OS-neutral: Heart of the swarm release date announced!

[labars]

Yay! We finally have a release date for the upcoming expansion to Starcraft II. Can't wait!

more info: http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/6512880/

[MacGamerHQ]

I was eager to bring the news but you people are too damn fast
Next time I will come here before writing the post in my blog

Anyway, great news!

[ScottishCaptain]

Too expensive.

I don't care what is in it. Starcraft 2 was criminally short as-is. Somehow they made Starcraft (the original)- which had all three species in it and took a bloody long time to finish... And yet SC2 had to be split up so they could charge you $60 + $40 + $40.

$140 for a complete game?

No thanks.

-SC

[Thraun]

Originally Posted by ScottishCaptain

Too expensive.

I don't care what is in it. Starcraft 2 was criminally short as-is. Somehow they made Starcraft (the original)- which had all three species in it and took a bloody long time to finish... And yet SC2 had to be split up so they could charge you $60 + $40 + $40.

$140 for a complete game?

No thanks.

-SC

Translation: Wahhh wah wah wahh wah wah! I'm a buzzkill! Waaahhhh.

[Cougarcat]

Originally Posted by ScottishCaptain

Too expensive.

I don't care what is in it. Starcraft 2 was criminally short as-is. Somehow they made Starcraft (the original)- which had all three species in it and took a bloody long time to finish... And yet SC2 had to be split up so they could charge you $60 + $40 + $40.

$140 for a complete game?

No thanks.

-SC

This argument came up all the time when Blizzard announced their SC2 expansion plans, and I don't get it. "Criminally short"? SC2 had 29 missions, SC1 had 30. Splitting them up means they can devote the resources to making full-length campaigns for each race.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by ScottishCaptain

$140 for a complete game?

No thanks.

I'm thinking the same thing. SCII was alright. Not great, not bad. Merely good. Its not worth paying $140 to me. I'll wait for inevitable battle pack, and pick it up for $70 or so when it comes out.

...though we're in the minority here. You know Blizzard is gonna sell a million billion trillion copies of the game.

[ScottishCaptain]

This argument came up all the time when Blizzard announced their SC2 expansion plans, and I don't get it. "Criminally short"? SC2 had 29 missions, SC1 had 30. Splitting them up means they can devote the resources to making full-length campaigns for each race.

What don't you get?

Heart of the Swarm is actually $60 for a boxed copy in Canada here. That's the same price as Starcraft 2 when it launched (which is now $40).

So you're telling me it's OK for them to charge FULL POP for an add-on, but still require that you own SC2 first in order to play?

I'd be OK if they said "Hey, it's $30 if you already own SC2". I'd even be OK if they were selling it as a standalone game for $60, because after all- they're the ones who told us we should expect "separate games" (~30 missions/piece) and sit around waiting for not one but three full development cycles to complete.

But that's not how it is. It's an overpriced add-on pack, especially when you consider the current price of SC2 and the fact that it is a requisite to playing HOTS. I'm sure the Protoss pack will require SC2 and HOTS before you can play it. Tell me how that's not being unnecessarily greedy?

-SC

[Cougarcat]

Originally Posted by ScottishCaptain

What don't you get?

Heart of the Swarm is actually $60 for a boxed copy in Canada here. That's the same price as Starcraft 2 when it launched (which is now $40).

So you're telling me it's OK for them to charge FULL POP for an add-on, but still require that you own SC2 first in order to play?

I'd be OK if they said "Hey, it's $30 if you already own SC2". I'd even be OK if they were selling it as a standalone game for $60, because after all- they're the ones who told us we should expect "separate games" (~30 missions/piece) and sit around waiting for not one but three full development cycles to complete.

But that's not how it is. It's an overpriced add-on pack, especially when you consider the current price of SC2 and the fact that it is a requisite to playing HOTS. I'm sure the Protoss pack will require SC2 and HOTS before you can play it. Tell me how that's not being unnecessarily greedy?

-SC

It's $40, the same price Blizzard's expansions have been for years.

The $60 price includes Wings of Liberty.

[Wardenski]

I will probably buy it anyway but I hope they have put more effort into the story and missions than in WoL and they need to stop Hollywoodising it.

SCI was much better value though, three well thought out stories with good dialogue and I felt there were less gimmicks in the missions.

[R1PPER]

Sc2 s all about multiplayer....probably the greatest multiplayer game of all time. Single player campaign is a "nice to have bonus".

[AlyseM]

That feels like a long way away. I'm not really sure I'm that excited about it. I loved star craft 2 multi player. Its competitive game play was one of my favorites. But 40$s and another year out? We'll see... maybe its competition will be stagnant.

[Cougarcat]

Originally Posted by Wardenski

I will probably buy it anyway but I hope they have put more effort into the story and missions than in WoL and they need to stop Hollywoodising it.

SCI was much better value though, three well thought out stories with good dialogue and I felt there were less gimmicks in the missions.

Eh, I rather liked the "gimmicks." They were very fun and spiced up the gameplay. Way too many of SC1's missions were just incarnations of "kill the enemy base," which got old.

