they allow all 3 races for play within one campaign that would kind of defeat the purpose of releasing 3 seperate games.

[Raziel321]

i don't know if i'm going to play this game. it will suck up a guaranteed 3 years of my life. i'm not in grade school any more :sad:

[ElderGOD]

i don't know if i'm going to play this game. it will suck up a guaranteed 3 years of my life. i'm not in grade school any more :sad:

You need to learn time management, learn to limit yourself.

I know it's difficult but do something like if playing SP then set an alarm clock and save and exit when time is up.

For multiplayer, limit yourself to a certain time limit and if you can't then limit it to like one match per weekend.

[NemoDC]

You need to learn time management, learn to limit yourself.

I know it's difficult but do something like if playing SP then set an alarm clock and save and exit when time is up.

For multiplayer, limit yourself to a certain time limit and if you can't then limit it to like one match per weekend.

Worse advice ever.

[Geese Pants]

BlizzCon 08: Protoss vs Terran Trailer (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41337.html)
BlizzCon 08: Zerg vs Terran Trailer (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41334.html)

That's hot..........

[JustB]

BlizzCon 08: Protoss vs Terran Trailer (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41337.html)
BlizzCon 08: Zerg vs Terran Trailer (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41334.html)

That's hot..........

I'm actually kind of disappointed. Looks like they slowed the game down by a LOT.

[Kajiki]

I'm actually kind of disappointed. Looks like they slowed the game down by a LOT.

I believe there are different speed options. (like the original game.)

[JustB]

I believe there are different speed options. (like the original game.)

Sorry, I actually meant it in more of a "damn, how many hits does it take to kill something now?" sort of way.

[Xiii]

I'm not too happy about the news of a trilogy release. I'd rather wait a bit more and get like a game that's so huge that my 60$ felt like a steal than to buy only a part of a game.

[NemoDC]

Sorry, I actually meant it in more of a "damn, how many hits does it take to kill something now?" sort of way.

Because it was normal speed, it probably felt like things took many hits to die (a la WarCraft 3).

If Blizzard played StarCraft on Very Fast, then it'd be hard for them to show off all the cool abilities and effects of the units.

[NemoDC]

I'm not too happy about the news of a trilogy release. I'd rather wait a bit more and get like a game that's so huge that my 60$ felt like a steal than to buy only a part of a game.
Me, too. I'd rather wait for a complete game that keeps my jizzing for months straight due to copious amounts of content.

[v1y]

it will be worth it.

[catchafire]

it will be worth it.

For Bizzard's sake it better be. If the game isn't good, they are going to fall on their asses hard.

[CarpeNoctumXIII]

Well damn, that seems retarded in Blizzard's part, UNLESS, each individual campaign is the same length of a full game. If they are all just regular sized campaigns then the following 2 better not be more then $30.

[Xiii]

Well there are rumours of the Terran campaign being about 30ish hours long with more than 30 missions which I find hard to believe since I don't believe there's a single RTS in existence that has a Singleplayer Story campaign that's even close to half that long.

[Nando]

Damnit, fuck it all to shit...... I already didn't go out that much...
this game is going to consume us alll!

Look at fucking Z go http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41395.html ... and yeah, I'd still nail the Queen of Blades

[Irennicus]

Damnit, fuck it all to shit...... I already didn't go out that much...
this game is going to consume us alll!

Look at fucking Z go http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41395.html ... and yeah, I'd still nail the Queen of Blades

FUCK, I wanted to see Zeratul and the Queen of Blades fight so badly. Alright, so heroes better be like they were in the original SC. That's my one sticking point, I can deal with using Jim Raynor just so long as he's just a pumped up marine/vulture and not a leveling hero like WCIII. If Heroes get included into skirmishes I'll be very annoyed and will probably be enough of a reason for me to just go back to SC.

[Geese Pants]

I want to see Kerrigan die...........the story is THAT good.

[catchafire]

I want to get hype, but... I'm finding it hard. I feel as if it's already been years since they announced... Going to be another couple years?

