Fun Stuff > CLIKC

Starcraft 2 to be three games, internet to explode

<< < (9/46) > >>

satsugaikaze:
... hated Warcraft III. Villains were just superficial anti-heroes with the typical "fall from grace" story that came with the beginning of Star Wars.

My previous statement was based off the fact that they said each game would roughly be the same size as the original game. Which was only a few hundred Mbs.
Look, there are probably a multitude of reasons why they did this, but the one that would stand out to me was how they could obviously reap so much more money for this. It may or may not be the foremost reason, but it seems to be one of the obvious ones.

We all know that Blizzard can perform, and everyone knows how successful their games can be. We'll probably never dispute that. But the fact that they need to initially release it in three separate boxes is a silly idea. At most, why not just put three DVDs in one box? The fanbase could probably just wait rather than get a story WIP check with three separate releases. I guess it depends - on one hand, Blizzard could do a fantastic job of it (as it did with Starcraft), and make it one of the top storylines. The characters could be fleshed out properly, there's proper dramatic spice to it, they score the music in a proper way (hearing the previews, it's my thumbs up for the music), and the individual races truly deserve a place as a standalone product.
On the other hand, Blizzard could release campaigns that are... fairly good, Starcraft 1 standard; with lots of nice visuals and a decent story, but ultimately customers might be saying that it wasn't worth putting into three separate games. That's probably generally the options that may occur.

That said, I have more to say, but all I really want to say now is that I'd wait for a Battlechest if Blizzard don't deliver to their promises. Makes the ordeal that much easier.

ackblom12:
Warcraft 3 was such a huge disappointment, but I seem to be in the minority with that opinion.

Ozymandias:
Bryan, I have to point something out:

You've already bought into this same reasoning for a different franchise. Mass Effect.

So I'm of two minds. I don't like it. I like my money (and I can't possibly get these for free). I do think it's partially a cash grab, which is the right of the company, but is still bullshit.

But if each of these games is honestly a giant, full length campaign that justifies its price point...isn't that severely awesome?

Chesire Cat:
And for all the 1 in 3 ideas that are getting put forth.  Would you prefer all three race campaigns were 1/3rd as long, to justify the price point and ship it all in a single box.  Or would you rather have 3 games, all released at once, all performing to Blizzards par?

And for the hating War3 got.  It might not have been the game alot of people were expecting, but it was well received and earned great reviews.

Alex C:
I liked Warcraft III. I wasn't so thrilled with the graphics, but for the most part I found it very enjoyable. I liked it better than Warcraft II but not as much as Starcraft. Which, frankly, gives it something in common with the vast majority of great games.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page