Top
90°

GameInformer : StarCraft II Wasn't Originally Planned As A Trilogy

Phil writes, "In my recent interview with StarCraft II lead designer Dustin Browder, one topic that inevitably had to come up was the decision to split StarCraft II's single-player campaign into three separate releases. Though Wings of Liberty, the Terran-focused first campaign, had plenty of content, I asked Browder how far into development that decision was made. He revealed that it wasn't their plan from the start."

Read Full Story >>
gameinformer.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Letros2861d ago (Edited 2861d ago )

...but then Bobby Kotick appeared with his butcher cleaver.

IaMs122861d ago

Damn you Bobby Kotick

ForNgoods2861d ago

that he didnt break it into more. Only 3 parts is gonna be at the minimum profit margin range that he was will milk us for.

gamingdroid2861d ago

I understand it as Starcraft 2 has 30+ missions for Terran's alone.

That is around the number of missions in the original Starcraft. The game hasn't gotten any shorter with only one race and hear the missions are far more sophisticated and thought out.

Would you guys prefer 10 missions for each race for a total of 30 or, 30 missions for each race with expansions?

Personally, I choose the latter and Blizzard has never failed to impress me.

badz1492861d ago

and I think who ever defend it is dumb! this is the decision to maximize profits and that is all about it! how can a gamer given 1/3 of a game and pay full price for it can ever justify it? for me I can't and that's why I will never put my money for the game ever! there's never too much for game contents, just look at GT5 and the amount of content and effort being put in the game - 1 one, INSANE! but Blizzard went the GREED route with Kotick as the pilot!

Sarcasm2861d ago

@gamingdroid

If you don't realize how much "filler" there was in SC2, then I feel sorry for you.

Of course it's still a kick ass game, but let's be realistic here. They cut up the game for profits on purpose.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2861d ago
RedDead2861d ago

"...but then we realised we could get more money"

Ravage272861d ago (Edited 2861d ago )

we remove some units and reserve them for the expansions. The players who play online will HAVE to buy them then.' Brilliant plan Kotick!

Seriously, fuck you Blizzard.

STONEY42861d ago (Edited 2861d ago )

Everyone who kept up on the production of Starcraft 2 knows this. And honestly, if it cut down the release date, and gave us a more full fledged campaign like the one in Wings of Liberty (15+ hours), then it was worth it. Plus it gives room for new units and tech and such for multiplayer, since I'm pretty sure we won't be seeing any new units or massive changes until Heart of the Swarm is released.

Nihilism2861d ago (Edited 2861d ago )

Until the bean counters decided otherwise...

seriously F em. Any SC2 fans that still claim SC2 was as long as the 3 campaigns in SC1 need to uppercut themselves, it was a little longer than 1 campaign. The muliplayer traded old units for new like units, very little changes, I stopped playing it because ITS THE SAME GAME I'VE BEEN PLAYING FOR THE LAST 12 YEARS.

I'm not buying the next 2. I'll take D3 and then i'm done. Those mofos better include AA in D3, it's a PC exclusive, there is no excuse for their laziness.

In supreme commander 2 I can have 500 units on screen and get over 45 frames with maxed settings and 8aa...you'd be lucky to get that with far inferior graphics, <50 units on screen and no AA in SC2... as far as i'm concerned SC is at the bottom of the RTS ladder in terms of quality gameplay, graphics or complexity.

People juggle balls for a living....that is what professional SC tournament are, applying a degree of skill to a VERY simple game.

It's a shame indie devs have such a hard time when PC gamers shell out for a half done RTS.

They lied to us about the expansions....which will likely be full RRP when they come out, they said they would have the same units for competitive sake and that they would basically have the new campaigns and new maps...and that everyone with only 1 of the games would be able to play with the other 'expansion' players, they lied so everyone that doesn't buy the other 2 will be left behind...

http://i789.photobucket.com...

Baka-akaB2861d ago

i dont entirely agree with your post , but yeah seeing as this game will remain popular for at least the next decade , and a wealth of other games , i'm not putting a cents down on it , till a bundle with the 3 campaign appears at a fair price .

Wich leaves me probably till 2015 , but i'm stubborn and patient .

Nihilism2861d ago

"Which leaves me probably till 2015 , but i'm stubborn and patient . "

Stick to your convictions, you'll feel better for it. I got screwed by thinking I was getting value by buying Dragon Age C.E...this time I got the standard edition...for half price, i'll get the DLC when the bring out a GOTY or some such thing.

Buying on launch day is always a bad thing, buy those marketing peeps have us wrapped up good and tight.

kesvalk2861d ago

agreed, it's a shame we have so much retards playing game now, that can't even diferentiate a good game from a bad game, they only buy because of the name, like MW2 which is a piece of crap...

i too, got very dispointed with SC2, it's the same old and clucky gameplay of the first one, and i played LOTS of the first one, if is just a graphical overhaul of 1/3 of the game, then i don't want...

TheIneffableBob2861d ago

So you would prefer that StarCraft 2 be nothing like the old one? What is Halo 2 compared to Halo 1 or Gears of War 2 to Gears of War 1? They're sequels, but they still play similarly to the previous games in order to maintain the same identity. If they wanted to create a brand new gameplay experience, they would have created a new IP.

And StarCraft 2 is about the same length as StarCraft 1. They both have the same number of missions and they are similar in length. The campaign took me around 10 hours, which is what StarCraft took me.

Supreme Commander 2's graphics are in a totally different style to StarCraft 2, both artistically and technically. SupCom 2's units are typically seen from a distance, so they aren't very detailed when zoomed in. They also tend to be very geometric for optimizations sake; SC2 units have a decent number of polys.

2861d ago
Show all comments (34)
The story is too old to be commented.