Starcraft 2 in 3 parts, good or bad?

[rubikscube]

So, a month since starcraft 2 has released, what i've heard and know is

few months or maybe 18 months till the next expansion will come

all parts come with multiplayer

So, this is my problem, i've been asking my friend if he played starcraft 2 yet, and he replied:

blizzard/activision is releasing it in 3 parts, costing 60 $ each, so total they're selling a pc game for 180 $ which is absurd



What i thought about it, he's got a point then i countered: expansion packs don't need to sell for 60 $ and the content is like soooooooooo much (30 campaigns for each race compared to 20 or 30 campaigns total in the orginal starcraft)
But if the heart of the swarm has multiplayer AND 30 missions, what makes it different from wings of liberty? So they should sell their hardwork for another 60 $?


So, what's your opinion, shameless scheme to make money or legimate prices for content?

[Spikey00]

I honestly thing most mainstream game companies today are almost certainly overpricing their game titles, ~$60 game titles, are you kidding me!?  To this modern day I don't understand it consumer-wise, but it does make a lot of sense business-wise since consoles are so cheap, which will attract new customers and such like a black hole.

Relevant to Starcraft 2 I have heard that they will include specific content for the expansions too, like some bonus units and such for multiplayer, an incentive if you will even though most of Starcraft is in the game already.

While I do appreciate the extended campaign experience as a casual gamer, I really dislike that price point of that common $60, and I am slightly appalled that they are taking advantage of the franchise name to inflate the pricing to such a degree.  More power to the publishers, no?

[Mivo]

Did they state that the expansions will be sold at the full price, too?

Personally, I think it depends on the content you get, and also whether it's a stand-alone product or requires the previous game(s). I don't think I'm very mainstream in my opinion, but I don't really mind paying the full price for an expansion if the game provides entertainment for dozens or hundreds of hours. Many, many new releases now just give you 10-20 hours of fun (without much replayability) and still cost 30-40 Euro a pop.

Compared to, say, movies or a visit at a restaurant that is still not necessarily a bad deal, but as far as games go I'd really like to play my stuff for a bit longer without running out of content or "things to do". SC2 with its online ladder system and huge community does provide me with that, so I'll most likely get the expansions even if they sell at the full price -- if only to support the company and give them initiative to continue the support.

Blizzard (while I don't necessarily agree with some of the more recent decisions) has always been fairly good with their games. I played Diablo 2 on their online service for years, and only bought the original game and the expansion. (Which led to a WoW subscription that's now been lasting for nearly six years, so good customer care does pay off.) You can still play all their non.subscription games online, even after more than a decade after the purchase. Not many companies offer that. So that's an aspect I consider when deciding whether I buy a game or if the asking price is acceptable.

[zebramatt]

I'm certain that Blizzard have stated the expansion packs will sell for whatever the going rate for expansion packs is these days, rather than for the price of a full game. I'll endeavour to find an official quote to back that up, mind.

Edit: OK, OK, so actually they said:

Are these three separate games? How much will all of these games cost?
The StarCraft II Trilogy will consist of the base StarCraft II game and two expansion sets. Pricing on these games hasn't been determined at this early stage; however, we've always charged an appropriate price for the content the player receives, and we will continue to release high-quality games that offer great value.

http://us.starcraft2.com/faq.xml

I originally read that as per my above interpretation; reading it again I see it's clearly a licence for them to charge anything they like!

[pallenda]

Comparing the hours of entertainment in SC2 to other single / multiplayer games or going to the cinema, all Blizzard are good value. I hear about console games with no multiplayer and a single player campaign of 5 hours with close to no replay value, and cost the same.

$60 to me isn't a lot, but then again I don't buy that many games per year. I rather spend more time on the few games I buy.

[Ozymandiaz]

SC2 is riding on the original SC wave, so if Blizzard can overprice their games a bit, they will do so, and they did. After all Blizzard got executives running the company, not developers , so money will be their prime motivation for making the game in the first place.

