| N4G | VGReleases | BADJoystick | GameNews24 | ZTGD | Price Comparison |

260°

Blizzard: We're Not "Milking" StarCraft

Since Blizzard announced StarCraft II would be released as a trilogy, with each entry focusing on a single race's campaign, there has been some backlash from Internet goers who speculate the studio is bowing to pressure from new owners Activision to drag out the game with the sole purpose of increasing revenues. "Franchise milking" has been on the lips of more than a few commenters.

But Blizzard's StarCraft rep Bob Colayco told Edge on Monday that it's not like that all, saying that Blizzard's the one "calling the shots."

Read Full Story >>

edge-online.com

Alternative Sources:

Blizzard Rep Says Company I... - ripten.com | By: Nostradavis

BIoodmask - contributor
Published: 435 days 3 hours ago | News | PC | Industry News

Save | Email | Info | Report | Add Alt Source

Comment Settings

Showing: 1 - 41 of 41 Comments

Shut this user up

Let user speak

tocrazed4you - 435 days 5 hours ago

1 - Wow

Screw you guys you are milking it. I rather wait extra months than spending 100 bucks more for one game your suppose to have entirely.

Agree(5) | Disagree(3) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

TheIneffableBob - 435 days 3 hours ago

1.1 -

They never announced how much the campaigns would cost.

They did, however, say that if the content felt like an expansion, then they would price it like an expansion.

I expect Wings of Liberty to be $50, then Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void to be $30.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

T12AN - 435 days 1 hour ago

1.2 -

Not a few extra months. Try a couple extra years because Blizz announced that their target date to finish up the 2nd part will be 1 year after, and the protoss part to be another year after that.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Endorphin - 435 days ago

1.3 - ..... >:(

I really do not like this idea. At first I was under the impression that I would be getting three different games at once in a big bundle for a mega price, which I was fine with. But now thinking that I have to wait and wait to finish my single player experience...is kind of annoying. Usually Pc games sell for 40$-50$ so if you gonna sell each for that same price (because your getting the same size of content everytime 26-30 missions each) IT IS MILKING! If the story is that epic why not do the mega price thing and get over with and save all the extra unit bs for expansion packs.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

TheIneffableBob - 435 days ago

1.4 -

They're doing the campaign packs because they want to release the game sometime within this decade. If they were to put all the content into a single game, then SC2 would probably release in 2011. By doing this, they can release Wings of Liberty maybe in 2009, then Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void in the years after that. So instead of waiting years and years for the full StarCraft experience, we can wait one year and have the full multiplayer experience and the Terran campaign to tide us over until the Zerg and Protoss campaigns release.

It's been over 10 years already. I don't want to wait another 3 years to play the sequel to StarCraft.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

1.5 -

Whats up people? Why do you complain when the only reason they are doing this is that they can ensure you get a quality game within reasonable time.

Either they would have to make the game significantly smaller or they wouldnt release the game in 2.5 years... And by then the game would probably be worth like 100$, but its not a wise to sell a game for a 100$ because even if its worth it and they have spent so much time and effort on developing it, people wont pay it because they dont know that its worth it.

So basically what this means is that you get more Starcraft. The first starcraft game they release will have more then enough value with its 26-30 missions. You also get the full multiplayer experience. The other two are basically like expensions with another 26-30 missions for the zerg and then the protoss. If you dont want to pay for the singleplayer then just dont buy it. You already have the full multiplayer from the first game.

Its really quite stupid that people complain about this. The alternative would be like 10 missions for each race in one game. Meaning you wont get any better value, you will just get 3 seperate smaller campaigns instead of one epic campaign.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

dktxx2 - 435 days 5 hours ago

2 -

I don't want to play 30 missions with the terrans. I want to play 10 missions of each race. Blizzard stop trying to think outside the box, you suck at it.

Agree(5) | Disagree(4) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

tocrazed4you - 435 days 5 hours ago

3 - Its supposely

90 missions per game, but they were planning to release it as a single game but than split it up so they can RELEASE IT EARLY, but the price came with it. Wow just wow bad cover up story for them.

