EPTHeart of the Swarm will have a Separate Ladder - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
coolcor
520 Posts
| ||
|
Buffy
Sweden665 Posts
| ||
|
undyinglight
United States611 Posts
| ||
|
Squirrel
United States1102 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:52 undyinglight wrote: Do you guys think Wings of Liberty will still have much of a competitive scene post Heart of the Swarm. I think it would be interesting if the game lived on. Did normal Starcraft have a competitive scene post BW? | ||
|
yakitate304
United States655 Posts
| ||
|
coats
Canada7 Posts
| ||
|
Shinshady
Canada1237 Posts
| ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:02 251 wrote: Why do you think they'll be $40? They're going to be separate, full-size games for full price. HotS is going to have its own giant campaign just like WoL. They've already said this over and over. Dustin Browder did state in an interview that the new expansions will probably be priced only as expansion packs, not as full games, though they have yet to finalize everything. Blizzard isn't remaking the multiplayer; they're just adding a few new units/upgrades/tweaks. They aren't remaking Battle.net or any of they fancy menus and interfaces that went along with it. Most of the assets that they will probably use for the campaign already exist in WoL, so they're art team will have a much easier time making new assets for the next game. Basically, the amount of work and time that they will spend on HoTS and LotV will probably be much less than that of WoL. They spent 4+ years building SC2 from the ground up and tweaking it, yet they are planning on spending at most 2 years on each expansion pack. No matter what, they are not justified in pricing they're expansion packs as full games, and Blizzard knows this. On February 18 2011 14:22 Integra wrote: In Blizzards case they already had before creating SC2 to make alteast 3 more expansions. With that in mind it would make sense to focus allot on creation of tools to easily expand the games content with minimum cost since it ensures reduced production cost with means cheaper expansions for the consumer which means more copys sold and more SC2 games being played with the expansion. They are only going to have at most 2 expansion packs, as they have stated in the past. This isn't WoW where they can expect to churn out expansions every few years with no repercussions. At some point, Blizzard needs to stop updating their multiplayer with new expansions, and as of now they have decided that 2 expansions and some more patches are enough for SC2 to be considered as "complete" as BW. Unfortunately, no matter what we say or what we claim to be right, it's all just speculation for now. Even Blizzard themselves doesn't really know exactly what their future plans are since they only began production of HotS shortly after WoL was released. | ||
|
Zeetee
United States153 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:43 rauk wrote: you can't seriously use fan mods as an example for why a new game should be signficantly cheaper. look at natural selection or counterstrike, they're total conversions based on half life. creating content for half life is therefore "extremely easy and cheap." DOTA is only made in the wc3 map editor. therefore hon and dota2 should be cheap, all the content is even pre-created, they're just slapping new names on heroes and spells! what about commercial game engines? idtech3 has been used for countless games; same for UE2 and UE3. are you going to argue that gears of war shouldn't cost 60 dollars because it just uses UE3? expansions have been typically cheaper because they reuse art content and are much shorter. just to use LOD for example; 2 new classes and 1 act, compared to the original 4 acts and 5 classes. or AOE2 expansions had just a few campaigns. HOTS and LOTV appear to be entire full-length games in their own right, they just happen to reuse some or most of the units from WOL. ..........not sure if serious | ||
|
ProtossGirl
England123 Posts
IF we meant anything to them there would be no issue with allowing the new units to be used by everyone in multiplayer, and the expansion content would be purely singleplayer for an actual axpansion price. However i bet we're going to see full price for this for a couple of units and maps :S | ||
|
undyinglight
United States611 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:56 Seam wrote: Did normal Starcraft have a competitive scene post BW? It did not, but normal StarCraft did not have a huge e-sports scene devoted to it the day it came out. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
Blizzard said the expansions will be standalone, meaning that it can be played without needing WoL. If this is true, that means that there will be 3 ways to play over these two chapters: 1. WoL only 2. WoL and HotS 3. HotS only With LotV, this will make for 7 combinations: 1. WoL only 2. WoL and HotS 3. HotS only 4. WoL and LotV 5. WoL and HotS and LotV 6. HotS and LotV 7. LotV only How are they going to deal with this? 7 different ladders? How will the balance work out?! Even if LotV and HotS were changed into non-standalone expansions, you'd still have 4 combinations, WoL+HotS, WoL+HotS+LotV, WoL+LotV I'm also wondering how they are going to prevent people who don't have a certain expansion to play custom games that use those expansion units (data imported from players who do have the expansions), emulating true expansion multiplayer. That would mean the only reason to get EITHER of the 2 expansions would be for ladder play and the campaign (and maybe less hassle). For the unscrupulous people who pirate, campaign can be played offline/pirated, which leaves only ladder functionality missing. On February 18 2011 15:08 eviltomahawk wrote: Dustin Browder did state in an interview that the new expansions will probably be priced only as expansion packs, not as full games, though they have yet to