Now now... I know this is a Diablo 3 forum. But I was wondering if anyone else thought about how Starcraft 2 is getting split up into 3 different games is a massive failer. Kinda really just seems greedy to me. But I guess at least they did say diablo 3 will be released before Starcraft 2 Episode 2 is released
Pardo wouldn't say exactly when Blizzard would reveal the remaining two classes, and he joked that they'll reveal them when they figure out what those classes will be. But we should expect the last two to be revealed next year, and he repeated something that he told us yesterday when we talked about StarCraft II; Diablo III will ship after the first of the StarCraft II games ship.
i would rather have it in a trilogy that means they can put more content (thru 3 games of course) in the game and better quality b/c they wouldnt have to rush to get it all done for one release, they now split it into 3. The D3 part sounds about right
Pardo wouldn't say exactly when Blizzard would reveal the remaining two classes, and he joked that they'll reveal them when they figure out what those classes will be. But we should expect the last two to be revealed next year, and he repeated something that he told us yesterday when we talked about StarCraft II; Diablo III will ship after the first of the StarCraft II games ship.
i am looking forward to the sc2 trilogy myself. i beleive thiswill give each campaign its full potential and really give it a story.
anyways, thats not what this post is about
i dont beleive i have heard that. and it is strange for blizzard to give even a half-assed timeframe.
i see d3 releasing in late '09...but you never know
Bad news. In order to have the complete experience of Starcraft 2, you must buy 3 games. One game is the Terran campaign, the next is the Zerg campaign, then the Protoss.
I'd bet that the first release will cost $59.99, next two "expansions" will be $19.99. So you are looking at dishing out $100 plus tax for one game.... LOL!!!
I knew Blizzard was in it for the money, but damn. So much for the greatness of this company... Someone tell me I'm wrong.
What is normal? Normal is a concept that everyone or a majority of people are the same or similar. However, we know that everyone is unique. If everyone is unique, then everyone is different. If everyone is different, then everyone is weird. If everyone is weird, then everyone is normal.
That was what I just read in an article. I could see maybe paying for the game with just one campaign at full price if the additional campaigns were maybe ten dollars each. But even then, I still find this news to be a bit depressing. Did they just bite off more than they could chew with making this game or something? Were they behind on schedule that they wanted to get something released within the next year at the expense of what most of us feel is a full game?
The first one would be 49.99, like most PC games and then the other two would be 19.99, just to clear that up. I actually don't see this as being that big of a deal, as all the multiplayer components and races will be in each release and the Terran campaign is bigger than the entire campaign for Starcraft. So it's not like you're not getting your money's worth. Plus it seems like Starcraft 2 wouldn't be released until hopefully 2010 if it was all released at the same time.
What is normal? Normal is a concept that everyone or a majority of people are the same or similar. However, we know that everyone is unique. If everyone is unique, then everyone is different. If everyone is different, then everyone is weird. If everyone is weird, then everyone is normal.
Don't just keep saying crap like that unless you're willing to elaborate.
@Lestater
I don't know, you're talking 90 dollars there. It may not seem like a lot to you, but that's pretty steep for what should be the entire game. And that's not even counting if they make an expansion for it eventually. I think it sets an unusual precedent for Blizzard.
Its not like they're releasing the seperate game versions at the same time.
Part one will feature the Terran Campaign and the FULL multiplayer experience with all races.
A YEAR later, we'll get part two, which features the Zerg Campaign
A YEAR after that, we'll get part three, which features the Protoss campaign.
Also, they said we're looking at 28-32 hours of gameplay for EACH campaign. They haven't even started work on the Zerg and Protoss campaigns.
@Lestater
I don't know, you're talking 90 dollars there. It may not seem like a lot to you, but that's pretty steep for what should be the entire game. And that's not even counting if they make an expansion for it eventually. I think it sets an unusual precedent for Blizzard.
Well, if you look at it, shouldn't expansions just be included in the game in the first place? I mean you paid for Diablo 2 ($50) and LoD ($20). Are you saying that the LoD couldn't have been included in Diablo 2, is that somehow excluded from this philosophy? When it comes down to it, every expansion could be included in the original game, but they don't. I mean, they need to make money, and even though they say it's for the gamer, business comes first.
Don't just keep saying crap like that unless you're willing to elaborate.
Okay, let me elaborate for you.
I don't think it is right to have to pay the price of 3 fucking games for what should be consolidated into one. I'm a little peeved that a well known and respected company like Blizzard is taking advantage of us. I don't think that Blizzard cares about what we want anymore. I would put my money on dollar signs. Money.
While making good games, I think Blizzard truly cares about profits, not making their fan base satisfied.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What is normal? Normal is a concept that everyone or a majority of people are the same or similar. However, we know that everyone is unique. If everyone is unique, then everyone is different. If everyone is different, then everyone is weird. If everyone is weird, then everyone is normal.
