backtop


Print 109 comment(s) - last by murphyslabrat.. on Oct 17 at 8:46 PM

Necessary sacrifice or cash grab?

Shacknews reports that Blizzard has chosen to release the much anticipated Starcraft 2 as a trilogy of separate games with each release focusing on one of the 3 factions. The first game in the trilogy will consist of the Terran campaign, and will be called "Terrans: Wings of Liberty." The second campaign will focus on the Zerg and will be called "Zerg: Heart of the Swarm," The third campaign will be focused on the Protoss and will be called "Protoss: Legacy of the Void."

Blizzard’s Rob Pardo stated, "The second and third games will be like expansion packs, but we really want them to feel like standalone products." He also justified the decision mentioning it was necessary to maintain the quality of the product, the alternatives either being a long delay of the game, or a scaling back of the campaigns.

According to the Shacknews article, each of the campaigns will have different play styles with the Zerg campaign implementing RPG elements, the Protoss campaign will implement diplomacy elements, and the Terran campaign will implement a Protoss mini-campaign.

The very important multiplayer component will be unchanged despite the separation of the campaigns. Some units will be specific to the each campaign and will not be available in multiplayer.

It remains to be seen if the separation of the campaigns is a necessary sacrifice to provide the best possible gaming experience to the customer. Each game will now feature more in-game cinematics and story content. Whether the decision was an unnecessary cash grab or not will become clear after the game is released.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

On pirating...
By gochichi on 10/13/2008 12:54:07 PM , Rating: 2
I may or may not pirate because huge companies are themselves thieves.

In terms of Blizzard and Starcraft 2, I have no complaints. In fact, most games I have zero problems with. Particularly computer games since their price drops very nicely not too much after release unless its a super amazing game.

Gears of War: $15
Bioshock: $20.00 (I paid $30.00 the day it came out)
Call of Duty 4 : $30.00
And on and on.

Blizzard makes fantastic games, and I'd much rather they do a "cash grab" and release the flipping game already than have to wait EVEN LONGER for the three campaigns in one. I seriously doubt anyone in a developed country can complain about paying up to $80.00 for the first installment of Starcraft 2. There is no game like it, and no publisher takes the time and effort to polish like Blizzard does. If something is actually twice as good, why can't it cost twice as much?
N
ow, back to why I may or may not pirate. Purchased Adobe CS2, have NO problems with CS2, no need for improvements... yet they saw fit to offer ABYSMAL Vista support (totally not a Vista issue, Vista does great when given the chance), this was Adobe's way to steal money from their customers by forcing them to either stay with Windows XP or "upgrade" to CS3... CS4 around the corner. So yeah, when faced with the option of being forced to pay for CS3 just to run Adobe's suite well under Vista, I may or may not have opted for a free and unlocked version of it. Though I'm not sure.

I was such a stickler for original software, but I have to be honest, other than Microsoft's stuff (Microsfot may be "evil" or whatever, but their customer service is second to none, I had a retail copy of Windows XP Pro that lasted 6-years of hardware changes and is still running strong. Office is updated only every 3-4 years, they offer free service packs unlike Adobe who'll charge full price for service packs.

Here's a good one, Mathematica... bought it and they won't let me reinstall it, period... cannot under any circumstances install it on a desktop and a laptop... much simpler to get an updated version on the torrents (you can install it on anything you want), but ultimately opted to not bother with Mathematica at all, there are open source alternatives.

So yeah, I used to think that pirated software created instability and just wasn't as good... but honestly I think the opposite is true. Buying expensive software is like paying for a crippled version of something from a bunch of thugs (specially Adobe). I've been burned too many times to be a "piracy is always wrong" guy anymore (I've been there and done that.)

In terms of this game, I hope it's not even piratable at all, it's going to be such a good game and Blizzard deserves the asking price. They don't do totally unethical things like Adobe and others do. Warcraft 3? Yep, it's Vista compatible... no problem at all. What's more it was always Mac and PC compatible... but it gets even better, they made it intel-Mac native via an update, no charge, no problems. I don't play Starcraft but I'm sure it's Vista capable as well (and again, Mac and PC from the very beginning).

So many software publishers refuse to hit the "recompile button" for their LEGITIMATE customers that I'm sorry... but they have done unto me, and I see no issue claiming my license in the most convenient way possible. Adobe CS2 for Mac... could have been Intel-Mac compatible with very little effort, instead they cashed in their ethics and traded them for more CS3 sales.

I have done business with different companies and Blizzard is a fine company to do business with, I fully recommend buying their products legitimately. I cannot make a blanket statement such as, "Piracy is always wrong"... I think piracy is leverage against the tiranny of huge, unethical software giants, or record companies, or whatever.

Don't buy into the lies and hype either, piracy DOES NOT increase the price for the "legitimate" customers, that's a bunch of bulloks. Piracy just says, "Hey, you'd better watch your price.

Here is where piracy hurts the industry: Piracy makes software monopolies. Adobe is a piece of junk (customer-service wise) company, with horrible prices, but no other software suite can compete because who would pay $250.00 for a competing product when you can pirate the "best" instead? Piracy created Microsoft, I mean c'mon, there was Dr. DOS and others which were perfectly viable operating systems (back in the day when OSes could be created by a handful of people) but why do that when you can just pirate the most compatible version of DOS? OS/2 Warp may have been cheaper and better but why do that when the piracy circuit has Microsoft's product?

Piracy doesn't stifle the mega-giants, it creates them. Piracy destroys the smaller companies.




"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki