|
For me, sc2 being split into 3 seperate games means that it will
- bring new players to the franchise
- bring more players to the ladder
- prolong the life of the game
- give the developers chance to make drastic changes to the gameplay
- even the playing field at the start of a new expansion
- more awesome cinematics
A lot of people thought that splitting the game into 3 was done out of pure greed but I think it is overall better decision for the franchise and retaining the playerbase. Each new expansion gives more exposure to the game, and brings new fans. Also Blizzard's expansions most of the time improve their games so much that it is hard to imagine them without the additions they bring. The only downside on sc2 being split into 3 seperate games is that the development team won't start working on wc4 for a long time (or maybe they never will but I hope they start thinking about if after they are done with sc2)
 
|
Game being good should be exposure enough in my opinion. But I'm a romantic.
|
No, it was for the money. All those reasons except for points 4 and 6 are for money. The Blizzard we knew back in SC:BW no longer exists. This is a fact.
|
This is quite a romantic take on the matter, to play devil's advocate my general responses would be:
bring new players to the franchise... Really? All your other points are potentially arguable, but this one just doesn't work. Imagine this scenario, "hey man, you should play this game called sc2, you have to pay $100 for the game and the expansions." "Fuck that, I'll continue to play lol for free." From a purely spectator perspective, I don't see why someone would not be watching sc2 now but will start once the expansion is released.
Bring more players to the ladder, for the first 3 months sure... it remains to be seen if anything will ultimately change after that.
Prolong the life of the game, Yes this is the case, although it remains to be seen how long the scene will last once development stops.
Drastic changes, I wouldn't really call anything about the hots reveals so far "drastic". The pathing is the same, the macro mechanics are the same, the only units removed so far is the carrier (lol). They are doing close to the minimum acceptable for the expansion which is adding a few new units and upgrades.
Even the playing field, Yeah it will but the playing field will get pretty steep fairly quickly once again.
|
I think people talk about the "3 parts" thing way too much. It's just one complete game and 2 expansions if anything. The only thing that is in "parts" is the storyline, though the WoL campaign itself is already quite substantial gameplay-wise with as much content as any other complete RTS release.
The WoL multiplayer is already very much complete, and most of its flaws weren't really identified until it was in Beta and well on its way to release which gave no room for drastic changes, so this is where the inevitable expansion packs come in. We didn't get 1/3 of the multiplayer. We got a complete, but inevitably flawed multiplayer experience that already is guaranteed to get some improvements down the road in the form of expansion packs now that most of the problems have been identified. Heck, some of the problems have already been fixed due to patches and efforts from the community.
I think Blizzard made a HUGE mistake when they said that they were splitting the game into 3 parts. They were wrong. They were splitting the storyline into 3 parts, but otherwise released a complete game with 2 traditional expansion packs announced to be on their way to fix whatever problems the complete game had as well as add in new features that they just didn't have time to finish by the time WoL was on its way to release.
|
On June 19 2012 07:35 ejac wrote:
This is quite a romantic take on the matter, to play devil's advocate my general responses would be:
bring new players to the franchise... Really? All your other points are potentially arguable, but this one just doesn't work. Imagine this scenario, "hey man, you should play this game called sc2, you have to pay $100 for the game and the expansions." "Fuck that, I'll continue to play lol for free." From a purely spectator perspective, I don't see why someone would not be watching sc2 now but will start once the expansion is released.
Bring more players to the ladder, for the first 3 months sure... it remains to be seen if anything will ultimately change after that.
Prolong the life of the game, Yes this is the case, although it remains to be seen how long the scene will last once development stops.
Drastic changes, I wouldn't really call anything about the hots reveals so far "drastic". The pathing is the same, the macro mechanics are the same, the only units removed so far is the carrier (lol). They are doing close to the minimum acceptable for the expansion which is adding a few new units and upgrades.
Even the playing field, Yeah it will but the playing field will get pretty steep fairly quickly once again.
You won't need WoL for HoTS or any expansion...and the game will be priced as an expansion >.< Thus cheaper than WoL I believe.
|
On June 19 2012 05:15 Jimmy Raynor wrote:
- more awesome cinematics
REMEMBER, MENGSK CAN ONLY CONTROL YOU IF YOU LET HIM.
Yeah dude, I really want to see Raynor shoot more TVs and hear the characters talk on and on in their droning voices.....
Have you played the SC1 and SC:BW campaigns? Much better storytelling in my book, even if the cinematics have terrible graphics.
|
I think Blizzard is well within their rights to split the game into three parts. They problem with it is that they made such a good game, that if they didn't release anything new for it for the next 15 years we'd still all be playing the same game - and they'd be broke. So I can see where they're coming from.
|
If SC2 wants to be a worthy successor to BW, then it needs to be able to survive on its own merits, instead of on the empty promise of upcoming expansions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
