Is Starcraft Heart of the Swarm going to be worth it?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Palindrome**

LordofHats wrote:

Mann vs Machine? Which is pretty much constructed wholesale to get you to pay for every single game (or spend 30 minutes trying to get a free one)? EDIT: Oh and that it crashes pretty much 50% of the time?

It has had 311 updates since it released, 22 of which has been significant. Ranging from adding alternative game play for all the classes to entirely new game modes. All of which are completely free by the way (unless you really like hats). TF2 also has just about the best marketing in the buisness.

Valve still cares a lot about TF2 but I wouldn't mind seeing some of that love given to DoD:S which has been sadly neglected for years.

**Kanluwen**

LordofHats wrote:
Palindrome wrote:Has it? While you may get a(nother) shiney hat if you pre-order a steam game the game itself has to be good enough to make that worthwhile.

For a game that is nearly 5 years old it receives a lot of high quality support for free, even the game itself is free. Thats something that is unique in gaming.

Mann vs Machine? Which is pretty much constructed wholesale to get you to pay for every single game (or spend 30 minutes trying to get a free one)? EDIT: Oh and that it crashes pretty much 50% of the time?

Yeah. Team Fortress is all about the money now

I suggest not using the "Quick Match" function for MvM.

Do a server search for "MvM" and you'll find them far, far, far quicker.

**Tazz Azrael**

Galdos wrote:
Tazz Azrael wrote:
My opinion is i should not have to pay three separate prices for one bloody game.....
tl/dr: Hernia of the Swarm is not worth it.

Even though clearly WoL was a game in itself. 26 Mission, 29 of them if you count the alternatives with a full story including a good climax.
Starcraft 1 had like 27 missions....

Now Im not saying the game was perfect or amazing, but it did a good job acting as a standalone game and there is nothign wrong with expansion pacts as long as they are treated as expansion pacts.

Ultimately it is what LordofHats said, if you liked WoL than yes it is. If you did not than no it isnt.

I enjoyed WoL (Key word is enjoyed, it wasnt amazing but it lived up to my moderate expectations) and from the trailer, I am more interested in HotS than I was for WoL. I will EVENTUALLY buy it but I wont buy it immediately.

Note I ONLY care about single player sense WoL BUTCHERED the User Map settings system that Starcaft 1 had done perfectly. (In terms of finding fun games to play, I only liked UMS, I HATE verses)

As a standalone yes it did do a good job, but just the fact that i know that it could have easily been one full game (given a few more years of production)ruined it fore me. Heck if it was one full game (with all three campaigns out already) i would have absolutely loved the game, sure the terrain are my main/ only played race (even when i played SC1) but if i had the option to do protoss or zerg in SC2 for the campaigns it would have been great!

**Garvy**

Hell no-comparing to warhammer Starcraft is nothing

**Brother SRM**

Garvy wrote:
Hell no-comparing to warhammer Starcraft is nothing

So does this logic extend to everything?
Hell no, compared to Warhammer, Citizen Kane is nothing!
Hell no, compared to Warhammer, going outside is nothing!
Hell no, compared to Warhammer, eating is nothing!
*promptly dies of starvation, models in hand*

**LordofHats**

Hell no, compared to Warhammer, Citizen Kane is nothing!

Well yeah. Innovative or not, Citizen Kane kind of sucks as a movie

**Galdos**

I didnt like Citizen Kane. I enjoyed the hell out of Casablanca though.

However this is about the go WAYYYY off topic

**Deadeight**

SC2 is a multiplayer game with a single player campaign bolted on to it for a bit of fun. I'm not even sure I've played the campaign to be honest, I think I started it but didn't finish.

And yet I've put hundreds of hours into it because the multiplayer is just so good. I question whether any RTS game has been worth it just for the campaign, I can't think of one (in my opinion). DoW II is another example, the campaigns are dull but it's got a good multiplayer.