finalize everything. ... No matter what, they are not justified in pricing they're expansion packs as full games, and Blizzard knows this. Where did you hear that they would only be priced as expansion packs? Regarding the justification: like I said, I heard that the 3 games will be standalone, or the 2 others standalone expansions. Assuming this stays the same, that would justify the full price, since people who don't have the game can get just 1 and get the same experience as someone who bought a different one. Obviously, people who already have one of the games wouldn't be getting as much out of it, but that's the way the cookie crumbles. | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:02 251 wrote: What? They actually said the EXACT opposite for ~2 years in their FAQ on the old SC2 site. I can't find a FAQ like that anymore, but if they said it "over and over" then surely you can find a source? Why do you think they'll be $40? They're going to be separate, full-size games for full price. HotS is going to have its own giant campaign just like WoL. They've already said this over and over.  Edit: http://us.starcraft2.com/faq.xml They say full game + 2 expansions. | ||
|
Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo
Germany2959 Posts
On February 18 2011 15:12 Xapti wrote: I'm I'm confused about are some other details of the ladder and expansions. Blizzard said the expansions will be standalone, meaning that it can be played without needing WoL. That's not true. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:43 rauk wrote: you can't seriously use fan mods as an example for why a new game should be signficantly cheaper. Actuallly it's a great example. These people with no or little money with only time as resources created entire new genres in the editor. No editor prior to this has been able to achieve this. look at natural selection or counterstrike, they're total conversions based on half life. creating content for half life is therefore "extremely easy and cheap." DOTA is only made in the wc3 map editor. therefore hon and dota2 should be cheap, all the content is even pre-created, they're just slapping new names on heroes and spells! If they truly are rehashed from the original game (game engine, programming code, the development tools that were originally created for the creation of the game and so on)then of course they could be be cheaper than the original since it was cheaper to create those games, compared to the original. what exactly are you not understanding? what about commercial game engines? idtech3 has been used for countless games; same for UE2 and UE3. are you going to argue that gears of war shouldn't cost 60 dollars because it just uses UE3? There are more to game development than just the engine to take into consideration when creating a new game, and most times the game engine must be modified due to compatibility issues so your argument doesn't really hold even if game engine was the only thing that it took to make a new game. expansions have been typically cheaper because they reuse art content and are much shorter. just to use LOD for example; 2 new classes and 1 act, compared to the original 4 acts and 5 classes. or AOE2 expansions had just a few campaigns. HOTS and LOTV appear to be entire full-length games in their own right, they just happen to reuse some or most of the units from WOL. Absolutely. | ||
|
ProtossGirl
England123 Posts
On February 18 2011 13:51 confusedcrib wrote: To paraphrase iNcontroL: holy shit they're not fucking it all up, instead they're doing something obvious! What a great company! To me, obvious would be allowing everyone full access to Starcraft 2's multiplayer,and those who want to spend time on additional singleplayer can buy the expansions. With this method, anyone who wants to stay relevant is forced to pay out. Not sure why this is so hard for you to see. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On February 18 2011 15:08 eviltomahawk wrote: They are only going to have at most 2 expansion packs, as they have stated in the past. This isn't WoW where they can expect to churn out expansions every few years with no repercussions. At some point, Blizzard needs to stop updating their multiplayer with new expansions, and as of now they have decided that 2 expansions and some more patches are enough for SC2 to be considered as "complete" as BW. Unfortunately, no matter what we say or what we claim to be right, it's all just speculation for now. Even Blizzard themselves doesn't really know exactly what their future plans are since they only began production of HotS shortly after WoL was released. I stand corrected, don't know where I got that third expansion from haha. I prolly must want a fourth race really bad | ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3714 Posts
| ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
On February 18 2011 14:43 rauk wrote: Full-length single player, but not even close in regards to multiplayerHOTS and LOTV appear to be entire full-length games in their own right, they just happen to reuse some or most of the units from WOL. Blizzard said the expansions will be standalone, meaning that it can be played without needing WoL. If this is true, that means that there will be 3 ways to play over these two chapters: I don't recall ever seeing anything saying this. On February 18 2011 15:16 ProtossGirl wrote: Excuse me if I'm seeing this wrong. I'm confused, but are you saying the obvious answer is for Blizzard to give away Hots/Lotv multiplayer for free? I can't agree that that would be a good idea.To me, obvious would be allowing everyone full access to Starcraft 2's multiplayer,and those who want to spend time on additional singleplayer can buy the expansions. With this method, anyone who wants to stay relevant is forced to pay out. Not sure why this is so hard for you to see. | ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3714 Posts
| ||
| ||