[Deathsythe]

I am actually liking the sound of this, three full fledged games for each race with somewhere in the ball park of thirty missions per race is almost too good to be true. My guess is that the initial Terran game, being the first, will be around the typical PC game $49.99 with the others, being meaty expansions more or less, the typical Blizzard expansion price of $39.99. Perhaps $29.99 if we are lucky but I wouldn't hold my breath, Blizzard (new) expansions have always been pricey compared to their other PC counter parts but being more of less full fledged games will only drive that up.

Still a pretty cool idea, a little pricey in the long run, but we are getting a lot more content than your typical RTS provides.

[jae hoon]

There are rumors, mind you just rumors that Blizzard is going to start a montly charge for SC 2 and D3 like they have on WoW.

[TheSix]

They already stated a long time ago that battle.net would always be free.

LOL @ dumb rumors.

[JustB]

I still giggle a little when I hear people go on about the story in the *craft games. Look at one and you have the story for the other. The characters in warcraft 3/wow were/are just palette swaps of characters from the starcraft universe. Thrall/Reynor, Kerrigan/Arthas/Sylvanas, The Cerebrates/ The Dread Lords, think about it.

[catchafire]

The main issue for me isn't about the story, but the fracturing of the starcraft community. Having three separate sc games and sc communities is going to bite blizzard HARD in the ass.

[Deathsythe]

I don't really see it fracturing the community either, that is just far too obvious an issue to trip up a company of Blizzard's pedigree. The multiplayer is exactly the same by all indications between all three products. All races available from the start on the multiplayer side and any balance or adjustments introduced with the two other games finding their way worked down to the previous iteration via patches, exactly the same way The Frozen Throne's tweaks and changes worked themselves down into vanilla Reign of Chaos.

So the only thing people would really be "missing" are the parts of the story they chose to buy or not as well as any special units or what not for the single player that wouldn‘t be in the multiplayer anyhow.

[box]

I think that it'll be a bit harder for new players (to Starcraft and RTS in general) to pick up on the Zerg and Protoss races with the initial release of only the Terran campaign.

I remember back when Starcraft 1 was released, I went thru all the campaigns before tangling in multiplayer. It's not necessary but being new to RTS games in general, I felt it helped me alot.

My guess is we'll probably see a lot more Terrans online in multiplayer than the other races initially, but eventually it will start to balance out.

[TheSix]

You would see more Terrans online anyway.

Space marine/Humans are always the easiest race for people to identify with (and therefor - Pick up and play).

As long as they aren't full priced expansions, then it's not so bad.

[ulovemikeroch]

You would see more Terrans online anyway.

Space marine/Humans are always the easiest race for people to identify with (and therefor - Pick up and play).

As long as they aren't full priced expansions, then it's not so bad.

Too bad atleast in the first one they are the hardest race to use.

And they aren't expansions, they're standalone games. I wonder if it's gonna have the custom game option so you can atleast practice using other races.

[JustB]

I love Zerg > all, but I'm better at playing as protoss.

[TheSix]

Too bad atleast in the first one they are the hardest race to use.

And they aren't expansions, they're standalone games. I wonder if it's gonna have the custom game option so you can atleast practice using other races.

They're expansions. (http://www.mymym.com/en/coverage/529/18.html)


I'm not sure why Blizzard chose to say three separate campaigns and give people to wrong impression. If they just said two expansions I think it would have went over a little better with everyone.

[Xiii]

There have not been any confirmations of anything yet and people getting upset at the idea of a trilogy is understandable, but despite that people will be getting this game in groves anyways, even me despite how I feel because I'm going to play every campaign regardless and multiplayer is a huge draw.

There's no confirmation as the games being 3 standalone products and I assume ulovemikeroch got his information from IGN which is often wrong (thankfully this time). Everywhere else it's billed as basically 3 separate experiences, but we know people will bitch and that bitching will make it a little cheaper. Probably going to end up getting rebates on the next game or something if you buy like each one so that people can pick and choose if they wish or get them all at a cheaper price (which I think most of us would feel is preferable regardless).

Most of us don't really have much to worry about as the campaigns are really just flavour. I love them for the cinematics and learning more about the story because I just enjoy Starcraft's world and lore, plus who doesn't think Blizzard makes some of the best CG videos in the world? I hope people bitch at this, but looking at it from Blizzard's side, they know how to do both marketing and creating good franchises. They don't need the money from splitting the game in 3, but they'll do it just because they can.