**Dark Scipio**

Deadeight wrote:
SC2 is a multiplayer game with a single player campaign bolted on to it for a bit of fun. I'm not even sure I've played the campaign to be honest, I think I started it but didn't finish.

And yet I've put hundreds of hours into it because the multiplayer is just so good. I question whether any RTS game has been worth it just for the campaign, I can't think of one (in my opinion). DoW II is another example, the campaigns are dull but it's got a good multiplayer.

The single player is at least as entertaining than that of some single.player centred games.

**Alexzandvar**

For me the whole Wings of Liberty campaign was a blast, and I loved the Multiplayer.

so yes I am looking forward to HOTS.

**Trondheim**

I very much doubt it, seeing how I strongly disliked the Wings Of Liberty

**deathholydeath**

Definitely buying it. I loved Wings of Liberty. SCII has 29 missions. The original SC had 30 for all three races. I don't really see a problem with the amount of campaign you get. But, that's just my opinion.

**Macok**

WoL was awesome. The campaign was really well made and missions differed from one another. Comparing to something like DoW 2 which had 3 missions (times twenty) it was light years ahead.

However between the huge waiting time, not insignificant price and overabundance of WoL... I don't know. Probably won't buy it.

As for TF2, Valve really made an effort to give players tools to expand the game. Source Movie Maker, Garys Mod...
You can also go and search for how long there was subtle hints of MvM coming. Hidden rooms, codes painted at walls, hidden links at the main page etc..
All the sounds and "personalities" given, Meet the...
You can't just give players alone credit for all this.
With another game (Dota 2) being FTP Valve got some bonus points. Yeah, it's a shameless rip off / same genre, but unlike others (LoL, HoN, Demigod, Starcraft Dota) it's free.

**KingKodo**

League of Legends is free Macok.

**SagesStone**

As is HoN now.

The genre is also MOBA.

**Soladrin**

And demigod never took off to begin with. They jumped on to early.

**Testify**

thenoobbomb wrote:
WoW really made Blizzard poor.

It made them lazy.

c&p from wikipedia:

1994 - Warcraft: Orcs & Humans
1995– – Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness
1996– – Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal
1997–
1998–
1999– – Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition
2000–
2001–
2002– – Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
2003– – Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne
2004– – World of Warcraft

What actual games have Blizard made since 2004? Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2. 2 games, in 8 years. And as far as we know there's no new games at all in the pipelines.

**Alexzandvar**

Testify wrote:
thenoobbomb wrote:
WoW really made Blizzard poor.

It made them lazy.

c&p from wikipedia:

1994 - Warcraft: Orcs & Humans
1995– – Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness
1996– – Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal
1997–
1998–
1999– – Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition
2000–
2001–
2002– – Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
2003– – Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne
2004– – World of Warcraft

What actual games have Blizard made since 2004? Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2. 2 games, in 8 years. And as far as we know there's no new games at all in the pipelines.

Just because Blizzard does not shovel out mediocre games every single or other year does not make them lazy.

SC2, Diablo 3, and WoW are all large Online games, they require constant patching and updating.

Once upon a time studios put time and effort into developing rather than shoveling out the same crap over and over again Call of Duty style.

**Ahtman**

SC2 and Diablo III shouldn't require constant patching and updating.

**Dark Scipio**

Ahtman wrote:
SC2 and Diablo III shouldn't require constant patching and updating.

Every games does. Most just dont get it.

**Soladrin**

Testify wrote:
thenoobbomb wrote:
WoW really made Blizzard poor.

It made them lazy.

c&p from wikipedia:

1994 - Warcraft: Orcs & Humans
1995– – Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness
1996– – Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal
1997–
1998–
1999– – Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition
2000–
2001–
2002– – Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
2003– – Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne
2004– – World of Warcraft

What actual games have Blizard made since 2004? Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2. 2 games, in 8 years. And as far as we know there's no new games at all in the pipelines.

Project Titan has been in the works for what.. 5 years now? It's a new IP MMO. That's all we know though.

**Alexzandvar**

Ahtman wrote:
SC2 and Diablo III shouldn't require constant patching and updating.