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

3.1 -

Whatever whiner. Compare this to any other game out there and you will see its a great value. Now what do you expect a company to work on a game for 7 years and then sell it for 50$?

The fans dont want to wait another 3 years for the game to finish. And if they did that and sold it for 50$ that would be an insane value, and would be stupid from a buisness perspective.

If they release each game with 26-30 missions then we are gonna get alot of starcraft out of this. If you enjoy starcraft SP and story then this will be great for you. If you dont then DO NOT BUY IT R-TRDS

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Raf1k1 - 434 days 21 hours ago

3.2 - @ SuperM

I agree with you though i think the 'If you dont then DO NOT BUY IT R-TRDS' thing is a little over the top.

Anyway, what u say makes sense.
Lets say Blizzard was to release a full game this year (doesnt matter what game), people would happily pay £30 for it.

Then Blizzard releases the sequel next year, people would still pay £30 for that after having bought the first one.

But if Blizzard was to wait and release both together at £60, there would be a lot of very unhappy bunnies bouncing around on sites like this.

Blizzard puts a lot of time and effort into their games, we all know that. People who love the story will get what they want over the next few years and people who just want the multiplayer will also get what they want from each release. So why the fuss?

The only problem I can see is with fans of the factions whose games are being released later. Nobody wants to wait longer than anyone else to play their favourite faction and that completely understandable.

Give it time, I'm sure Blizzard will win you over. They usually do don't they?

Edit: lol just realised I may come across as a real Blizzard fanatic. I'm not, I just wanted to get this off my chest :D

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

jackdoe - 435 days 3 hours ago

4 -

I disagree. Unless you charge $30 per StarCraft II game, then you are indeed milking it.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

4.1 -

Riiight.... Its milking if each game is a bad value for the money. 26-30 missions is more then they did in the first starcraft game. So they do more then the original starcraft with each game, is that really such a terrible value that it has to cost 30$?

And who knows, maybe it will cost 30$, but its just so stupid to whine about it know.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Ninja-Sama - 435 days 3 hours ago

5 - CAN IT BLIZZARD!

Activision is the one calling the shots. If not then you have become just as bad as them!

Oh and also...Yes, you are milking the franchise.

GG NO RE K THX BAI.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

5.1 -

Does anyone of you even read the article? Because it doesnt seem like it. They have been working for the game for 4 years now. And its only the terran SP that they have managed to do alot of work. The other two factions they have almost done nothing. So you have to wait for 3 years or take what you get... Hey they have worked on it for 4 years already, it cant be such a terrible value. Besides if blizzard decided they wanted to milk something they would just do like EA and release a game each year with minor upgrades.

Its basically pathetic to call this milking when all blizzard is doing is ensuring the quality of the all the singleplayer campaigns. Blizzard is all about quality like it or not.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

levy - 434 days 20 hours ago

5.2 - this is kinda whiney

You can't say it's "milking" if you don't know the details. How do you know it's not $20 for each expansion? Oh, and imagine some other game, if it was announced that it would be a trilogy, I don't think everyone would shout "MILKIIIIING" the first thing they did. Think of them as starcraft 2, 3 and 4 then. That is fully acceptable if the games are large enough to be worth the money.

and guess what, we don't know that yet. so save the whine.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Noctis - 435 days 3 hours ago

6 -

Starcraft versus II?

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

FantasyStar - 435 days 1 hour ago

6.1 -

Starcraft Agito II?

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Adriana Lima - 435 days 3 hours ago

7 - secret cow level

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

IaMs12 - 435 days 2 hours ago

8 -

this is gay... just make it one game... what am i going to do if i want to play as Zerg but i have the Terran campaign, wait for the release of Zerg then Protoss? Hopefully it will act like expansions and nothing more...

