StarCraft II

[RUiN 427]

As much as I would love to join in the discusion about this one person's opinion of the game for a couple more pages...

I seem to have developed a dependency for the cheese that this particular thread has introduced me to. I'm in desperate need of a run of the mill Terran build to ween myself off the cheese, a fromage rehab therapy of sorts. Any suggestions? I'll do the leg work of research, just looking for a nudge in the right direction.

[Malakili]

Depends on the matchup really.

[Ingmar]

Ghost spam!

[luckton]

*reads up on HotS info*

They cut the single-player campaign to just 9 missions?  Fuck that shit.  I'll wait for the bundle with the Protoss expansion.

[Malakili]

*reads up on HotS info*

They cut the single-player campaign to just 9 missions?  Fuck that shit.  I'll wait for the bundle with the Protoss expansion.

Hmm, where are you seeing that, I had heard it was going to have 9 less missions than wings of liberty, which would put it somewhere around 20 missions.  But I might be wrong.

[K9]

Who the fuck complained that the campaign was too long?

Tards...

[sinij]

Single player campaign in SC2 makes as much sense as single player campaign in CS. I played campaign mostly to see cinematics, but I'd rather see them polish multiplayer... like release with chat rooms would have been nice.

[Malakili]

Single player campaign in SC2 makes as much sense as single player campaign in CS. I played campaign mostly to see cinematics, but I'd rather see them polish multiplayer... like release with chat rooms would have been nice.

Yeah, if I could pay less for multiplayer only I definitely would by such a version.  That being said, the single player campaign in WoL was passable, its just effectively totally separate game from multiplayer.

[Fordel]

There are tons of people who ONLY play the campaigns, they can't skimp on that.

[Rasix]

I'll probably buy the expansions, but I have no intention of ever playing multiplayer again.   My recent work "league" has shown me it's not fun in the slightest to do casual multiplayer and any desire I've had to get good again has been replaced by LoL.

I did have fun with the campaign and even enjoyed chasing some of the achievements.

[RUiN 427]

blue said 20 missions

[Malakili]

*reads up on HotS info*

They cut the single-player campaign to just 9 missions?  Fuck that shit.  I'll wait for the bundle with the Protoss expansion.

Hmm, where are you seeing that, I had heard it was going to have 9 less missions than wings of liberty, which would put it somewhere around 20 missions.  But I might be wrong.

blue said 20 missions

[K9]

Single player campaign in SC2 makes as much sense as single player campaign in CS. I played campaign mostly to see cinematics, but I'd rather see them polish multiplayer... like release with chat rooms would have been nice.

 

[Ironwood]

Yeah, I thought that was pants on head silly too, but bear in mind how much of this thread has been about Multiplayer....

[K9]

Over time indeed, around the time of launch though there was plenty of SP discussion. I thought the campaign was really good, and since we get so few RTS titles nowadays it is nice to have a campaign as rich and deep as WoL had. Appeasing the naysaysers is such a poor excuse for cutting the length of the campaign.

[Ingmar]

Over time indeed, around the time of launch though there was plenty of SP discussion. I thought the campaign was really good, and since we get so few RTS titles nowadays it is nice to have a campaign as rich and deep as WoL had. Appeasing the naysaysers is such a poor excuse for cutting the length of the campaign.

Blizzard has said:

We typically don't provide details about pricing until the game is closer to release. We do view Heart of the Swarm as an expansion set, so for the regions that have a standard box business model such as North America and Europe, we will price accordingly.

Depending where that 'expansion set, not full game' pricing comes in, a 20 mission campaign where the original had 29 isn't tremendously out of line. Remains to be seen what the final price is though.

[Paelos]

My guess is $40

[Ingmar]

Yeah that seems likely. SC2 appears to be $50 now, was it $60 at release?

[Rasix]

Yup.

[luckton]

I stand corrected...the info I had was that the single-player was just 9 missions.  20's still decent for a xpac.

And yes, I'm in the 'I only play the *Craft games for their single-player story' crowd. 

[Ingmar]

So yeah, 20 missions for $40, 29 for $60, would be pretty much 'right' I guess.

[luckton]

So yeah, 20 missions for $40, 29 for $60, would be pretty much 'right' I guess.

Taking account the overall quality, additional cinematics, and the multi-player stuff (unless they started charging people for the matchmaking and online play), it's a fair deal to me.  I suppose if I did play multiplayer I'd get more bang for my buck, but 

[Merusk]

If you're only playing for SP.. why not just wait until all 3 xps are out and pay less for them than the original retail price?  S'what I did with the first and what I'll do with this one.

[sinij]

  My recent work "league" has shown me it's not fun in the slightest to do casual multiplayer

SC2 defines causal as anything below Masters. By definition, this is not doable by something like 99.5% of all players.

[sinij]

I stand corrected...the info I had was that the single-player was just 9 missions.  20's still decent for a xpac.

And yes, I'm in the 'I only play the *Craft games for their single-player story' crowd.  

You paying something like $2 per mission. Isn't SC2 _a lot_ too expensive for what it is in this mode of playing?

Still, playing SC2 only in single player makes my head explode. To me its like FURRY LARPing, sure you could do it, but dear go why oh why?!

[Ingmar]

If you're only playing for SP.. why not just wait until all 3 xps are out and pay less for them than the original retail price?  S'what I did with the first and what I'll do with this one.

Because then we don't get to play it until like 2015?

[Merusk]

And?

/shrug

I'm not a big RTS fan at all. In fact I hate them but I love the cinematics and watching the story.. I can wait.

[Ingmar]

I could get hit by a car in 2014 and then never get to play it! Too risky.

[luckton]

I could get hit by a car in 2014 and then never get to play it! Too risky.

[Malakili]

You paying something like $2 per mission. Isn't SC2 _a lot_ too expensive for what it is in this mode of playing?

This is the way I think about pretty any AAA title that is single player only, or someone intends to play single player only. 

[Paelos]

I played SC2 for the single player and the achievements involved in single player.

I don't like playing other people because I'm terrible and it makes me angry.

[K9]

Single player in SC2 also incorporates the challenge modes (which were a genuinely great addition to the game I thought), and bot matches vs AI. I doubt many people who bought SC2 never played any multiplayer at all, but to argue the reverse is just daft.

[bhodi]

 My recent work "league" has shown me it's not fun in the slightest to do casual multiplayer

SC2 defines causal as anything below Masters. By definition, this is not doable by something like 99.5% of all players.

That is so retarded and wrong I don't even know where to begin. Who defines casual as anything below masters, other than you?

We have what two or three people in this thread that could theoretically play at that level? Are you saying only the few could even potentially have fun in multi? Like gets matched up with like, and my friend who is a permanent gold player enjoys multi just as much (if not more) than I ever did when I was laddering "for real".

[Ingmar]

You paying something like $2 per mission. Isn't SC2 _a lot_ too expensive for what it is in this mode of playing?

This is the way I think about pretty any AAA title that is single player only, or someone intends to play single player only. 

It isn't really too much, no. There's a fair amount of replayability in the missions with the achievements and multiple difficulty levels, etc. $/mission is not the way to look at it, more like $/hour - and SC2 beats the hell out of a lot of very good games on that front even if you don't do much multiplayer.

[Arinon]

You paying something like $2 per mission. Isn't SC2 _a lot_ too expensive for what it is in this mode of playing?

This is the way I think about pretty any AAA title that is single player only, or someone intends to play single player only. 

It isn't really too much, no. There's a fair amount of replayability in the missions with the achievements and multiple difficulty levels, etc. $/mission is not the way to look at it, more like $/hour - and SC2 beats the hell out of a lot of very good games on that front even if you don't do much multiplayer.

Exactly.  if you are talking about assets rather than time then the MP-only guys are paying $40 for 2-3 new units a side and maybe a tileset or two.  That's an equally crumby way to judge value.