Starcraft 2 To Be a Trilogy 253
The Starcraft 2 gameplay panel was an eventful one at Blizzcon today. The developers faced an obstacle when designing the game; the plans they had were just too massive to implement in a single game on anything approaching a reasonable timeline. Their solution was to divide the game up into three separate, stand-alone titles: Terran: Wings of Libery, Zerg: Heart of the Swarm, and Protoss: Legacy of the Void. Read on for further details.
Each campaign will have on the order of 26-30 missions. The path players take through the missions can vary — the storyline branches frequently — but they will end in the same place. The games will run alongside each other; there will not be cliffhanger endings leading from one to another, and each game will focus on a different part of the story. The Terran campaign will focus on Jim Raynor, and the Zerg campaign will be all about Kerrigan. Multiplayer functionality will be in place for all three races from the start.
Re:Speaking of Multiplayer (Score:5, Informative)
Multiplayer functionality will be in place for all three races from the start.
Re:Speaking of Multiplayer (Score:5, Informative)
There IS no UID 666. You must be new here...
Actually, ACs internally are uid 666, they just don't display.
Re:Shenanigans. (Score:3, Informative)
I do not see how "no cliffhangers" logically leads to "simultaneous release".
If you remember Starcraft 1 at all, you should see how easily the game could be broken up like this, and yet how badly is would affect the story telling to force it into cliffhangers. Part of what was great about StarCraft 1 was how the different plot lines wrapped together.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Shenanigans. (Score:4, Informative)
Trust me, in Australia, we will be paying $99-$120 per pack, as always.
Re:Shenanigans. (Score:3, Informative)
Meh. I don't even like RTS games that much, though I enjoy certain aspects of single player. I hate multiplayer RTS. That said, I _LOVE_ the first three titles in the Warhammer 40k Dawn of War series. When they gave up on making content for their expansions and started bulding the bulk of the gameplay out of their skirmish mode I stopped playing, but those guys know how to make a fun RTS.
They're also the ones who made Company of Heroes, which I never would have tried if I hadn't played DoW first, and which ended up being one of my favorite games ever.
If you have some cash to spare and want something different from your normal gaming fare, hop on steam and buy the Company of Heroes or the Dawn of War value bundles (the ones that come with base game + many expansions). Definitely worth your gaming dollar.
And certainly better than some overbloated Blizztard crap that, despite their assurance it doesn't end with a cliffhanger, will most assuredly end in a cliffhanger, just like every other game they've ever made.
Re:Zeratul (Score:3, Informative)
No, you're paying $50 for an engine and a campaign. Then you're paying $100 for 2 more campaigns.
Re:Shenanigans. (Score:4, Informative)
According to http://pc.ign.com/articles/918/918895p1.html [ign.com] they're planning to have a 1 year gap between games.
Re:Victim of WoW's success (Score:2, Informative)
only there aren't 10M people playing on the subscription method. Asia's players have a different payment system.
good try though.