And here you thought there'd be no big
StarCraft 2 announcement after its conspicuous absence from the
BlizzCon 2008 opening ceremony. Rob Pardo, executive vice-president of game design at Blizzard announced that the campaign version of the game will be a trilogy, each part focusing on a separate race.
- Terrans - Wings of Liberty
- Zerg - Heart of the Swarm
- Protoss - Legacy of the Void
Sure, it's not a release date, but for those still hopeful, there's always tomorrow night's closing ceremonies. We'll get more info on this as we have it, like will it all be in one box? Will we have to buy separate discs? Can we have it now, please?
Update: Yes, you'll have to buy separate discs. According to Pardo, "It's a separate product. Look at the next two as expansion packs, but will have the feel of stand alone products." Meaning yes, we'll be charging you more money.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Archon @ Oct 10th 2008 7:02PM
Oh Great. Activision strikes again...
Guitar Hero XXXII
StarCraft XV
Call Of Duty X
Diablo VIII
What next?
Oh Yeah. Probably Tony Hawk LXIX.
Replica23 @ Oct 10th 2008 7:29PM
You think they'd have enough money from WoW eh?
TheE3Guy @ Oct 10th 2008 7:43PM
Wow, that is gay as fuck
GreyFox @ Oct 10th 2008 7:54PM
Starcraft 3: Finishing the Game You Thought You Finished Before
Archon @ Oct 10th 2008 8:00PM
I mean... Just look at my nick... It's been with me for years... I hate those guys so much.
pers @ Oct 10th 2008 10:35PM
i've always bought all Blizzard games bc they were quality products and worth supporting (except WoW bc I don't want to continue paying to play--i just skipped playing that one)
But now, I'm gonna pirate the **** out of sc2. vote me up if you plan to do the same.
A Firetruck @ Oct 11th 2008 4:42AM
Whine like you mean it blizz will prob just release one product if the fan base is mad enough
Haggard (Mr.ESC resurrected on a... thursday?!) @ Oct 11th 2008 9:06AM
What if each of the three SC3 'chapters' has as much content and is as well-made as a regular triple-A game?
Does the fact that there's more than one of them somehow dampen the experience?
Lord Foortwenti @ Oct 11th 2008 8:32PM
@ pers
I'm sorry, but there is never a good excuse to pirate a game. By pirating this (or any other) PC game you aren't telling Blizzard that they are making a bad move, you are telling the world you are a fucking childish, douche-bag THIEF.
If you don't support the move, let Blizzard know through the proper channels, and if it really pisses you off that much then don't buy the game. But for christ's sake, by pirating a game you aren't punishing anyone except all the other people that enjoy the PC as a gaming platform.
-------------------------------------------------
That being said....I think this move is incredibly lame and REEKS of Activision sticking there money-grubbing nose into Blizzards affairs. Lets face it, Blizzard has always been about supreme quality AND quantity w/ their games. I honestly don't think this would have happened had Vivendi (Blizzard's old owners) not merged w/ Activision. This just straight up bites and reeks of nothing more then a money-grab.
Ghen @ Oct 12th 2008 6:44AM
I'm a fucking childish, douche-bag THIEF, so this news doesn't bother me.
SoulBlade @ Oct 10th 2008 7:04PM
Super lame... it better be worth it.
ExMcCloud @ Oct 10th 2008 8:03PM
I cant lie to you and say it will be....This is Activision we are talking about...
tawmtawm @ Oct 10th 2008 7:04PM
ehhhhhh, what :| ?
highcharity @ Oct 10th 2008 7:04PM
WTF!!! (MGS Alert sound)
acme @ Oct 10th 2008 9:22PM
exactly...
SecretAgentHam @ Oct 10th 2008 7:05PM
hmm. they must have known we'd buy it anyway. cheeky bastards
JoeTheBlow @ Oct 11th 2008 6:12AM
Its like Spore all over again......its like they WANT it to become the most torrented game ever.
BananaBoat @ Oct 10th 2008 7:06PM
Meh. I hope they don't do this with Diablo III
highcharity @ Oct 10th 2008 7:08PM
I second that
rivaldi22 @ Oct 10th 2008 7:25PM
You mean Diablo III: Lord of Hatred, Diablo III: Lord of Destruction, and Diablo III: Lord of Terror?
BananaBoat @ Oct 10th 2008 7:30PM
Nooooo don't give them ideas.
NeoK-182 @ Oct 10th 2008 7:06PM
so your splitting the campaign into 3 parts. okay blizzard give us a good excuse now that the first part isn't out yet.
If EA can crank out a new C&C each year you guys can get this shit down faster now that Activision is paying the bills.
Sora @ Oct 10th 2008 7:35PM
Maybe Blizzard wants to make a quality product?
Dustin Everhart @ Oct 10th 2008 8:17PM
I second Sora. Blizzard doesn't need Activision to pay the bills.
