| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Phenny
Australia1435 Posts
On February 18 2011 23:51 Endorsed wrote: There will also be more units in the multiplayer/different maps. How could you play those at the same time. A change of the map pool or units wouldn't be HotS dependent though. They have the ability to do this already. | ||
|
Jayson X
Switzerland2431 Posts
On February 18 2011 23:35 thesideshow wrote: It's also a safety net if HoTS is so horribly imbalanced that tournaments can't use it at all, so I think it's probably the best option. I question if there are going to be any significant balance changes anyway. I think the new Blizzard team realised that changing only little things can have unforeseeable changes over time. If there are new units however, they better be designed with the same thoughts the BroodWar guys had behind it. The medic for instance wasn't this super cool marketable unit, it was a very specific unit to get terran out of the static and defensive bunker play. I hope we don't just see cool units for the sake of looking cool. | ||
|
Escapist
Portugal548 Posts
Would like it to be a single ladder for everyone so we dont get more balance discussions and comparisons between players that are top on each expansion for the rest of our lives. Also attending to how deep and delicate it is to bring new patches into the current game, i can only imagine having to patch 3 different games looking for the best balance possible on each of them. Peace. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On February 18 2011 23:57 Jayson X wrote: I hope we don't just see cool units for the sake of looking cool. Fortunately since they've already shown that they are willing to completely separate the single player from the multi player they are in a great position to not do this. | ||
|
monterto
Canada103 Posts
EDIT: I was wrong here is the original statement source: http://pc.ign.com/articles/918/918895p1.html + Show Spoiler + Pardo explained that the multiplayer remains relatively unchanged; each StarCraft II game will have a fully functioning multiplayer suite with all three races playable. "[In] the shipping product, all three races will be fully featured and balanced in gameplay and also in content," he said. We asked whether that meant the multiplayer suite in each game would be exactly the same, and he said, "More than likely, the successive products will add multiplayer content; we haven't decided right now what that is." That brought up the question as to how multiplayer would work if some players only buy the first game while others only buy the second or third games. He said that they haven't made any determinations yet as to how that would work. | ||
|
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
On February 18 2011 21:31 emythrel wrote: WoW has 3 expansions, and you dont have to buy all of them if you dont want, you can also buy them as you need them to advance in level. WoW might cost $100 but you are getting 4 complete games for that. There is literally hundreds if not thousands of hours of content for each expansion, and expansions are nothing new. Hell I remember having to pay FOR PATCHES. When I first bought Duke Nukem 3D I had to pay for the Plutonium pack, which was basically what we would consider a patch now, not an expansion by any standards, even those of the times. All it added was 2 new maps and updated bug fixes etc...... before the plutonium pack (which was 1.4 or 1.5 if i remember right) you could buy 1.3. When plutonium arrived, you could skip the 1.3 disc and just use the 1.5 disc. These were literally patches and you had to pay nearly the price of a full game for them....... they added vrirtually nothing new and were just bug fixes, yet we paid because it was what you had to do. Err, what? Plutonium PAK added new weapons, maps, and the alien queen with three tits. As for Blizz, there really anything out there to indicate the game will be priced at higher than 40$. They seem to be treating it like every Blizz developed expansion pack (BW, TFT, LOD). New content, new maps, new campaign, separate ladder. It seems as if anything Blizz does will get people giving them static. | ||
|
Koshi
Belgium38799 Posts
| ||
|
GagnarTheUnruly
United States655 Posts
| ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On February 18 2011 12:59 LoLAdriankat wrote: Hasn't it always been like this for Blizzard RTS? Not really surprising. That`s what I was thinking too. I thought it was fairly obvious and I agree with bob. I will fight to the end to be the last remaining player! O; | ||
|
winter017
United States103 Posts
| ||
|
Faze.