I'm a sucker and Blizzard is the only company that's made me their bitch over this because I know I'm going to end up getting all 3 games regardless of how pissed I am later on when this is confirmed by a box on the shelf that gets glued to my hands as I walk to the counter of some corporate retailer.

Edit: One of the things that does concern me after seeing that interview that I hadn't thought about before was that during Starcraft they had withheld units for an expansion, but in that case none of the expansion units were shown. The question now is will we be getting all of the units we've seen so far or will those units be toned down in size and we'll end up only getting 12 or 13 units for each race and see the rest come later.

[Dhalsimowns]

This is bs. Buying the same game 3 times. Just put all campaigns in one box blizz. You can fit alot of dvd's in a 8' by 2' case. I don;t see how any campaign could use more than one anyway.

[Geese Pants]

This is bs. Buying the same game 3 times. Just put all campaigns in one box blizz. You can fit alot of dvd's in a 8' by 2' case. I don;t see how any campaign could use more than one anyway.

I thought similar..........but then I saw this video.

They're expansions. (http://www.mymym.com/en/coverage/529/18.html)


I'm not sure why Blizzard chose to say three separate campaigns and give people to wrong impression. If they just said two expansions I think it would have went over a little better with everyone.

So if it's just SC2 and 2 expansions down the line..........not a big deal for me.

[Xiii]

Well there are reports of like about 7ish CG vids rumoured, so 1 Opening Cinematic, Intro Cinematic, Ending Cinematic and other campaign related cinematics for the game and if they're all going to have be in different formats if Blizzard decides to try and compromise for HD and SD video quality. Videos and sounds take up a lot of space on a dvd and just the engine stuff can take a lot not to mention everything is now 3D which ups it. The issue isn't DVD space anyways, we know that Blizzard is willing to ship multi-cd products already, the issue I think they're taking up with is time. They're not making any money with this game and I'm assuming that they need to release something to avoid falling into the stale underhype category from previewing too early and releasing too late. If the game comes out early-mid 2009 you can bet that the next 2 expansions will be out a year out unless Blizzard decides to space things up.

You can only figured that everything is already written, they just have to create/balance assets for the campaigns and that should be a lot easier after having completed their engine already. Knowing Blizzard though they might pull a WoW and release the expansions every year citing adding new units and working in new campaign elements (which shouldn't take them a year, but they can say whatever they want, can't they?).

Edit: Vids for those who are informed =)
http://www.incgamers.com/Videos/275/BlizzCon-2008-StarCraft-2-Art-Panel-QA
http://www.incgamers.com/Videos/274/BlizzCon-StarCraft-2-Gameplay-Panel

[catchafire]

Snip

Good point. I also thought of this idea earlier because it made the most sense to me. Time isn't on their side, and if they were to wait until the whole game was complete, who knows how long that will take. They also have their plate full with DIII, WoW, and possibly Warcraft IV...

I've already lost some excitement for SC given the awesomeness of DIII and other non blizzard games. Like you said, if they wait too long it's going to become irrelevant.

[Xiii]

Well I wouldn't say irrelevant, but they lose out on free marketing. When the internet is on fire, they can push it hard with money or they could do nothing and the word still gets out. Right now they don't need that much of a marketing campaign for Starcraft 2. Releasing images of a new unit gets people excited. Oh well, I am off the Warcraft train, didn't like WoW's endgame job and hated WC3. D3 and SC2 are on my plate though and I will get both of them.

Another vid:
http://www.incgamers.com/Videos/276/BlizzCon-Chris-Sigaty-StarCraft-2-Interview

[Xiii]

Nice new Q&A at http://www.sc2armory.com/. Here is something specific thats good to note and this was a review of information gained at Blizzcon 08'.

Any news as to the protoss or zerg campagin... any at all nothing specific? (BritishBrat)
All I really know is that the additional campaigns will be released about 6 months after the other. They also said the ingame mechanics (where you buy units at an armory for terrans using credits) will be different for each; Protoss will use something along the lines of diplomacy and Zerg will deal with Kerrigans control/power.

[fishjie]

Too bad atleast in the first one they are the hardest race to use.

