The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Blizzard's Paul Sams responds to Starcraft 2
Meiz
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
For those of you who are unaware, Starcraft 2 is going to be sold as 3 separate games. That's 1 game for each faction and each campaign. Someone with an ounce of intelligence could conclude that hey, Blizzard wants more money. It's simple.
Well, apparently not.
Here's the response from Paul Sams saying they're not in it for the money.
Article:
http://kotaku.com/5084928/blizzard-were-not-milking-you-on-starcraft-2-honest
Yeah, this guy's so full of shit it's not even funny.
Well, apparently not.
Here's the response from Paul Sams saying they're not in it for the money.
Total shitbag wrote:The fact of the matter is, it's absolutely, positively untrue about us trying to stretch it out and milk it. People think that it was a monetary driven decision. I can absolutely, positively tell you, with 100 per cent certainty, that that was not part of the conversation. I guarantee it. I give my word. There was never, ever a conversation where we said, 'let's do this because we're going to make more money'. I guarantee it. As a matter of fact the sole reason we did it was because we thought it was going to be a better experience. Anybody that says otherwise is not correct. It is absolutely not what we did it for.
Article:
http://kotaku.com/5084928/blizzard-were-not-milking-you-on-starcraft-2-honest
Yeah, this guy's so full of shit it's not even funny.
Meiz on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
I mostly just feel bad for the people who have been waiting for this game for years, and now they get to pay, what, 150 bucks for it? That's fucking bogus.
If Starcraft didn't exist, and there were just three games set in the same universe, each with its own race and each with a single player campaign as long as normal strategy games with a unified multiplayer content, would you bitch about the company being money-grabbing whores?
No.
But blizzard just wants your money and the game is going to be a shity money grab, right?
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
I believe we agreed for the most part that it was dumb and it'd be dividing the multiplayer base unless they don't add anything exclusive with the expansion packs and we'd rather have a single, excellent, whole game than three thirds of an awesomer game
except a bunch of other queermos said blizzard always infuses their games with quality and each game would be worth the fifty dollars
I remember making some metaphors
Yes.
Because WoW is obviously a dud.
Which is why it bombed so bad.
Except we live in the real world, not this dumb world of hypothetical situations tailor-made to the response you want
How is having the games sold separately not a money grab?
Oh I'm sorry, you're right, the company releasing a previous game in the same IP makes it a horribly transparent money-grab.
You get to open up three boxes instead of one!
Except not as bad because you didn't have to pay to play races in multiplayer.
I'm sure they'll all be good games, but I don't want three good games. I want one good game.
Or Starcraft and Brood War
Or WCIII and TFT.
Fucking WHORES.
making 3X the money is simply the byproduct of that decision.
Think about that for a second.
Think about it out of context.
really?
good argument there squirt
Yeah because clearly the situation is 100% the same.
If Blizzard just said "We're planning to have two expansions for Starcraft II" I'm sure that very few would have a problem with that.
They could be a lot less vague with how they're talking about this.
If Blizzard had said, "We're already designing the content for our WoW expansions" months before WoW came out, I would have had the same reaction.
If Blizzard had said, "Okay, we finished the game and we're already through with some of the assets for the expansion but we're going to just wait a bit and charge you for those" while Warcraft 3 was still in development, I would have had the same reaction.
What other reason is there?
Pokemon red and blue were full games with slightly different pokemon (as I understood it)
Starcraft 2 is 1/3 of the game being sold in each version. Sure is supposed to be this epic campaign for each but its a money grab however you slice it. I might still get it, I might not. Its better if I don't if I want to finish college.
It doesn't really matter anyhow. People will buy it up like the digital crack it is ( It appears to be such delicious crack.)
Do you really believe that Blizzard hasn't already done some work on content planned for their next expansion pack?
I'd be angry
because I want to play a game that is complete without other games
Yes. I am at a point in my life where I need to budget my time and money, but I still want to get a satisfying, complete experience out of the Starcraft story. I cannot afford a three-layer cake.
You slightly miss my point. I'd say WoW is the only Blizzard game you could argue has a whole lot of problems, and many people don't like, not that it bombed.
Besides that, we all know how Blizzard has a nasty habit of delaying everything, forever. If they can get the game out in a timely manner (and it's still going to have 100% full functioning multiplayer on a newly improved Battlenet) and still put in all the extra single player stuff they wanted, then hooray for Blizzard.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
it absolutely stuns me
There is a non-money reason to do it. I doubt it's the true or the real reason, but I can see it.
The money argument: Blizzard is perhaps attempting a new triple A effort. These companies are shoving so much money into games, and they make up for it by selling so many. Once the market is saturated, however, how do you make more money? You sell more to the same people. Some people, more than with most games, have been playing StarCraft for years upon years. $150 is probably a totally reasonable price from both sides for the amount of experience they get.
In fact, if the StarCraft 2 experience is good enough (and it probably wont be for me, but hypothetically), that I would rather have it than three games, then I don't see how this is a bad shake. If the alternative is they spend 1/3 of the effort, and make two more games with 1/3 of the effort each, I'm not sure which is better.
Plus, chances are that I wont really mind just picking up 1/3 of this game. For me, I probably wont play it enough to really want to play through the other 2/3. It would be nice to get a taste of the other two races, but I'll probably be able to have a game's worth of enjoyment from just one.
They have mentioned that the later 2 games will include new units. All 3 races will be playable by everyone though, no need to spend money for that.
So this will affect Starcraft 2 the same way Brood War affected Starcraft. Last I checked, most people think that Brood War was a good thing.
What are you complaining about? Each Starcraft 2 game is going to have enough content to justify an entire game. You will have three complete games over a period of, probably, two-and-a-half years. Is that a problem for you?
That's dandy. Alienate normal people. That really gets me interested.
And that's not how it is, anyway. Each game has all the races in multiplayer. The campaign is the only differing factor between the three, plus whatever units they add in for each race with each expansion.
So the argument isn't so much about the quality of the content, or even the quantity, but rather when it was made.
Is it really any secret that Blizzard would eventually make an expansion though?
I mean ever since Warcraft II they've pumped out at least one for every game they make.
like, this honestly bothers me a lot
it's like arguing against humans breathing oxygen
I asked about that multiplayer part in the first part of that post.
I was just saying that, from a design point, there would be a reason, however shitty a one it is. I didn't say I was for it.
No, it's about the cognizant choice by Blizzard to divide a game into seperate segments which must be purchased individually, given a reputation for choosing to delay a game in order to make it perfect rather than releasing an unfinished pile of crap.