I ordered the collectors edition myself (found it priced reasonably in UK), but it has been stuck in customs for 7 weeks now (I really hate Norwegian customs ). So no SC2 for me, yet. The main reason I did order it was actually the single player part, it seems the game play is not too different from the original, but I liked the story and depth of the original campaign.

[Mánagarmr]

I was very excited about SC2 about a year ago when the first videos were released, but the second they announced it would be split in three and sold separately, I signed off. I refuse to support companies that are nothing but milking their customers, or shoving pointy sticks up players behinds (UBIsoft).

So no SC2 for me. Not even if the "expansions" are $20 each. That's STILL a $100 game. I don't pay more than $50 tops for games unless they are EXCEPTIONALLY good (Mass Effect 2, for instance. Up to 144 hours on that game. Money well spent)

[HellishFiend]

I think that the full SC2 package is going to be well worth $100+. The campaign in SC2: Wings of Liberty is amazing, and the multiplayer and achievement systems are deep.

[Ozymandiaz]

Achievement I could not care less about. That kind of cheap rewarding that substitute real content was never to my liking .

But however, I have now actually got my hands on SC2, and i do like the campaign so far.

[zespri]

I'm maybe shallow, but I don't understand what is the big deal. If you feel that the game is worth it you buy it, and if you don't feel that it is then you don't buy it, this is as simple as that. I'm also not quite sure what "overpriced" means. It's supply and demand, right? Right? If they priced it this way then obviously there are enough people who'd buy it so they make profit they want.

The price doesn't look too unreasonable to me. I bought the first part of the game. Will I buy the expansions? Quite likely.

[Ozymandiaz]

I'm maybe shallow, but I don't understand what is the big deal. If you feel that the game is worth it you buy it, and if you don't feel that it is then you don't buy it, this is as simple as that. I'm also not quite sure what "overpriced" means. It's supply and demand, right? Right? If they priced it this way then obviously there are enough people who'd buy it so they make profit they want.

The price doesn't look too unreasonable to me. I bought the first part of the game. Will I buy the expansions? Quite likely.

Supply and demand is not the right thing to use here. Supply is infinity since they can copy the game as much they need (well, technically its limited by storage space of physically made devices). Its all about how much they can profit from high prices initially, from the hardcore fans and gamers. As such you might call it artifical supply, and PR/market made demand.

Regardless, supply and demand only really applies to real goods in limited supply. And even then its getting outdated term since the earth has supply in abundance.

A profit driven flawed capitalistic system as we have now only perpetuates false limited supplies of good sto line the supply controllers own pocekts in the name of profit


Personally I think the game price was somewhat steep comapred to what I got and agames in general these days, but not outrageous.

[zebramatt]

Wait, wait, wait... The supply of Starcraft games is ludicrously scarce! It took them three years just to get the balance to a point they were satisfied with for this one! Are you honestly suggesting that they'd be able to pump out quality SC games ad infinitum if only they had the inclination...??

Just to be clear: the "supply" to which one must refer when talking about any particular video game refers to an equivalent of the same for any material good; that is, the factors which are required to produce the end product - namely, all that talent!

[Ozymandiaz]

Wait, wait, wait... The supply of Starcraft games is ludicrously scarce! It took them three years just to get the balance to a point they were satisfied with for this one! Are you honestly suggesting that they'd be able to pump out quality SC games ad infinitum if only they had the inclination...??

Just to be clear: the "supply" to which one must refer when talking about any particular video game refers to an equivalent of the same for any material good; that is, the factors which are required to produce the end product - namely, all that talent!

I was refering to the product in and of itself, not new SC games

But I guess you can expand teh supply/deamand definition to include abstract supply as new games as well. In that case its a bit different.

[Winter Born]

I played the demo a few times and play mostly solo. Will wait until the 1st exp comes out. I 've got little time and a stable of great games that I have to choose between as it is. However I might get it as a gift 

[RCIX]

I played the demo a few times and play mostly solo. Will wait until the 1st exp comes out. I 've got little time and a stable of great games that I have to choose between as it is. However I might get it as a gift 

Wait, what? there's a Starcraft 2 demo? Where?!?!?!