Starcraft 2: The Milking?

[Blackjack]

Maybe, but rest assured that outside this relative bastion of rationality here (GT), most boards about the game are awash with people angry about all this (you can see that just in the Joystiq article's comments). And I mean, if you ask a mob of Blizzard fans at a convention if they "want more Starcraft," it's a given they'll all scream and cheer. What does Pardo think they're going to do, boo? 

If you ask them if they want to pay $130 to $150 to get the "full game" (which is how a lot of players are going to view it, no matter how Blizz tries to spin the other campaigns as expansions), if they want to pay $50 for an RTS that only has one single player campaign in it (no matter how groovy, full of doodads and cinematics it is), then the cheering might be more subdued. I do think it'll be interesting to see if these all sell equally, or if something sells particularly poorly or spectacularly. Zerg has become such an overused, almost "generic" term now (I hear people use the term in FPSs, MMOs, other RTSs, everything), perhaps that's the campaign that will sell spectacularly and the others won't?

To be fair, Company of Heroes only had the one U.S. campaign in it (a long, sprawling one I never could finish), and then Opposing Fronts added British and UK campaigns -- maybe that's a comparison of sorts?

Anyway, with SC the only race I got remotely competent at was Terran and I imagine that's all I'll sign up for. I am assuming that whatever multiplayer updates get added through the expansions will get auto-updated via battle.net to people who only get the initial Terran release.

[Turtle]

Dawn of War 1 had only 1 campaign, and was docked some points for it.

CoH wasn't really docked points for that since its army structure and gameplay was made in such a way that tactics ruled the field.

With Starcraft 2 I don't know if I could keep using the same units in the same ways over and over in the campaign.  Of course, that's where campaign only units come in.

[IkeVandergraaf]

CoH wasn't docked because no one really expected a Nazi campaign.

[Ridah]

CoH wasn't docked because no one really expected a Nazi campaign.

LoL.

[jersoc]

well its spreading
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewstory&threadid=92186

[Razgon]

well its spreading
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewstory&threadid=92186

haha! Awesome find!

anyways, I may be cynical, but, in my eyes, its a PR stunt to cover the basic fact that they want more money...

[wonderpug]

anyways, I may be cynical, but, in my eyes, its a PR stunt to cover the basic fact that they want more money...

Well, when you have one game that grosses nearly $2 billion every year from subscription fees alone, I guess it doesn't seem worth your while to make another game that's only going to make a puny $1 billion or so just one time (not including expansions).

Rocket cars and gold houses don't grow on trees, you know.

[CeeKay]

Rocket cars and gold houses don't grow on trees, you know.

and they keep on trying to gold plate their cabana boys.....

[Destructor]

Via Shacknews:

"I don't know how long it's going to take...it could be [a year or more between each one]," Sigaty explained to MTV Multplayer. "We want to hit the shortest amount of time possible."

"Let's spin that in a positive light," he laughed, attributing the uncertainty to the time it takes to complete each story made and their respective in-engine cinematics. Sigaty also noted that the team has yet to discuss pricing details for the individual games.

"With any luck, it would be like a year for each successive one, but that's going to be a target date, that's not a promise," added Blizzard VP Rob Pardo in a Joystiq interview.

So that pretty much solves it then - they delayed it from keeping the full game from shipping in 2010-2011.

[Turtle]

Not really, if they'd kept their goals realistic instead of allowing it to balloon to these proportions, well, it'd be out in full within a year.

Instead, knowing that they could milk it for money, they went ahead and did this.

[kadnod]

Boo hoo! Couldn't they have disguised the fleecing of the poor wittle gamers by calling the second and third games "full expansions" or "standalone expansions"?

 

Seriously though, it is sort of odd they're not pitching it that way.

[biggercup]

I could go for $20.00 each~
However, if it's more like $50.00 each? 

[Ridah]

How about they just release the freakin game when it's finished?

[CeeKay]

I could go for $20.00 each~
However, if it's more like $50.00 each? 

I'm guessing a minimum of $39.99 each based on their WoW expansions.

[Blackjack]

Clearly, this Blue's News headline indicates Ceekay's thread title has struck a nerve! 
    
Blizzard Denies Milking StarCraft II
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=92202

If I was a gaming editorial cartoonist, I'd have a picture of a guy in a shirt marked "Blizzard" busily swapping buckets under a cow marked "Starcraft II."

Mooooooooooooooooooo... 

[SuperHiro]

You know what drives me nuts?  I bet 98% of the internet folk complaining about it will buy the games at full price, bitching to the cashier, to their mom driving them home, then to the people in the battle.net servers.  The other 1% will claim to have pirated it.  And the other 1% will smugly announce he didn't buy it in every single SC2 thread on every single forum on the internet.  I'll better you a nickel that when the first expansion's details come out, there will be some feature aside from a campaign that'll make it must own.  That's what Blizzard does; and they're infuriatingly brilliant at it.

That's why companies make decisions like this, because they can.  Why will Blizzard charge $40 for the WoW expansion?  Because people will pay for it.  Charge what the market will bear (though we'll soon see if people can play games in their cardboard boxes). The problem isn't Blizzard, it's YOU. 

