It's not about the length of the game, read my post. With your reasoning, Square Enix could put out Final Fantasy in 6 episodes per game and sell them to you at full price. I don't care how long the product is, I just like seeing people pay full price for a product and receiving just that. Sure, you can argue "but it is a full game, look, epic campaign and multiplayer!", but the fact of the matter remains that you do not get the full extent of the story until you buy the expansions. Because that's what they are.
Ok well I understand what you're saying, but how are you not getting the "full extent of the story" with SC and do with Half-life 2? There's no difference, you can consider the ending of SC2 to be a cliffhanger, and the expansions to finish it off. It's not like just becuase you can only play as the Terran that the story has nothing but Terrans. No, it's a full game, the story includes the Protoss' and the Zerg's heavy involvement, the campaign is about as long if not longer than the original. You only PLAY as the Terrans, but you're still getting the full story with zerg and protoss included. Do you understand what I'm saying? If not, then we agree to disagree, no point in arguing in circles as I do understand where you're coming from, I just don't know that you're grasping what I'm saying.
No, I don't mean the gameplay. I'm fine with a game ending on a cliffhanger. Hell, that's become the trend since the year 2000. That's a perfectly acceptable way to end your game. Using your HL2 example, imagine if HL2 was exactly the game it is now, PLUS Episodes 1 and 2. Then, they remove Episode 1 and 2 from the package (which you would've paid $50 or $60 for, not sure what the prices are over there) and make you pay for them later.
Again, I don't see any difference in how HL2 left the story off, to how SC2 left it off. Your HL comparison isn't good becuase the game's stories are structured differently.
HL1 is a better comparison, HL1 had two expansions that featured you playing as different characters; Blue-shift, and Opposing Force. Now, they charge you $50 for HL1, and then later on these two expansions come out at $20-$30 a pop (prices are estimated), is HL1 not a full game without the expansions? Is it not fair for them to charge money for the expansions? It's totally fair, and the only reason those expansions are less costly is becuase they're significantly shorter and not nearly as good as the original game. In SC2's situation, they're doing sort of the same thing, just that SC2: Wings of Liberty = HL1 quality, SC2: Heart of the Hive (forget the actual name, something like that) will basically = Another HL1 quality game, and the third game featuring the Protoss will be another HL1.
Now it's not confirmed, so if they go ahead and put out two half-assed expansions, call them full games and charge another $60 for each I'll be pissed, but they're saying another full story continuation, new units for multiplayer, new maps, features etc... So it's not just going to be an expansion.
THAT is my problem. The "expansions" or "extra" content that every single Starcraft fanboy will gobble up in 6 months time was part of the original game. I can't make this any clearer.
No... The original SC is a
different game, so you really can't take SC, and base your expectations for SC2 off what it was. SC2 has just as much substance as SC1 if not more, the story is just structured differently.
You should learn to read my posts better. There's a link in there linking to a Kotaku article, with a video of someone finishing the campaign in 16 hours.
LINK TO THE ARTICLE:
http://kotaku.com/5597879/starcraft-ii-campaign-finished-in-16-hours
So please lower your bull**** flag, thank you.
Just becuase one person finished the game in 16 hours (which is one hour more than you were saying btw
). Doesn't mean that that's the actual amount of gameplay. A better meaasurement would be a solid average from all types of players. Some people may beat it quicker than 16 hours, some may take 25, it depends on how you play. So you can't just take one person's time and say that's the gameplay, and I'll be keeping that flag raised high and proud.
I never, ever said Starcraft 2 was a bad game. I'd like you to quote me on that. I'm sure it's great. But its marketing and packaging decisions is clearly a publisher taking massive advantage of its fanbase.
Again, I don't think the argument is about whether it's bad or good, it's about if it's a full game, and whether or not people are being ripped off. Let me ask you this though, if you admit that it's a good or even great game, how are you being taken advantage of? For that matter, even if it IS a bad game (which clearly it is not), no one is being taken advantage of, becuase it's been publicly announced that you only play as the Terran and no one is forcing you to buy it. It's not their fault that there are fanboy's out there that buy any game they put out, that's solely the fault of the fanboy. It's the same reason we keep getting all these god awful ****ing DBZ games from bandai namco, every idiot who loves DBZ goes out and buys these mediocre games and thinks they're amazing.
Also I apologize to anyone if my words are taken as offensive. I mean no harm and I respect any opinion that you have, I just get a little passionate arguing about things I love. Let's not turn this thread into a flame war, and I'll try my best to remain calm.
