Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Jozrael · 10-22-2008, 05:14 AM

They are standalone games. I.e. someone who waited til the end could buy the protoss and have a fully functional game.

Also, the MP will -change- with each game, and not be compatible with each other. This is the one thing I don't like. With SC and BW it was never much of an issue: BW is THE game to play on multiplayer. But with three separate multiplayers, I'm a bit worried that the multiplayer may be split (especially if Koreans don't like one of the later expansions).

In regards to monetizing bnet, they say that they have to to have a profitable business model for SC2. However, they will use a subscription based service as a last resort (and far cheaper than WoW, you were right when you compared the relative costs). I think they'll probably look into making a bit of money off the e-sports scene.

Also, in regards to this campaign, they've released tiny little details, and it's going to be fucking EPIC.

For one (for the Terrans), it's a -nonlinear- story. I.e. you choose what happens, and your choices affect the story of SC. Thus no two players will have exactly the same story (well, some will, but you get the point). You also CHOOSE which units to unlock for your army in the Terran saga (and you can choose original SC1 units too!). The Zerg campaign will feature some role-playing elements, and the Protoss campaign some diplomacy ones. That's all we really know, but knowing Blizzard, this is going to be godly.

They had three options:
1: Remove a lot of the planned multiplayer (make it as long as SC1). They didn't want to do this.
2: Release the game MUCH later (they want to get their money, their fans want to get their game).
3: Do this.

Like them, I most prefer the third option. This is also not a financial difficulty for me, but if it was I wouldn't really mind saving up for each one. They'll come out years apart, anyway (I'd guess one year between games).

10-22-2008, 05:14 AM	#12 (permalink)
Jozrael Junkie	They are standalone games. I.e. someone who waited til the end could buy the protoss and have a fully functional game. Also, the MP will -change- with each game, and not be compatible with each other. This is the one thing I don't like. With SC and BW it was never much of an issue: BW is THE game to play on multiplayer. But with three separate multiplayers, I'm a bit worried that the multiplayer may be split (especially if Koreans don't like one of the later expansions). In regards to monetizing bnet, they say that they have to to have a profitable business model for SC2. However, they will use a subscription based service as a last resort (and far cheaper than WoW, you were right when you compared the relative costs). I think they'll probably look into making a bit of money off the e-sports scene. Also, in regards to this campaign, they've released tiny little details, and it's going to be fucking EPIC. For one (for the Terrans), it's a -nonlinear- story. I.e. you choose what happens, and your choices affect the story of SC. Thus no two players will have exactly the same story (well, some will, but you get the point). You also CHOOSE which units to unlock for your army in the Terran saga (and you can choose original SC1 units too!). The Zerg campaign will feature some role-playing elements, and the Protoss campaign some diplomacy ones. That's all we really know, but knowing Blizzard, this is going to be godly. They had three options: 1: Remove a lot of the planned multiplayer (make it as long as SC1). They didn't want to do this. 2: Release the game MUCH later (they want to get their money, their fans want to get their game). 3: Do this. Like them, I most prefer the third option. This is also not a financial difficulty for me, but if it was I wouldn't really mind saving up for each one. They'll come out years apart, anyway (I'd guess one year between games). Last edited by Jozrael; 10-22-2008 at 05:17 AM..