Of course Blizzard cares about profits, it's why they make games. And it's not like you aren't getting your monies worth, as each campaign will be larger then the original game.
The only thing that is slightly strange is that they said they would add new multiplayer components in the different releases. If they are, they should have the new bits available as free downloads if you don't want to buy the new campaigns.
You were acting as if screwing people out of money was something new.
But by saying that, aren't you acknowledging that that's what Blizzard is doing?
Quote from "SteelVelocity" »
Okay, let me elaborate for you.
I don't think it is right to have to pay the price of 3 fucking games for what should be consolidated into one. I'm a little peeved that a well known and respected company like Blizzard is taking advantage of us. I don't think that Blizzard cares about what we want anymore. I would put my money on dollar signs. Money.
While making good games, I think Blizzard truly cares about profits, not making their fan base satisfied.
Well, yes, profits simply must come first in order to sustain the company. But I actually suspect that this decision was not made so much out of greed as it was out of making a lot of bad decisions during Starcraft II's development that pushed back possible release dates too far back even for Blizzard's standards. So they want to get something out on the shelves sooner than it would take for it to complete all three campaigns.
Yeah, I guess Blizzard are doing it in a way, depending on how you look at it. I suppose I've just become more accepting (bending over) of game developers tactics.
Well, yes, profits simply must come first in order to sustain the company. But I actually suspect that this decision was not made so much out of greed as it was out of making a lot of bad decisions during Starcraft II's development that pushed back possible release dates too far back even for Blizzard's standards. So they want to get something out on the shelves sooner than it would take for it to complete all three campaigns.
That's Bullshit Siaynoq. They just want our money.
Actually, I'm too pissed off to think straight right now. I'll come back in a few hours and see if I can't confirm this. SCLegacy.com crashed due to traffic overflow, they have the most reliable info on Starcraft, so we'll just have to see what they say.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What is normal? Normal is a concept that everyone or a majority of people are the same or similar. However, we know that everyone is unique. If everyone is unique, then everyone is different. If everyone is different, then everyone is weird. If everyone is weird, then everyone is normal.
--Steel :cool:
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reference please
anyways, thats not what this post is about
i dont beleive i have heard that. and it is strange for blizzard to give even a half-assed timeframe.
i see d3 releasing in late '09...but you never know
I'd bet that the first release will cost $59.99, next two "expansions" will be $19.99. So you are looking at dishing out $100 plus tax for one game.... LOL!!!
I knew Blizzard was in it for the money, but damn. So much for the greatness of this company... Someone tell me I'm wrong.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6199172.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;1
--Steel :cool:
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
--Steel :cool:
@Lestater
I don't know, you're talking 90 dollars there. It may not seem like a lot to you, but that's pretty steep for what should be the entire game. And that's not even counting if they make an expansion for it eventually. I think it sets an unusual precedent for Blizzard.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Part one will feature the Terran Campaign and the FULL multiplayer experience with all races.
A YEAR later, we'll get part two, which features the Zerg Campaign
A YEAR after that, we'll get part three, which features the Protoss campaign.
Also, they said we're looking at 28-32 hours of gameplay for EACH campaign. They haven't even started work on the Zerg and Protoss campaigns.
I can find sources for all this
Well, if you look at it, shouldn't expansions just be included in the game in the first place? I mean you paid for Diablo 2 ($50) and LoD ($20). Are you saying that the LoD couldn't have been included in Diablo 2, is that somehow excluded from this philosophy? When it comes down to it, every expansion could be included in the original game, but they don't. I mean, they need to make money, and even though they say it's for the gamer, business comes first.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Okay, let me elaborate for you.
I don't think it is right to have to pay the price of 3 fucking games for what should be consolidated into one. I'm a little peeved that a well known and respected company like Blizzard is taking advantage of us. I don't think that Blizzard cares about what we want anymore. I would put my money on dollar signs. Money.
While making good games, I think Blizzard truly cares about profits, not making their fan base satisfied.
--Steel :cool:
You were acting as if screwing people out of money was something new.
The only thing that is slightly strange is that they said they would add new multiplayer components in the different releases. If they are, they should have the new bits available as free downloads if you don't want to buy the new campaigns.
Well, yes, profits simply must come first in order to sustain the company. But I actually suspect that this decision was not made so much out of greed as it was out of making a lot of bad decisions during Starcraft II's development that pushed back possible release dates too far back even for Blizzard's standards. So they want to get something out on the shelves sooner than it would take for it to complete all three campaigns.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
That's Bullshit Siaynoq. They just want our money.
Actually, I'm too pissed off to think straight right now. I'll come back in a few hours and see if I can't confirm this. SCLegacy.com crashed due to traffic overflow, they have the most reliable info on Starcraft, so we'll just have to see what they say.
--Steel :cool: