It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
http://www.giantbomb.com/news/plunging-into-the-heart-of-starcraft-iis-zerg-swarm/3274/
Giant Bomb has a wonderfully exhaustive look at what we can expect from the newest addition to the StarCraft II family. In addition to a lengthy story, they've attached gameplay videos and an interview with Blizzard!

WARNING: If you never played Wings of Liberty to its conclusion, you may want to skip this. They talk about events at the end of the first game and how they lead into the second.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/debut-trailer-hd/714343
How is SC2?

I though it was a subscription game.
avatar
reaver894: How is SC2?
Pretty good. I loved it, but haven't played it since my last reformat.
I though it was a subscription game.
No clue where you got that idea.
Post edited May 31, 2011 by Taleroth
avatar
reaver894: How is SC2?

I though it was a subscription game.
Absolutely fantastic
Still meh. After the inevitable Battlechest with all three parts comes out, I might pick it up. Until then, no way.

I though it was a subscription game.
No clue where you got that idea.

Probably because it's one game sold three times (for no reason except that they can) by a company that's made tens of billions of dollars selling the biggest subscription game ever.

Probably that, yeah.
I need this game so much
avatar
OneFiercePuppy: Probably because it's one game sold three times (for no reason except that they can)
Yeah, the whole thing is probably already finished and they're just keeping it in a basement somewhere, just for the heck of it ;)

I've heard that one a lot, and I don't really get it. Would it be better if they called it Starcraft 3 instead of an expansion pack?

I though it was a subscription game.
avatar
OneFiercePuppy:
No clue where you got that idea.

avatar
OneFiercePuppy: Probably because it's one game sold three times (for no reason except that they can) by a company that's made tens of billions of dollars selling the biggest subscription game ever.

Probably that, yeah.
It's not one game being sold three times. Considering the length of the campaign is greater than the length of the three campaigns in StarCraft 1, it's really three separate games.
avatar
OneFiercePuppy: Probably because it's one game sold three times (for no reason except that they can)
avatar
Adzeth: Yeah, the whole thing is probably already finished and they're just keeping it in a basement somewhere, just for the heck of it ;)

I've heard that one a lot, and I don't really get it. Would it be better if they called it Starcraft 3 instead of an expansion pack?
No, of course not. But it would have been better if they'd released it in the same way they released Starcraft over a decade ago: complete, with the campaign for all three races, and if they needed an expansion pack, it would tell the story across all three perspectives. They came close with that one thing you do optionally, but only got halfway there, and even that was halfassed and brief.

There's a big, big difference between those who suggest that the game is totally finished and Blizzard is letting it trickle out a bit at a time (but given the *engine* is the same for all three, there's the requisite kernel of truth to make the lie all the better) and those who are pissed that they're asked to pay $150+ and wait three years for a game that, when all's said and done, looks like it'll be exactly as long and exactly as balanced as the first game was ten years ago.

But by all means. Make your strawman and flail wildly at it.

[edit: typos]
avatar
TheCheese33: It's not one game being sold three times. Considering the length of the campaign is greater than the length of the three campaigns in StarCraft 1, it's really three separate games.
Point of order: starcraft 1 was thirty missions before the expansion pack. Starcraft II part 1 was ten missions, twelve if you went spelunking. I'll grant you that the missions were individually maybe longer than the missions from the first game, but your comment overall is either misleading or wrong.
Post edited May 31, 2011 by OneFiercePuppy
avatar
OneFiercePuppy: No, of course not. But it would have been better if they'd released it in the same way they released Starcraft over a decade ago: complete, with the campaign for all three races, and if they needed an expansion pack, it would tell the story across all three perspectives. They came close with that one thing you do optionally, but only got halfway there, and even that was halfassed and brief.
So, you're saying that for Starcraft 2 to be a proper game, it needs to have a separate campaign for all the three races from the get-go, mostly just because the first one was like that? Does this apply to other games as well?

avatar
OneFiercePuppy: There's a big, big difference between those who suggest that the game is totally finished and Blizzard is letting it trickle out a bit at a time (but given the *engine* is the same for all three, there's the requisite kernel of truth to make the lie all the better) and those who are pissed that they're asked to pay $150+ and wait three years for a game that, when all's said and done, looks like it'll be exactly as long and exactly as balanced as the first game was ten years ago.
I think it's a bit too much to get pissed at being asked to pay a lot of money for a game and its expansion packs. Sure, for all I know, they might be stalling to get people eager to dish out the cash, but I see no reason to get angered by it even if it is true. I also don't get what you mean by "having to wait 3 years"; do you mean the wait after the announcement, or the wait for the expansion packs or something entirely else?

As I recall it, Starcraft 1 campaign was pretty short, and at times boring.

avatar
OneFiercePuppy: But by all means. Make your strawman and flail wildly at it.
I answered in a trying so hard to be witty fashion to someone who had just made an extreme claim without backing it up, thinking it was all in good humor. This strawman bit makes it seem like I might've been mistaken about that last part (do correct me if my doubts are baseless).
*flails wildly*
avatar
OneFiercePuppy: Point of order: starcraft 1 was thirty missions before the expansion pack. Starcraft II part 1 was ten missions, twelve if you went spelunking. I'll grant you that the missions were individually maybe longer than the missions from the first game, but your comment overall is either misleading or wrong.
Wings of Liberty has 29 missions at least for the single player campaign. So the Terran campaign is about the same length as the three campaigns from the first combined. Also, the story is much better this time around.
avatar
OneFiercePuppy: <snip>
I'm guessing you haven't actually played SC2 yet have you? Or at least not the complete campaign.
avatar
OneFiercePuppy: Point of order: starcraft 1 was thirty missions before the expansion pack. Starcraft II part 1 was ten missions, twelve if you went spelunking. I'll grant you that the missions were individually maybe longer than the missions from the first game, but your comment overall is either misleading or wrong.
avatar
hobbes543: Wings of Liberty has 29 missions at least for the single player campaign. So the Terran campaign is about the same length as the three campaigns from the first combined. Also, the story is much better this time around.
Yeah, you're right. With the hidden and mutually-exclusive missions it looked like fewer, and I only played through it once, and finished it in a weekend of moderate playing. Doesn't excuse my not fact-checking, though.