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

8.1 -

Well you can play them in multiplayer. or you could wait until they release the zerg campaign or the protos campaign. You would have to wait just as long if they did the whole game in one package anyway so no reason to whine about it

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Timesplitter14 - 435 days 2 hours ago

9 -

THey're stupid. They're just gonna lose their money because way more people will decide to pirate their games

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Ninja-Sama - 435 days 2 hours ago

9.1 - My thoughts exactly dude.

They are just opening the doors for the pirates to rush in. This thing has the potential to really blow up in Blizzard's face ala Spore.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

jackdoe - 435 days 2 hours ago

9.2 -

I guess supposedly, you could argue, people would purchase the first product, get their multiplayer kicks from that, and pirate the other two games, with the justification that their $50 should have been enough for the "whole game". So yes, there may be an increase in piraters.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Skyyo - 435 days 2 hours ago

9.3 -

Profit driven society

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

9.4 -

Well people would have to buy one of them to get the multiplayer... So if they released the entire game for 50$ then they would definately not earn anything on doing that. Besides that would have been such an insane value that its just stupid to expect something like that. Its basically starcraft with two expansions, now stop whining.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

mariusmal - 434 days 19 hours ago

9.5 -

yup.today what keeps ppl from pirating is devs supports and love. look at sins of a solar empire. no drm and ppl felt they should support them.
blizzard is going crazy and battlenet 2 will not make everyone ditch 100 euros or more for a full game. guess ill wait for diablo3.. oh wait maybe they just make and edition for each class :D

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

pandaboy99 - 435 days 2 hours ago

10 -

Correction to the Article: Blizzard is milking starcraft

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

RememberThe357 - 435 days 2 hours ago

11 - Activition doesn't own Blizzard.

Vivendi, Blizzard Activision's parent company, owned Blizzard under Vivendi Games. Vivendi bought a 52% stake in Activision and on July 9,2008 Activision and Vivendi Games merged to create Activtion Blizzard. Bobby Kotick, Activisions CEO was named CEO of Activtion Blizzard. Activtion and Blizzard are two parts of the same company, owned Vivendi.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Now with that said, Blizzard is milking StarCraft. I mean come on, they're not fooling anyone. If the single players are massive games then I might just live with it. However, my big concern is multi-player, I would think that the multi-player would be gimped with only one race. Unfortunately for me StarCraft is going to be awesome and I'm going to get it anyway...

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

RememberThe357 - 435 days 1 hour ago

11.1 - Correction

Blizzard Entertainment IS a subsidiary of Activision Blizzard, but they do claim that they are a free entity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

René Penisson, the former chairman of Vivendi Games is now the chairmen of Activision Blizzard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

SuperM - 434 days 23 hours ago

11.2 -

No the multiplayer wont be gimped, you get the full multiplayer experience with the game. So you can play all races

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

12 incogneato | 435 days 2 hours ago - User only got 1 bubble - Show

Shut this user up

Let user speak

kydrice - 435 days 2 hours ago

13 -

Due to their success of WoW They know think they can sodomize us and expect us to pay extra for that.

This is why our sails fly free. Yarr..

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

UltimateIdiot911 - 435 days 1 hour ago

13.1 -

Raise the anchors matey.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Endorphin - 435 days ago

14 - Brood War

Starcraft: Brood War was an expansion pack, the game was smaller in terms of single player and it added a few units to each race, that's it.<--THAT'S EXPANDING THE GAME. Slicing your game into three parts is trying to get more for what you have at once. Bad Move Blizzard!

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Raf1k1 - 434 days 21 hours ago

14.1 -

you make a fair point.

hadn't thought of it like that.

but anyway, my thoughts still stand. (which you can find further up at 3.2 btw :P)

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

mariusmal - 434 days 19 hours ago

15 -

the funny thing is that i supported this move because i tought it was 30 euros a pack and separated by few months... terran to protoss "kill ya in a year mate".
but now ? i'm hating blizzard for milking it.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

tuaamin13 - 434 days 18 hours ago

16 - So now the question is:

Are the games going to be stand alone or is it required to purchase the Terran campaign first, then the Zerg or Protoss campaigns.