And they aren't expansions, they're standalone games. I wonder if it's gonna have the custom game option so you can atleast practice using other races.

I love Zerg > all, but I'm better at playing as protoss.

i think tiering wise, terrans were top, and zerg were bottom. this is by a thin margin though, and based on what races the top players in korea used to win tournaments. there was (is?) a slight preference toward using terran among the people who place 1st.

[JustB]

i think tiering wise, terrans were top, and zerg were bottom. this is by a thin margin though, and based on what races the top players in korea used to win tournaments. there was (is?) a slight preference toward using terran among the people who place 1st.

I remember the Terran dominance days, but that was a while ago. Nowadays, it's widely accepted that the map being played on is what determines race advantage: Averetec/Intel Classic Season 1 finals. (http://www.gomtv.net/videos/index.php?page=1&cate=2&keyfield=all&key=jaedong+vs+flash) Jaedong destroyed Flash.

[Xiii]

Well maps do help to determine, but each of the races have different strengths at different times. Like for example with the Zerg, if they fight Terran then Terrans have an early advantage vs Zerg due to Terran's ability to easily defend and bunker rush Zerg to gain the advantage. Right after that Zerg gain the advantage with mobility when they tech to Muta/Lurkers and as the game goes on, Zerg just get stronger and stronger against Terran until late game where Terran gets Science Vessels to even it back up.

I think rather than maps favouring certain races, it's more of the maps favouring certain tactics and it's just trying to find the tactic that works on those maps. Like a lot of smaller maps with lots of symmetry and thick or absent ramps to mains when given the ability to build anywhere around the map makes proxies for Terran/Toss much more viable and the better choice than trying to play a macro game on those maps.

Right now I feel like Terrans are the best still followed by Zerg and then Protoss last still. Though you could easily switch Zerg and Protoss around, I think most people would agree that Terrans are the best in the game on most maps.

[ckrazy]

I remember the Terran dominance days, but that was a while ago. Nowadays, it's widely accepted that the map being played on is what determines race advantage: Averetec/Intel Classic Season 1 finals. (http://www.gomtv.net/videos/index.php?page=1&cate=2&keyfield=all&key=jaedong+vs+flash) Jaedong destroyed Flash.

After Flash knock out Jaedong in the STAR Invitational and went on to win the whole thing.

SC is actually pretty damn balance, at the top level it really depend more on the player and map then the actual race match ups. I would say 70 player 30 map since it been clearly proven some map favor one race over the other.

As for all these expansions in SCII wtf are they trying to rape our pockets?

[JustB]

After Flash knock out Jaedong in the STAR Invitational and went on to win the whole thing.

SC is actually pretty damn balance, at the top level it really depend more on the player and map then the actual race match ups. I would say 70 player 30 map since it been clearly proven some map favor one race over the other.

As for all these expansions in SCII wtf are they trying to rape our pockets?

I would have to agree here. Hopefully, we won't see more maps like Katrina (P75% vs T25%) in the pro leagues. The fact that Flash was still able to overcome with his dual armory build on that map supports player > map ratio.

As for SC2... I'm still not sure how to feel about their declared course of action. I mean, I'm starting to warm up to the idea of epic campaigns, but I'm VERY skeptical as to how this will affect race balance and online play.

[Xiii]

Then we have the Flash build on Katrina that absolutely destroys any Carrier tactic for some reason and that map was thought to be heavily Protoss favoured.

[JustB]

Then we have the Flash build on Katrina that absolutely destroys any Carrier tactic for some reason and that map was thought to be heavily Protoss favoured.

...it still is. It's not just double armory/goliath pwnz protoss carrier on that map. Flash had to position those goliaths, set traps, and micro his ass off to win that. His opponent just wasn't prepared for it. What Flash did that game wasn't and still isn't typical. Protoss is still favored on that map because not every terran player is as badass as Flash is.

[Deathsythe]

Some new videos up at Gametrailers, certainly validates their choice to split up the games.

Trilogy announcement:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41530.html
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41532.html

Bar scene:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41534.html
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41536.html

Mission 3:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41538.html

[NemoDC]

Some new videos up at Gametrailers, certainly validates their choice to split up the games.[/url]

I wholeheartedly agree.
Thanks for the epic video links.