Gabriel @ Oct 10th 2008 7:07PM
It'd beter be fairly long campaigns for each race. There were three separate campaigns in the origianl installment - all in one package and three in Brood Wars - also all in one package. If each individual campaign isn't about as long as all three from the original or Brood Wars, I'll be a liitle wary of buying into Starcraft II. Does it look like one of the best RTS's ever? Yes, but that won't justify over-charging the consumer for something that was considered standard on their previous installations.
bm @ Oct 10th 2008 8:55PM
For me, anything much longer for a campaign for a single race than what was in the original SC and BW, would get pretty damn boring. In the original, IMO the race switches came at exactly the right time before playing through the previous part got stale.
They better just make each one a normal length and priced at like $15 or something.
Yeah, fat chance.
mutd1999 @ Oct 10th 2008 7:07PM
I love Starcraft, but that's bullshit.
Ignatius @ Oct 10th 2008 7:19PM
It'd better not be $50 a game...
343 Guilty Fart @ Oct 10th 2008 7:51PM
Ameeeen brotha', you speak tha' truth of the Lord!!
Hashbrown Hunter @ Oct 11th 2008 5:55AM
The only way I'd buy it if the first was $40 and the others were $20-$30.
But even then it's a ripoff, and I second all the people who will choose "other methods" to get the game because that is frankly total bullshit.
Josh @ Oct 10th 2008 7:07PM
PokéCraft!
rTwelve @ Oct 10th 2008 7:28PM
This is not how I wanted to envision that.
BPMOmega [gamertag] @ Oct 10th 2008 8:06PM
Gotta construct 'em all!
tobikow @ Oct 10th 2008 7:09PM
So I guess that means that you buy one and then pirate the other two? I wonder if online play will be restricted to the race that you purchase, cause that would suck.
Lone Starr @ Oct 10th 2008 8:28PM
They didn't say each version would only have one race -- "each part *focusing* on a separate race." (Emphasis mine).
This doesn't sound good but I think it's way overblown and perhaps slightly misleading. I could be wrong, but I'm expecting something much more in the way of Tides of Darkness, Brood Wars, Frozen Throne -- a meaty expansion.
Hithere @ Oct 10th 2008 7:10PM
Wow, and I thought it was taking them long enough already. It will be 2015 and people will still be finishing StarCraft 2.
Will @ Oct 10th 2008 7:10PM
Oh son of a bitch. They better price it as per episode content. Also, the number of Starcrafts you buy better not interfere with multiplayer.
iofthestorm @ Oct 10th 2008 7:18PM
It better be something like Orange Box, where you can get all three for the price of a normal game or just get one race at a time if you're a weirdo. Seriously, does this make any sense to anyone? WTF.
Dave @ Oct 10th 2008 7:10PM
So is this Blizzard's latest innovation for PC gaming? Selling one game as three seperate games? Sounds like a ripoff to me.
Will players who are only interested in online gaming have to buy all three disks to be competitive?
aMac @ Oct 10th 2008 7:11PM
Dear Blizzard,
Fuck you.
Signed, Starcraft 1 fans
brandon @ Oct 10th 2008 7:27PM
Make that at least two of us.
Logis RX @ Oct 11th 2008 7:24AM
Me three, real sh*tty move on them...
Limezor @ Oct 10th 2008 7:11PM
I hope they make it so that I won't have to buy all three games to enjoy the full multiplayer.
rask @ Oct 10th 2008 7:11PM
I'll say it because none else seems to have the balls to...
Fuck Blizzard.
Starcraft 2 split up into 3 seperate products?? Bullshit...
Diablo 3 turning out to be Diablo 2 with a facelift? Lame and uninsteresting.
The innovative company of yesteryear is dead.
The company that completely scrapped Starcraft and re-built after fans revolted is gone and buried.
They're all about the money now and the Activision merger is making it worse.
Tenali @ Oct 10th 2008 7:18PM
Are we thinking about the same Blizzard? The Blizzard I know hardly revolutionises at all, but rather takes ideas and polishes them stupidly well.
I can't really think of anything Blizzard did that was revolutionary in the past other than perhaps Battle.net.
brandon @ Oct 10th 2008 7:32PM
HEY THERE!! Some of us would have settled for a facelifted D2. Have you gone back to play D2 only to realize it looks like pixelated crap, because it runs at many less pixels than your LCD? I want to play it but I can't, it hurts my eyes!
Rask @ Oct 10th 2008 7:34PM
I have.. I couldn't play through the whole game it looked so painful.
Mike @ Oct 10th 2008 7:12PM
I was going to pick this up day one, but instead I think I'll just play the original starcraft a second time - it's out now, and you get a complete game in one package instead of it being broken up into three separate parts so they can charge you three times for what should be all one game. Unless they're $20 a piece, count me out.
Rask @ Oct 10th 2008 7:15PM
I have absolutely no problem believing that all 3 will be released at the same time.
I'm pretty sure there's going to be a deluxe package for 99$ and then all 3 seperate for 39$ a pop.
Eh @ Oct 10th 2008 9:31PM
Thats what I was going to say, unless this game is 20 bucks or less they wont be getting a dime from me. I only play strategy games for the single player campaigns, and I like playing both sides, I find the custom skirmishes boring and dont like online strategy because everyone just rushes. Theres no way I would pay $50 for a strategy game with just one campaign.
This was a really stupid move, I hope they enjoy the amount of piracy.