Any real starcraft player would buy them all anyhow, but that's one way to tell if they're milking it--if they force you to buy everything.

Anyhow I predict that in 3 years we'll be able to buy the Battlechest with everything for probably $50.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Erdrick - 434 days 12 hours ago

17 -

episodic games be damned.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

kalos - 434 days 11 hours ago

17.1 -

Right there with you. Hate episodic content, the ratio of content verses cost is worse for the consumer, such as the Half Life 2 Episodes. Trying to play out an RTS like thier popular MMORPG WoW, it just sucks unless these extra campaigns are a heck of a lot cheaper than the base game. I'm talking $10-15 max. There were a handful of free campaigns for Warcraft 3 that showed up Blizzard's professional work, like Wonderers of Sorceria and Cryptrobbers and so forth; good campaigns do take time and effort but it certainly doesn't deserve high prices without proper development of either the races or the game engine. This does niggle me deeply, but if they aren't greedy with the pricing it'll work.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

zxcvbnhjgf - 433 days 23 hours ago

18 - My argument

Before I start, heres my premise: "Starcraft is a complete game when 3 races are represented and playable to the same extent in multiplayer AND singleplayer"

SCII therefore is NOT a standalone game. They've used this word " standalone" to trick us in thinking that we're getting a complete game.
Although its milking, but personally thats not why I'm pissed; I don't have problem with $. (I'll explain later why it ABSOLUTELY IS milking later...)
More importantly, if you consider my premise above, I'm pissed because I won't be able to EXPERIENCE STARCRAFT. PERIOD. I'm simply against the idea of waiting for 2nd and 3rd campaign to come out.
They said they've "always" thought of having expansions to SC2. I smell bullshit. I think they just came up with that sentence when preparing for this announcement. 2nd and 3rd so called "expansions" are really pieces of ONE puzzle. Broodwar WAS an expansion. If it was never announced to be released, if it never existed, no one would be complaining because we won't be waiting for something;
Now, however, we WILL be waiting for the 2nd and 3rd part because ONLY THEN will we have experiences STARCRAFT.
Now the milking part: some say "oh its not milking! multiplayer will feature all 3 races!" Actually, they said that 2nd and 3rd releases will have some changes (new units etc) to the multiplayer and people with the first release WON'T be able to play with people with 2nd release. Now....they know that everyone will be like "but but...I dont wanna sit around and play with losers! I wanna play the new multiplayer!!" So therefore, its not just the campaigns, it's the multiplayer aspect that they'll use to get $$.

Bottom line: Release everything at once, no matter how long it takes. For me personally, it's not the $$ that bothers me, it's the insult to the fans by suggesting that the first 2nd and 3rd release is "standalone" when its REALLY 1/3, 2/3 and 3/3.

And just for the fun of, and because I'm pissed, I hope those torrent guys get busy when 2nd and 3rd come out. Actually, since I don't play multiplayer, i'll probably be downloading the first too, and encouraging others to do so as well.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) |

Shut this user up

Let user speak

Endorphin - 433 days 23 hours ago

18.1 - :D

Well said! After a day this has still been in the back of my head, its so disappointing to have to experience Starcraft 2 in such a teasing way.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) |

Showing: 1 - 41 of 41 Comments

Add Comment (Gamer Zone)

Gamer Zone Posting Guidelines
The Gamer Zone is for members who want a more friendly and civilized discussion. This section is heavily moderated by the N4G staff, so leave your fanboyism at the door please. Members who are unable to behave in a mature and respectful manner will be temporarily or permanently restricted from posting in the Gamer Zone. Using words such as Xbots and Sony droids, or other words from the console war vocabulary, is strictly prohibited in this Zone.
Read More...

You must log in to post comments.

Username:

Password:

Remember

Join N4G

Login

About N4G

N4G is a social game news site that covers the game industry 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
More Info... | Submit News

- Site Menu
  
  Game Index
  Help & Info
  
  RSS Feed
  Feedback
  
  Full Menu...
  Webmaster Tools