[Geese Pants]

So it's basically those who are more into the SP storyline that will be having to churn up more cash...........no problem with that.

[catchafire]

okay, when does this shit come out... i'm not getting any younger here...

[Xiii]

Karune speaks:
What is the StarCraft II Trilogy?
The StarCraft II Trilogy consists of the base StarCraft II game and two subsequent expansion sets. StarCraft II is subtitled Wings of Liberty (working title) and will include a lengthy single-player campaign that focuses on the terrans and puts players in the role of Jim Raynor, one of the series� main heroes. The first expansion set, Heart of the Swarm (working title), will follow later and include a single-player campaign focusing on the zerg and Kerrigan, Queen of Blades. The second expansion set, Legacy of the Void (working title), will continue the story experience with a single-player campaign centered on Zeratul.

Will we still be able to play multiplayer matches of StarCraft II with all three races?
Yes! From the beginning, StarCraft II will be a fully featured multiplayer game, and all three races will be available for competitive play.

How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay?
The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.

If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online?
Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft.

How long is each of the campaigns?
StarCraft II's terran campaign will consist of approximately 26 to 30 missions, and each expansion set will include a similar number of missions. This means that the complete StarCraft II Trilogy will include as many as 90 single-player missions. This allows us to create a truly epic story experience with a great variety of unique missions and gameplay types.

Why did you decide to release each race's campaign separately?
We're aiming to push the boundaries of storytelling and character development in RTS games through the unique single-player campaign design of StarCraft II. Players will be able to choose their mission path and technology upgrades for their army as they advance through the campaign. In order to make these choices meaningful while creating an epic story and well-developed characters for each faction, we needed to focus on a single race for a large number of missions.

The Trilogy also allows us to create more in-game and prerendered cinematics to tell the story in between missions. There will be more interactive sets and elements for players to explore during each campaign, along with other interesting design elements to differentiate the single-player game from multiplayer matches. For example, the technology choices within the terran single-player campaign will include special upgrades and unit types that are unique to the single-player game. These could include the ability to purchase classic units such as the wraith or firebat to add to Jim Raynor's army.

Are these three separate games? How much will all of these games cost?
The StarCraft II Trilogy will consist of the base StarCraft II game and two expansion sets. Pricing on these games hasn't been determined at this early stage; however, we've always charged an appropriate price for the content the player receives, and we will continue to release high-quality games that offer great value.

How long will it take to ship each expansion set in the Trilogy?
We're still focused on developing the base StarCraft II game, and all the content associated with the terran campaign, including the missions, cinematic cutscenes, and interactive sets. It's too early to provide an estimate on how long it will take to develop each of the expansion sets in the trilogy, but as always, we will take as much time as is needed to create the best possible gaming experience with each expansion set.

[catchafire]

"If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online?
Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft."

This is going to hurt the community beyond belief, and I don't care what they are saying to sugar coat it. Multiplayer mode is going to suffer the most from this "experiment" while singleplayer will obviously flourish; however, we all know that the heart of SC was always MP. If I buy the first two releases, and somehow choose not to get the the third, then I can't play with people who bought the third game.

I'm going to support them of course, but damn if they fuck up the series... And a side note: how the hell are the going to update THREE games at the same time??? Obviously the first two will be neglected for the final expansion, so I guess i'm SOL??? All this... for... singleplayer? I've never even BEAT the broodwar singplayer campaign. WoW.

[Shinkuu Tatsumaki]

^^ Yeah wtf is that... When I first heard about this, I thought no matter which campaign you have, you'll still be able to play with others.

I don't understand though... Are people with the Terran campaign only going to be able to play Terran vs Terran or what? I mean, if you can play all 3 races no matter which campaign you bought, what would be the point of having separate lobby rooms for each campaign?

Are they pulling a Guild Wars on us?? You can't use all 3 races unless you own all 3 campaigns?

[Geese Pants]

"If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online?
Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft."

This is going to hurt the community beyond belief, and I don't care what they are saying to sugar coat it. Multiplayer mode is going to suffer the most from this "experiment" while singleplayer will obviously flourish; however, we all know that the heart of SC was always MP. If I buy the first two releases, and somehow choose not to get the the third, then I can't play with people who bought the third game.