[leo8877]

You know what drives me nuts?  I bet 98% of the internet folk complaining about it will buy the games at full price, bitching to the cashier, to their mom driving them home, then to the people in the battle.net servers.  The other 1% will claim to have pirated it.  And the other 1% will smugly announce he didn't buy it in every single SC2 thread on every single forum on the internet.  I'll better you a nickel that when the first expansion's details come out, there will be some feature aside from a campaign that'll make it must own.  That's what Blizzard does; and they're infuriatingly brilliant at it.

That's why companies make decisions like this, because they can.  Why will Blizzard charge $40 for the WoW expansion?  Because people will pay for it.  Charge what the market will bear (though we'll soon see if people can play games in their cardboard boxes). The problem isn't Blizzard, it's YOU. 

Awesome and true!

[CeeKay]

[Ridah]

Are people really complaining ahead of time about the prices? Who cares, I just want all the content I was expecting on one release date. Seriously, one year (at least) apart for each campaign?

I personally hope this model fails, I would rather have the game come out in 2010 if that's when it would truly be finished.

[baelthazar]

Are people really complaining ahead of time about the prices? Who cares, I just want all the content I was expecting on one release date. Seriously, one year (at least) apart for each campaign?

I personally hope this model fails, I would rather have the game come out in 2010 if that's when it would truly be finished.

Were you expecting 90 missions in the initial release? Because that sounds like what they have planned for the 3 tiered release.

Bael

[Blackjack]

Voodoo Extreme had a Q&A about all this:
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/interviews/42261/StarCraft-2-Trilogy-Interview
A little bit of tension right about here...

VE3D - Are you afraid that turning StarCraft 2 into three different games dilutes the brand name?

Bob Colayco -- Well, the name “StarCraft II” is prominent on each title, so I’m not really sure what you’re getting at here, or why there’d be any dilution of brand name. Maybe if I mention what we’re delivering with each chapter, it’ll become more clear?

There's a a bit of detail on what each chapter will entail:

The first chapter will deliver the Terran campaign where you take the role of Jim Raynor and lead your mercenary band across the galaxy to exact your revenge on Arcturus Mengsk. You’ll interact with old friends and enemies, like Zeratul and Kerrigan, and meet tons of new characters and their storylines. ...

The next expansion, or chapter, will delve deeply into the story behind Kerrigan and her swarm of Zerg, and then the third chapter will likely focus on the Protoss hero Zeratul.

I guess I could keep hyperventilating about the Milking, but they've made up their mind, and no tidal wave of Internet rage will change it.

That doesn't mean I'm going to make a You Tube video of me in Starcraft pajamas under my blankets crying, "Stop HATING Blizzard's Starcraft II Milking! Blizzard's perfect and you don't Understand Them!!!" as a flashlight illuminates my face, but I do hope to hear more - generally, obviously they won't want to give away twists and turns - about what the campaigns entail.

[Ridah]

Are people really complaining ahead of time about the prices? Who cares, I just want all the content I was expecting on one release date. Seriously, one year (at least) apart for each campaign?

I personally hope this model fails, I would rather have the game come out in 2010 if that's when it would truly be finished.

Were you expecting 90 missions in the initial release? Because that sounds like what they have planned for the 3 tiered release.

Bael

I didn't say anything about an amount, I said I wanted THE content I was expecting which was access to all the campaigns and full multiplayer out of the box.

[Blackjack]

"Milking" came up in another interview. 

Blizzard: We're Not "Milking" StarCraft [the actual headline]
http://www.edge-online.com/features/blizzard-were-not-milking-starcraft

Some people say that the decision to release StarCraft II as a trilogy is a sign of Activision flexing its muscle over Blizzard—to “milk” the StarCraft franchise. Is the trilogy format related at all to the Activision merger?

The Dairy Council is really missing a golden opportunity for some excellent cross-marketing here.

"Got Starcraft II?"
Instead of "Got Milk?" 

Anyway, the Blizz guy does say Activision had nothing to do with the decision. And he gave some more specific mission numbers:

All we’re really doing is reshuffling how players are going to experience the single-player content. In StarCraft II, we’re going to have a campaign that focuses strictly on the Terran. It’ll be 26-30 missions long, and you’ll play as Jim Rainer. When we release first expansion set, that’s going to focus on Zerg. So that’s going to be another 26-30 missions strictly focusing on Zerg. When we go to the final expansion pack, it will be the Protoss experience, probably another 26-30 missions.

[Blackjack]

I didn't want to get too graphic (udders, etc.), but does this work? 


Or maybe this?

[PaulBot]

Split the multiplayer into a separate game and I'll just buy it!! I don't give a crap about the single player stuff.

I will buy the first one, and only the first one because all I want is multiplayer.

[Butterknife]

I didn't want to get too graphic (udders)

Are udders considered graphic?  After growing up on a farm the thought makes me smile.

[CeeKay]

Split the multiplayer into a separate game and I'll just buy it!! I don't give a crap about the single player stuff.

I will buy the first one, and only the first one because all I want is multiplayer.

the could make that a 4th release!  as base MP game with special MP units available if you buy that races campaign!

[PaulBot]

Split the multiplayer into a separate game and I'll just buy it!! I don't give a crap about the single player stuff.

I will buy the first one, and only the first one because all I want is multiplayer.

the could make that a 4th release!  as base MP game with special MP units available if you buy that races campaign!

Moooooooooooooo!