I agree about the story, though. WoL's was terrible, even worse than Diablo III's. I don't have high hopes for HotS in that regard. They need to fire Chris Metzen or bring in a talented scriptwriter or science fiction author.

[Erasmus]

Having played SC and SC2, I think SC2 is easily the better game. And I don't play Multiplayer. The missions were much more interesting and fun, and the story was fine. SC2 was never going to be Amnesia: The Dark Descent, and expecting it to have a fantastic story was always going to be foolish. The plot was good enough to link the missions together, which was all it needed.

EDIT: Morale to this story, if you couldn't do it better yourself, then don't complain.

[Cougarcat]

Originally Posted by Erasmus

EDIT: Morale to this story, if you couldn't do it better yourself, then don't complain.

That's a fallacy. One does not need to be an artist in order to know what makes good art. Film critics would be out of a job otherwise.

I don't think it's too much to ask for at least a somewhat-engaging plot without plot holes large enough to drive entire Zerg armies through. Blizzard polishes the hell out of everything else in their games. They should be able to come up with a plot that doesn't sound as though it were created by a 10th-grader on a napkin during lunch period.

[rezenclowd3]

Originally Posted by thraun

translation: Wahhh wah wah wahh wah wah! I'm a buzzkill! Waaahhhh.

qft

[Wardenski]

Originally Posted by Erasmus

Having played SC and SC2, I think SC2 is easily the better game. And I don't play Multiplayer. The missions were much more interesting and fun, and the story was fine. SC2 was never going to be Amnesia: The Dark Descent, and expecting it to have a fantastic story was always going to be foolish. The plot was good enough to link the missions together, which was all it needed.

EDIT: Morale to this story, if you couldn't do it better yourself, then don't complain.

I disagree. SC1 had a great story with three very interesting species that tied together in a grand plot. IMO if your gonna do a game with a story driven campaign it needs to be at least consistent which the SC universe no longer is. It has been Lucased - endless books.

You often were defeated during the missions. In SC2 your always victorious, everyone is a genius and it rips off Firefly way too much - SC2 has no tone.

Others have pointed out a few more flaws
http://www.overthinkingit.com/2011/0...ft-2/?page=all
even SC Legacy a long running SC2 website:
http://sclegacy.com/editorials/7-reviews

[oklaonion]

Whoa, this thread diverged quickly into a battle between people who love the game and are excited and people who's job in life is to tell everyone that they will not buy something.

Considering the 100s of hours I put into WoL, $40 is a bargain for another few hundred hours. SC2 provides ENDLESS entertainment if you like it. No game is worth $40 if you don't like it.

[Erasmus]

Originally Posted by Wardenski

I disagree. SC1 had a great story with three very interesting species that tied together in a grand plot. IMO if your gonna do a game with a story driven campaign it needs to be at least consistent which the SC universe no longer is. It has been Lucased - endless books.

You are judging the plot, when it's only one third done.

You often were defeated during the missions. In SC2 your always victorious, everyone is a genius and it rips off Firefly way too much - SC2 has no tone.

Ripping off Firefly is a GODD thing. If only everything would take some style from Firefly...

And if you want to be defeated in missions, play at a higher difficulty setting. It's not hard, and takes about two mouse clicks.

On a side note, how many flaws did the first Lord of the Rings movie have in it? Still a good movie.

[Wardenski]

Originally Posted by Erasmus

You are judging the plot, when it's only one third done.

Ripping off Firefly is a GODD thing. If only everything would take some style from Firefly...

And if you want to be defeated in missions, play at a higher difficulty setting. It's not hard, and takes about two mouse clicks.

On a side note, how many flaws did the first Lord of the Rings movie have in it? Still a good movie.

Its not a third done though, an entire game and expansion preceeded it and it already contradicts many things. For example, Raynor is a friend of the Protoss helping to destroy the Overmind, yet he is willing to raid their sacred shrines in the second game.

Firefly is great but blindly ripping it off is bad. SC was a dark, serious universe with some subtle humour. Now the SC universe is screwed up, its a rushed blend of comedy, sci-fi references and Hollywood. Remember the bar fight in Firefly? Watch that, then watch the one in SC2. If I did that in my Thesis I would be banished from science from the rest of my life.

I badly worded what I meant about defeats. In the SC2 campaign, each mission is a victory for Raynor. In the SC1 campaign, you win the mission itself, but the mission is sometimes a defeat, such as when Raynor got arrested or when the Cerebrate was reincarnated in-front of Zeratul at the horror of Aldaris. (I completed the game on brutal FYI).

I will stop ranting there as I fear I may have derailed the thread. I like SC2 is a good game but with a bit more attention given to its scripting and story it could have been a great game but also a great bit of Sci-fi that could hold its own.

[Nightarchaon]

Supurb news,

Pre-ordered the Collectors edition the moment i saw this thread,

Shame there's no Zergling USB key, but i guess we cant have everything.

[Warhawk15]

Ill buy it just because I have a gift card at a store around $60 that I can buy it from.
But I wouldn't pay the full price out of my pocket.
I'm sure it'll be great, but I'd wait for a sale personally...
Especially considering I paid $60 for SC2 then a week or two later it was on sale for $30 around Christmas last year.