I'm going to support them of course, but damn if they fuck up the series... And a side note: how the hell are the going to update THREE games at the same time??? Obviously the first two will be neglected for the final expansion, so I guess i'm SOL??? All this... for... singleplayer? I've never even BEAT the broodwar singplayer campaign. WoW.


How is this going to hurt the MP community?

The way I honestly see it is like how SC/BW worked.........a person who has only Starcraft can't play anyone who is using Brood War. A person who is using Warcraft 3: RoT can't play with anyone using Frozen Throne. This has been going on with many games and their expansions.

[JustB]

From what I understand, each game is stand-alone single-player and multiplayer.

Look at it this way: I have Starcraft: Terran edition. I can play through the Terran campaign single player and I can play any race online with anyone else who has Starcraft: Terran.

-and/or-

I have Starcraft: Zerg edition. I can play through the Zerg campaign single player and I can play any race online with anyone else who has Starcraft: Zerg.

-and/or-

I have Starcraft: Protoss edition. I can play through the Protoss campaign single player and I can play any race online with anyone else who has Starcraft: Protoss.

-SO-

If I have Starcraft: Terran edition, I can not play the game with someone who only bought Starcraft: Zerg edition or Starcraft: Protoss edition and vice versa. If I want to play a friend online, we both have to have the same edition, much like Vanilla SC players cannot play against Broodwar players.

-HOWEVER-

In the end, Starcraft: Protoss edition is going to be the most popular online edition because it is the only one that is going to have ALL of the units.

That's how I understand it anyway.

[catchafire]

Exactly. This is and will fracture the community like no other. Trust me, I've seen it happen with games like Age of Empires III. Again, my argument: How are they going to patch all three games when the need arises? Isn't it better for me to wait for the last game to be released?

Look, i'm a Blizzard fan like everyone else; however, I believe that this model they are taking is going to be for the worse and won't really help the community in the long run. Sure, at first it is going to be interesting but after a year or two I doubt anyone will care.

[Geese Pants]

Exactly. This is and will fracture the community like no other. Trust me, I've seen it happen with games like Age of Empires III. Again, my argument: How are they going to patch all three games when the need arises? Isn't it better for me to wait for the last game to be released?

Look, i'm a Blizzard fan like everyone else; however, I believe that this model they are taking is going to be for the worse and won't really help the community in the long run. Sure, at first it is going to be interesting but after a year or two I doubt anyone will care.

You can wait if you want..........but you'll be behind from others who bought and played the first 2 earlier.
It's a catch 22 really...........you wait and be left behind, but get only the first one, then miss out on MAJOR updates like new units.

And in terms of patching, they'll do it like they have with SC/BW........use a patch to update all games.

[JustB]

You can wait if you want..........but you'll be behind from others who bought and played the first 2 earlier.
It's a catch 22 really...........you wait and be left behind, but get only the first one, then miss out on MAJOR updates like new units.

And in terms of patching, they'll do it like they have with SC/BW........use a patch to update all games.

I'm pretty sure that sentiment is what Blizzard is banking on. The problem is that I will be buying all of these. I want to play all the campaigns and I want to start with everyone else online at the beginning.

Throw in a monthly fee for battle net and blizzard has a new World of Warcraft that will sell faster and be more popular in general.

[catchafire]

So if I want to play a game of SC, i'm going to have to pay a subscription just to play a game or two... And, they probably won't have a LAN option either...

Blizzard has a lot of balls and cockiness to even try and pull this off... I just hope that you don't have to pay ANOTHER subscription to play Diablo III.

[Geese Pants]

I'm pretty sure that sentiment is what Blizzard is banking on. The problem is that I will be buying all of these. I want to play all the campaigns and I want to start with everyone else online at the beginning.

Throw in a monthly fee for battle net and blizzard has a new World of Warcraft that will sell faster and be more popular in general.

If they throw in a monthly fee to play Bnet.........then there is a problem for me.
I rarely play Bnet, and if I play MP.....it's usually with my friends on LAN or DCC, so I won't be getting my money's worth on that service. I'm hoping they'll just put more ads, I can deal with ads.

I know I'll be getting all 3 games........I'm curious on how the story plays out.