No game can be sucessful long term with out constant maintenance and bug fixing.

**Ahtman**

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of what the word 'constant' means. To say that SC2 and DIII shouldn't require constant maintenance and patching is not the same as saying they should never have have maintenance or be patched. A RTS and an Action RPG that require the same level of revision and attention as an MMO didn't do something right somewhere down the line.

**Kanluwen**

Ahtman wrote:
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of what the word 'constant' means. To say that SC2 and DIII shouldn't require constant maintenance and patching is not the same as saying they should never have have maintenance or be patched. A RTS and an Action RPG that require the same level of revision and attention as an MMO didn't do something right somewhere down the line.

I get what you mean, but I do think that SC2's balancing is something that will happen due to the PvP nature rather than the PvE nature of the game.

DIII requiring this much maintenance and patching is silly considering how recently the game released. Especially considering the "major" nature of those patches/maintenance issues.

**Ovion**

Whether it is or not... I know I'll be buying it regardless...
I'll try and get the special edition if there is one, same for the Protoss edition when it finally comes out.

**Soladrin**

Kanluwen wrote:
Ahtman wrote:
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of what the word 'constant' means. To say that SC2 and DIII shouldn't require constant maintenance and patching is not the same as saying they should never have have maintenance or be patched. A RTS and an Action RPG that require the same level of revision and attention as an MMO didn't do something right somewhere down the line.

I get what you mean, but I do think that SC2's balancing is something that will happen due to the PvP nature rather than the PvE nature of the game.

DIII requiring this much maintenance and patching is silly considering how recently the game released. Especially considering the "major" nature of those patches/maintenance issues.

with D3, yeah, I agree. But let's be honest, that game is crap.

For SC2 however, this the highest level of competitive RTS out there right now, the balance has to be made as perfect as possible, this requires constant patching.

**Kanluwen**

Soladrin wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Ahtman wrote:
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of what the word 'constant' means. To say that SC2 and DIII shouldn't require constant maintenance and patching is not the same as saying they should never have have maintenance or be patched. A RTS and an Action RPG that require the same level of revision and attention as an MMO didn't do something right somewhere down the line.

I get what you mean, but I do think that SC2's balancing is something that will happen due to the PvP nature rather than the PvE nature of the game.

DIII requiring this much maintenance and patching is silly considering how recently the game released. Especially considering the "major" nature of those patches/maintenance issues.

with D3, yeah, I agree. But let's be honest, that game is crap.

Wouldn't know. Didn't buy it--don't plan on buying it either.

Blizzard got too much of my money when I played WoW, and managed to have some of the worst customer service I've ever dealt with.

For SC2 however, this the highest level of competitive RTS out there right now, the balance has to be made as perfect as possible, this requires constant patching.

Well, it's more that Blizzard can't keep their fingers off of doing minor tweaks here and there, then adding a massive slap to the head of what they see being done by "casuals" which upsets the "hardcore" players in the process.

**Palindrome**

Soladrin wrote:

For SC2 however, this the highest level of competitive RTS out there right now, the balance has to be made as perfect as possible, this requires constant patching.

As the updates are almost all small balance tweeks they will not require much work.

**Soladrin**

Palindrome wrote:
Soladrin wrote:

For SC2 however, this the highest level of competitive RTS out there right now, the balance has to be made as perfect as possible, this requires constant patching.

As the updates are almost all small balance tweeks they will not require much work.

And your point is..?

**Palindrome**

Alexzandvar wrote:

Just because Blizzard does not shovel out mediocre games every single or other year does not make them lazy.

SC2, Diablo 3, and WoW are all large Online games, they require constant patching and updating.

Thats my point, the care and attention the SC2 gets will not take many man hours. Compare SC2 with something like TF2 (Valve has a similary sluggish release schedule) and the work that has gone into SC2 post release is negligable.

Of course they are releasing 2 expansion packs for full game prices so they are obviously beavering away on a new engine (or something) to justify doing so.