Canada285 Posts
The crowd cheered at the idea of 3 games. Following that, there was some information about how people wouldn't need to buy everything, they're not supposed to be expansions etc etc. Some interviews even asked blizzard what they planned on doing for the other 2 games to make them more worth buying since, technically, if we buy the first one we can play online with anyone and we shouldn't need to buy the other games to have all the same stuff. It was stated that the main point of the 3 games instead of 1 was mainly for campaign. Unless what they meant was "you can still play WoL all alone there will be 2 ladders once HotS comes out". I was expecting new units and maps to come in a big patch, for everyone, once HotS comes out. Buying the game would give us the second part of the campaign and probably some new game mode or whatever mainly for single player or a little extra custom something online for HotS exclusively. I personally don't mind, I'm pretty sure I'm gonna buy them all anyways, I liked the campaign in WoL and there's enough content to make it worth buying (if you compare to most single player games that come out, they're usually more expensive with less play time). I just think it's lame to change their original plans like that. It's like saying they're making an awesome stealth game based on starcraft, show off some great stuff, images and shit then suddenly throw everything out the window...ow..ow..... oh wait. | ||
|
MichaelJLowell
United States610 Posts
On February 19 2011 00:05 Escapist wrote: Just wondering what will it be of the tournament scene? we will get pro gamers specialized on a single ladder expansion? kinda strange imo and doesnt suit the organization we currently have, since i cant imagine top pro-gamers transitioning expansions because blizzard decided to split the game in pieces. Would like it to be a single ladder for everyone so we dont get more balance discussions and comparisons between players that are top on each expansion for the rest of our lives. Also attending to how deep and delicate it is to bring new patches into the current game, i can only imagine having to patch 3 different games looking for the best balance possible on each of them. Peace. People are going to move on to the expansion pack regardless of how "balanced" the content is, because: 1) Balance should always take a back seat to a diversity of game strategies. And if you don't believe that, you can go back to November of 2003 and play Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos, where all four races were essentially balanced around their win-all caster/Dryad/Ghoul armies. Adding new units has increased the amount of diversity in every Blizzard strategy game because the unit additions are typically used to address race weaknesses and plug holes rather than redefine the way the race plays (and if Medics give Marines completely new life in matchups such as Brood War's Terran vs. Zerg, then it's a bonus). Half a dozen new units, new maps, and new strategic points are not going to break the game and, if they do, Blizzard will have ample time during the beta to make sure they simply bend the matchup. 2) "Splitting the community" only happens in new games with overhauls of the game engine itself. It did not happen in Brood War. It did not happen with The Frozen Throne. This is ridiculous. A major portion of a Western Starcraft community that made a seamless transition from Brood War to Starcraft II is now concerned that the community may be split in two by an expansion pack? Come on. The only time communities get "split" is when a new game engine is introduced or modified, i.e. "all the little nuances and glitches in Super Smash Brothers: Melee are supplanted by a Super Smash Brothers: Brawl that didn't replace those nuances and glitches with additional interesting game mechanics". | ||
|
Termit
Sweden3466 Posts
Also, they should just shut down WoL ladder so people won't be like "WoL is better than HotS!!!" that would prevent the scene from splitting up as in other big games like Counter-Strike, Call Of Duty etc. | ||
|
Penguinox
Sweden29 Posts
having two ladders when the first expansion is released is probably ok, but when the second expansion is released, that would make three ladders which is too many in my opinion. That's even assuming the second expansion requires the first expansion as well as the vanilla game. In the worst case scenario (neither WoL nor HotS required for LotV multiplayer) seven ladders would be used for the seven possible combinations of games you can have installed. Also, the majority of players, especially good players, will be playing on the ladder with both expansions used (I sure hope that you'll be able to apply both expansions at the same time). If you were to get into Starcraft 2 at that point, you would pretty much feel obligated to buy both expansions to play on a decent ladder. This would probably make a quite high initial cost which in the worst case will scare people away from playing at all. I do wish, among with many others around here I guess, that as many people as possible were to pick up and play SC2. I can't really think of other RTS games that have released more than one expansion, but even if they exist I don't think it's easy to do it without these drawbacks. Especially not for a highly established game like SC2. I can't really see WoW as a good example since that's an MMORPG, and those are generally huge money drains in my opinion anyway. I don't say that Blizzard have done anything horribly bad. It was kind of expected to have just an additional ladder for the first expansion like this. What I'm stating is that they'll probably run into some hurdles as they release the second expansion. I'm interested to see if they'll find a way around the problems, assuming they care for more than solely the income from sold LotV-copies. | ||
|
Cofo
United States1388 Posts
| ||
|
antikk
15 Posts
"Haters gonna hate" springs to mind. | ||
|
oxxo
988 Posts
| ||
|
Rylaji
Sweden580 Posts
This is like any other game, an expansion is realesed and u need it to stay relevant. It's like that in ANY game. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
If you want to be professional, you play the most updated version, or the most balanced version. That will be decided once the expansion(s) are up. | ||
|
Turgid
United States1623 Posts
On February 18 2011 21:54 SpoR wrote: it's possible that you don't need to buy the game, just some DLC. I'm sure it'll cost the same either way. I'm not too worried about it, even if it turns out to be $60. I'm just kind of perusing this thread with bewilderment that there were people who are somehow surprised or angry that this is what's happening, considering that there has never been anything different. Imagine if I went to the same restaurant 9 times in a row, and I disliked the food each time. Now imagine I came back to that same restaurant a tenth time, disliked the food for the exact same reasons, and in the exact same way, but this time, I screamed about the restaurant's new ownership. Bobby Kotick ruined my beef flambe! How insane would that be? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Stormgate Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
The PondCast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
RSL Revival
RSL Revival
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Cup
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