[Chaotic Blue]

this is so much better than having to wait an addition 3 years for sc2 instead of waiting another 8 months (or so) for one campaign and full multiplayer. So i'm all for it.

[Deathsythe]

I think some of you need to slow down with the monthly fee for b.net talk. Nothing outside of rumors at this point and ill formed ones at that. All we know is that b.net 2 is set to launch around the time Starcraft 2 hits and be a fairly significant upgrade to the current system. Is there going to be some sort of monetization? Probably, but likely for extraneous courtesies that won't drastically effect how many have used the service and will continue to.

As for splitting up the community due to the splitting up of the games it really is a non issue. All the campaigns are not launching at once. My guess is that it will follow a Half-Life 2 Episode like time line and we will likely see the Zerg campaign roughly a year after the Terran with the Protoss roughly a year after that. So in essence outside of a beefy single player campaign these are no different than your typical expansion packs. The balance and fixes being handed down to previous versions, any new multiplayer units obviously being exclusive to play to their respective expansion. The "vanilla" version obviously being playable by anyone who bought any of the games, exactly like almost any other expansion pack. Just like Broodwar just like The Frozen Throne. It is all lined out in that Q and A, I am not sure how it could be any more clear.

So, really just a lot of speculation and worry about more or less nothing.

[Xiii]

I think you guys are confusing yourself with your own logic. If the games were standalone then many people might just wait for the last game since they get everything for the same price minus the wait time. Logically that doesn't make sense and everybody at Blizzard has been labeling the next 2 SC2 games as expansions.

As for Battle.net, many people working at Blizzard know that they have said previously that Battle.net will always be free. The rumours are just spawned from the fact that Blizzard has WoW on a subscription, but the 2 games are different. If Blizzard charges money so you can get on battle.net I can guarantee you that something that's Kali-like will show up or even just playing on ICCUP. My bet is that anything on the Battle.net servers will be free online and anything that isn't will be paid for.

Seriously though it doesn't really matter because a lot of people are hating this because of monetary issues and Blizzard can afford to listen to their demands and try to cater a bit closer to what would be acceptable. Either way though, we're still spending over 100$ to completely experience all of Starcraft 2 and that's like a day's work for years worth of enjoyment.

[Xiii]

It's been confirmed by Karune:

Are these three separate games? How much will all of these games cost?
The StarCraft II Trilogy will consist of the base StarCraft II game and two expansion sets. Pricing on these games hasn’t been determined at this early stage; however, we’ve always charged an appropriate price for the content the player receives, and we will continue to release high-quality games that offer great value.

It will work the same way as SC and BW works right now. You won't be able to pick and choose what campaign you want to buy. This makes more sense now as there won't be too much conflict between who has what. There will probably be a divide when each expansion comes, which happened before with BW for some time, but eventually everybody gets on BW.

[JustB]

I had my doubts about the gameplay until I saw the exhibition match from blizzcon2008. I'm pretty hype now. It may have just been Yellow, but Protoss are looking crazy good. Those abilities and mechanics he showed off may be too much for non-protoss to handle. Clossi are looking pretty useless so far though.

I'm also not sure if I like the idea of high yield minerals. I'm not exactly sure, but the economy of the game sounded kind of hinky too. Iirc, one of the commentators said something about one of the players having 4k+ minerals in their "bank?"

I'm also not liking the idea of certain units having a set +damage against other units. Like I can buy the Banelings acting like sappers and doing extra damage to buildings, but other units shouldn't have that big of a damage modifier on a unit-by-unit basis. It seems to cheapen the idea of upgrades.

3d is looking ok, I suppose. I really enjoyed Tasteless not giving a full endorsement of SC2 whenever he was asked what he thought. He pretty much said, "Well, it looks pretty." every time. :rofl:

[Deathsythe]

Bit of thread necromancy but this doesn't warrant it's own topic:

Blizzard is doing "StarCraft II Battle Reports" basically HD direct feed face offs with commentary. Awesome stuff and quite nicely quiets any doubts about the game play (as if there could be any doubts with Blizzard). Game looks beyond amazing even in "alpha".


http://www.starcraft2.com/features/battlereports/1.xml

[Geese Pants]

That's f'in hype.............can't wait for this game.
Zealot rush look fuckin beast.........

