Blizzcon 08: StarCraft 2 Trilogy Confirmed

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

I hate trilogies when executed poorly, because having a sequel in mind before finishing #1 just doesn't end well most of the time.

#1 violator is almost anything by Ubisoft.

 

[Azhrarn-101]

@bobisonlybob:

they have stated that each will be released a year apart, so count on that full price each. That way, if they decide they'll sell them for less it'll seem better.

 

[xitel]

Soo... Starcraft 2 Episode 1, 2, and 3? Sounds strangely familiar. But I will say that if they came out all at the same time, I wouldn't mind as much. Or if the races played significantly differently from each other to merit extra time to flesh out race, then I wouldn't mind. This just seems to be Blizzard's second step into becoming a greedy powerhungry company.

 

[axia777]

This just seems to be Blizzard's second step into becoming a greedy powerhungry company.

I am telling you all, this is not Blizzard's doing. They never did anything so retarded as this even when they were owned solely buy VUG. Now that they have merged with Activision their operations have changed for the worse. I am willing to bet cash money that the pressure to do this crap is all from Activision's head people. It is GREED at is worse.

 

[wrightofway]

The makers of World of Warcraft seem to have gotten a bit more greedy over the years, haven't they?

 

[Altorin]

I sort of believe them that they just want to make the most amazing single player starcraft experience they can.

100 missions and 3x the cinematics?

Paid for over 3 years?

I don't think I'm going to mind, my only gripe is that I'll have to wait to play through the zerg's campaign.

 

[Jursa]

I guess the biggest question in everyone's mind is the price. I don't see anything wrong with trilogies because they're usually one game after another with the same name, however it looks like blizzard is making one game and later ripping it into 3 pieces because they know we're gonna buy it anyway... and sadly I'll be one of those who does what they want. I have to admit Blizzard hasn't disappointed me yet, let's see if my hope will be trampled on release day.

 

[Capo Taco]

Three full priced games would be ridiculous money grabbing.

Three full priced games would be ridiculous money grabbing.

Are you kidding me? Starcraft is still fun to play. It's still easy to find an online game of starcraft. Starcraft 1 was made in 1998. Do you know other games that have a multiplayer lifespan like that?

The longevity and play value that you get from a blizzard game changes the dynamic. I'm guessing, from the track record of blizzard, that each separate game will be of sufficient size to warrant the price, unlike half life episodes. If this turns out not to be the case then, yes, we have a problem.

 

[Estarc]

Food for thought: So, each campaign will have as much content in it as the original StarCraft, right? Well, what about Grand Theft Auto Vice City VS Grand Theft Auto IV? GTA4 has way more content that Vice City, and yet it was still released as a single game...

I think this is pure greed, and maybe some desire to get the game out, especially for multiplayer, as soon as possible. If not for either of those two factors, the bastards would delay more to release the game as three bloody disks, each with a separate campaign.

As if WoW doesn't make them enough money...

 

[Capo Taco]

Btw for those that like to make informed opinions, I just read in an interview with rob pardo that each game will come with a full fledged multiplayer capability and that each single part of the trilogy allows you to play all three races in multiplayer.

 

[BobisOnlyBob]

Just another thought: if multiplayer is complete in the first game, I suspect the latter two will be treated as expansions to the campaign mode only anyway, along with a set of the latest offline patches. Thus it'll be just like when Brood War came out, which (if my hazy memory is correct) was cheaper than the original game.

 

[Dectilon]

It was cheaper, but not by a lot actually : )

 

[Duck Sandwich]

Anyone else think they should have had the Zerg

I have one complaint, why aren't my Zerg first?

Yeah, they should have made the Zerg first, followed by the 'Toss, and finishing with the Terrans, instead of going back to the original order of Terran, Zerg, Protoss. That way, every race will have been played in every order at least once.

SC1: Terran, Zerg, Protoss
BW: Protoss, Terran, Zerg
SC2: Zerg, Protoss, Terran

 

[Altorin]

Food for thought: So, each campaign will have as much content in it as the original StarCraft, right? Well, what about Grand Theft Auto Vice City VS Grand Theft Auto IV? GTA4 has way more content that Vice City, and yet it was still released as a single game...

I really don't know what you're trying to say.

Yes, but they're saying that each starcraft 2 campaign will have as much content as the entire starcraft 1. GTA4 also came out WAY after Vice City and on a different console.

Btw for those that like to make informed opinions, I just read in an interview with rob pardo that each game will come with a full fledged multiplayer capability and that each single part of the trilogy allows you to play all three races in multiplayer.

yeah, I basically gathered that. Buying just the Terran campaign will give you access to full multiplayer, you only have to buy the campaigns you want to play

 

[TJ rock 101]

i think it sucks ass!
will each one only have that team playable in skirmishes and such?
who the hell told them this would be a good idea?
each one better have longer campaign than in brood war, 3 races = 30 missions in one game. 3 games = 10 missions+ per? bargain! (sarcasm)

Its ether because they STILL haven't finished the other teams story/units so they just said "give them what we have right now and hand out the rest later" (shut them up for now) or activision have corrupted their minds and blizzard didn't really say that...

 

[Asehujiko]

Knowing blizzard, this was less of a pre-decided buisness tactic but more a case of:
Dev 1: Hows the campaign coming along?
Dev 2: The Terran one is almost complete with 30+ missions.
Dev 1: And the other factions?
Dev 2: Uhhhh....
Dev 1: You do realise that the game ships in less then 6 months, right?
Dev 2: Errrr...
Dev 1: So what are we going to do now?
Dev 2: Just give them the multiplayer, we'll catch up later.

 

[axia777]

The makers of World of Warcraft seem to have gotten a bit more greedy over the years, haven't they?

Please refer to my previous posts....

 

[MStrauss]

My other question is what are they going to do about multi-player? The first section for the single player game is going to just the Terrans right? How are we going to play Zerg or Protoss on-line? Because on-line I always played the Protoss, period. If I cannot play them first day, out of the package I am going to be none to please.

Hardly believe they will be stupid enough to release a multplayer of terran vs terran vs terran vs terran vs ..., probly all races will be 100% up for multplayer.

 

[axia777]

My other question is what are they going to do about multi-player? The first section for the single player game is going to just the Terrans right? How are we going to play Zerg or Protoss on-line? Because on-line I always played the Protoss, period. If I cannot play them first day, out of the package I am going to be none to please.

Hardly believe they will be stupid enough to release a multplayer of terran vs terran vs terran vs terran vs ..., probly all races will be 100% up for multplayer.

I dearly hope so. But I have heard nothing official which worries me just a little. I bet you are right, but if you are wrong, well, rebellion against Blizzard would be a good place to start.

I just want Blizzard to kill all the rumor mongering at once. They just need to release an official statement explaining everything.