Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #paulsams more →
Blizzard: We're Not Milking You On Starcraft 2, Honest
Sams: No Free WoW
| posts about #paulsams more → |
Blizzard: We're Not Milking You On Starcraft 2, Honest |
Sams: No Free WoW |
11/14/08
11/13/08
11/13/08
When Blizzard announced Starcraft 2 in three games, it's not "BASTARDS" you heard but more like stuff along the lines of "YEAH" and "AWESOME". The point is, Starcraft one gave you something like 10 missions per race. With this new method, you're going to get between 30 to 40 missions for EACH race, that's not including the mini-story they'll had to link each game.
And for the Multiplayer ? You'll get EVERYTHING with the first game.
So yeah, three games that'll cost LESS then normal games (They stated so at Blizzcon again) each containing over 120 missions, plus the full multiplayer experience
Instead of
One game with around 50 missions for the full price.
Sure, you'll lose a bit of money in the deal, but fuck, look at what you're gaining by that instead of fucking crying...
To sum it up, do your damn research before whining.
11/13/08
Yeah, so you'd go believe MTV instead of the company that MAKES the freaking game ? GG!
The Devs that are working on the game told us during a conference that you buy one game, you get the whole damn thing, Multiplayer-speaking.
11/13/08
11/13/08
11/13/08
Because people simply don't like spending money.
Single player content is good and all, but the main attraction here is multiplayer.
People really just want the multiplayer, and making it so you need the other games to get certain units is in fact a money grabbing dick move.
11/13/08
By forcing players to purchase all 3 games to hope to have the complete multiplayer experience, and then releasing this statement, they are essentially showing us their dicks while simultaneously telling us that they aren't showing us their dicks.
You want us to believe you, Paul Sams? Release a multiplayer disk with the first game, with all of the content available for everyone. Don't force those few poor souls out there that don't care about single player content to purchase all three games to have the complete experience. That gesture, above all else, will prove to us that the above statement isn't just a pretty box of lies. A further gesture to back up your words would be to charge $25 for each game. But you won't do either of those, will you?
11/13/08
They're not forcing anyone buy anything. It'll be a game with two expansions. Just like Warcraft III had an expansion and WoW is getting its second one. Even the original Starcraft had Brood War.
The first game will have all 3 races in multiplayer, and the next games will probably add more units and mechanics. Just like Brood War did. Simple.
11/13/08
11/13/08
11/13/08
Blizzard does deliver almost all the time on quality, but with three games, the expectations rise accordingly.
People who can be patient and wait for all 3 to come out will probably be rewarded, if history is any indicator. *cough*cheaperBattlechest*cough. I probably won't be one of those people.
11/12/08
so...hypothetically...what if these 3 games and the entire single-player campaign turned out to be great, and somehow ended up making sense spanning 3 discs? yeah, its hard to see from here, too, but hey, there was a time the idea of spider-man using organic web-shooters sounded retarded, too.
and that time was before i actually saw the flick.
11/12/08
11/12/08
11/13/08
Although is it coincidental that this has happened since they merged with Activision? Hmmmm
11/13/08
What will most likely happen, and it will be subconscious, people will buy the game for the race they like the best, and in only being able to play that one race, they will identify with that race.
I really like this idea.
11/13/08
except they aren't all launching at the same time =/