[catchafire]

Checking the Battle Report out now and yes, it is awesome. Can't wait to throw down on a nice pc and monitor for SCII and DIII

[MechZZ]

everything lives for so long....

[JSN723]

I don't suppose anyone would be interested in buying a SC2 beta key from Blizzcon.. :woot:

[f_man]

It's been confirmed by Karune:



It will work the same way as SC and BW works right now. You won't be able to pick and choose what campaign you want to buy. This makes more sense now as there won't be too much conflict between who has what. There will probably be a divide when each expansion comes, which happened before with BW for some time, but eventually everybody gets on BW.

isnt this sort of the same structure wow and its expansions are using right now? people who are genuinely interested in multiplayer are going to get each expansion as it comes out in order to stay ahead of the game.

OR

am i wrong and most wow users are casual, leaving only the hardcore players to get burning crusade and the EVEN MORE HARDCORE to get wrath of the lich king?

i think this is a legit move by blizzard, letting them develop and evolve the game as they like while ripping us off. (which i dont mind right now. 10 years ago, i only got computer games by saving up allowance and lunch money.) so if youre dead serious about the game, you WILL buy all 3. if you just want to play the game casually, no ones stopping you from buying only the core game.

[JSN723]

isnt this sort of the same structure wow and its expansions are using right now? people who are genuinely interested in multiplayer are going to get each expansion as it comes out in order to stay ahead of the game.

OR

am i wrong and most wow users are casual, leaving only the hardcore players to get burning crusade and the EVEN MORE HARDCORE to get wrath of the lich king?

i think this is a legit move by blizzard, letting them develop and evolve the game as they like while ripping us off. (which i dont mind right now. 10 years ago, i only got computer games by saving up allowance and lunch money.) so if youre dead serious about the game, you WILL buy all 3. if you just want to play the game casually, no ones stopping you from buying only the core game.

As a WoW Player, I dont very many people stayed at the original wow or stayed at BC when WotLK came out. There are many things to do as a casual player or hardcore.. there isnt even a point in staying at a previous expansion since it limits you incredibly.

[catchafire]

Dustin Bowder sounds as if he's running and auction every time he talks. He needs to slow down a bit.

[{PFH}-Lake]

I want to see Kerrigan die...........the story is THAT good.why so Duran can be the king of the zerg?

[Geese Pants]

why so Duran can be the king of the zerg?

To avenge Fenix..........

[{PFH}-Lake]

I was joking, I bet they'll bring Duran back though. Even though I didnt pay much attion to his story that much.

[Xiii]

Duran was like just filler depth. He never really had his own storyline unless you played the additional campaigns. There wasn't much of him in the story campaigns anyways. I believe that it's been somewhat confirmed that Duran will play a part in SC2 what with the whole discussion of hybrids and Duran having some mysterious unknown origins.

[Deathsythe]

You can now vote for the type of Dark Templar you want in the game:

http://www.starcraft2.com/features/protoss/darktemplar-vote.xml

I really like style #2 but honestly the only correct choice is option #3, in fact with option 3 on the table this vote almost seems kind of pointless, still pretty cool though.

[Spirit Juice]

Is it me or do both models look too bulky to be DTs?

[Geese Pants]

If the difference between them is only visual.........I'd pick both @ random.

[ElderGOD]

I was joking, I bet they'll bring Duran back though. Even though I didnt pay much attion to his story that much.

Most players don't pay attention to story, it's the gameplay that matters.

Last time I cared about story I wanted Kerrigan to revert to normal.

Batman and Spiderman both created a cure for vampire, so why can't someone come up with something for Kerrigan.

[Remy Saotome]

I don't like the second version of the Dark Templar. That double scythe looks like one of the most ridiculous, impractical, and unwieldy weapons I've ever seen.

I also hate the both option because I would be irritated to see a grouping of one unit where some look different from others. If it were like, random per match though I'd be okay with it.

[NemoDC]

Is it me or do both models look too bulky to be DTs?

I agree. And the green psionic blade looks kind of cheezy. If those are the only two models to chose from, then I'd just go with an updated Dark Templar model from StarCraft 1. It was bad ass. With the cloak, dark clothing, translucent sword with that soothing whoosh sound...