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.

Figuring out how to tweak one thing so it doesn't break the hell out of a dozen other things is trickier than you'd think.

 Ovion wrote:
Figuring out how to tweak one thing so it doesn't break the hell out of a dozen other things is trickier than you'd think.

Er no.

"Tweaks" are actually relatively simple.
"Balance Changes" are not.

BioWare is being very open about how they are balancing the Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer. Tweaks are fairly simple, provided it is a variable which can be changed without having to delve too deep into the code.

Getting into full-blown bugs/glitches requires a lot more work and the deployment of a patch.

Sorry - let me rephrase, Tweaking Balance is tricky.
Fixing glitches is just a matter of finding where the problem is in a bazillion lines of code.

Except again you're still not using the correct terminology.

"Tweaks" are minor alterations which do not require as much work--or even really full updates.

HOTS seems very expensive for what is an expansion, it should cost half what it is. Blizzard was one of my favourite companies before WoW, best hands down for story telling. While I enjoyed SCII and was by no means a bad game, it was just lacking....something. Im currently replaying the original Starcraft, it seems to have a spark SCII just dosent. I also dont understand what has taken them so long to get out HOTS, SCII came out 2 years ago for gods sake. You would think with blizzards formidable resources it would take less than half that (even with Diablo 3, which is sub par at best).

 vodo40k wrote:
HOTS seems very expensive for what is an expansion, it should cost half what it is. Blizzard was one of my favourite companies before WoW, best hands down for story telling. While I enjoyed SCII and was by no means a bad game, it was just lacking....something. Im currently replaying the original Starcraft, it seems to have a spark SCII just dosent. I also dont understand what has taken them so long to get out HOTS, SCII came out 2 years ago for gods sake. You would think with blizzards formidable resources it would take less than half that (even with Diablo 3, which is sub par at best).

How much is the price? Last I heard was 40 but that was more of a speculation a long time ago

 vodo40k wrote:
HOTS seems very expensive for what is an expansion, it should cost half what it is. Blizzard was one of my favourite companies before WoW, best hands down for story telling. While I enjoyed SCII and was by no means a bad game, it was just lacking....something. Im currently replaying the original Starcraft, it seems to have a spark SCII just dosent. I also dont understand what has taken them so long to get out HOTS, SCII came out 2 years ago for gods sake. You would think with blizzards formidable resources it would take less than half that (even with Diablo 3, which is sub par at best).

Why should it costs half? They will sell it for that price and enough people will buy it. Thats what the ,,right" price is. And its not just an expansion, it has too much content in for this. Would be any better if the whole game would be composed of new units?

I dont think 2 years are too long. 2 Years!

I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

 Dark Scipio wrote:

 vodo40k wrote:
HOTS seems very expensive for what is an expansion, it should cost half what it is. Blizzard was one of my favourite companies before WoW, best hands down for story telling. While I enjoyed SCII and was by no means a bad game, it was just lacking....something. Im currently replaying the original Starcraft, it seems to have a spark SCII just dosent. I also dont understand what has taken them so long to get out HOTS, SCII came out 2 years ago for gods sake. You would think with blizzards formidable resources it would take less than half that (even with Diablo 3, which is sub par at best).

Why should it costs half? They will sell it for that price and enough people will buy it. Thats what the ,,right" price is. And its not just an expansion, it has too much content in for this. Would be any better if the whole game would be composed of new units?

I dont think 2 years are too long. 2 Years!

Thats the entire problem, they will sell it for £35-40 and people WILL buy it. If I remember correctly wings of liberty sold for the same amount at release, and that was the core game not an expansion. The main problem as I see it is Blizzard in no way need to market it for that much money, they make a killing off WoW anyway, its just them being greedy like EA. Two years may not be a long time for a smaller company, but for Blizzard....

 Dark Scipio wrote:

 vodo40k wrote:
HOTS seems very expensive for what is an expansion, it should cost half what it is. Blizzard was one of my favourite companies before WoW, best hands down for story telling. While I enjoyed SCII and was by no means a bad game, it was just lacking....something. Im currently replaying the original Starcraft, it seems to have a spark SCII just dosent. I also dont understand what has taken them so long to get out HOTS, SCII came out 2 years ago for gods sake. You would think with blizzards formidable resources it would take less than half that (even with Diablo 3, which is sub par at best).

Why should it costs half? They will sell it for that price and enough people will buy it. Thats what the ,,right" price is. And its not just an expansion, it has too much content in for this. Would be any better if the whole game would be composed of new units?

I dont think 2 years are too long. 2 Years!

Its a few new units and a new campaign that is slightly longer than the first game. That is the perfect example of an Expansion. If you think this game has too much content for it to be an expansion you are apperently have increadibly low game standards or dont know what an expansion is.

A good expansion (RTS) will add 1-2 new units per side and a new campaign that is slightly shorter than the main game. Because expansions are USUALLY only doing that and not much else they are charged like $10 -20 less than the original at release date.

That WHY it should cost less (not nessecarly half but that would be a damn good price if it was) because it is NOT a full game so it has no business being charged the same price as a full game. Retribution only costed like $30 when it came out because it was an expansion. (Campaign, plus a race)

As for the time, I would have liked it to been released faster but im okay with 2-3 year wait. As long as it doesnt hit Half Life 3 territory

 Soladrin wrote:
I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

Haters gonna hate, that's why. We're all waiting (myself included) for Relic to create DOWIII because we hope it'll bring back the franchise Blizzard ran with when it departed from working with GW.

 Soladrin wrote:
I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

Because they're not selling you a full game.

They're selling you a game priced single race campaign, and some new units for MP.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

Because they're not selling you a full game.

They're selling you a game priced single race campaign, and some new units for MP.

Bingo. Wings of Liberty was Single Player, and Multiplayer. Now they want to charge me the same price for half of the new content. I've already got the multiplayer.

djones520 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

Because they're not selling you a full game.

They're selling you a game priced single race campaign, and some new units for MP.

Bingo. Wings of Liberty was Single Player, and Multiplayer. Now they want to charge me the same price for half of the new content. I've already got the multiplayer.

By that logic things like Fallout NV aren't full games either. You are getting an equal length single player and new units for mp. Do you guys have any clue how hard it is to balance just 1 new unit per race? Much less 3.

 Soladrin wrote:

djones520 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

Because they're not selling you a full game.

They're selling you a game priced single race campaign, and some new units for MP.

Bingo. Wings of Liberty was Single Player, and Multiplayer. Now they want to charge me the same price for half of the new content. I've already got the multiplayer.

By that logic things like Fallout NV aren't full games either.

Yes, and lots of people gave Bethesda hell for that. Fallout: New Vegas originally was going to be an expansion, but it spiraled out into its own game due to limitations on DLC sizes for console platforms.

You are getting an equal length single player and new units for mp.

Who cares about 3 new units for MP? That should not be a "selling point" for a game at $59.99. The SP is also woefully short, with some missions (off the top of my head, the Protoss one where you have to defend against waves for 30ish minutes) resorting to utilizing timers to artificially pad the length of the game.

Do you guys have any clue how hard it is to balance just 1 new unit per race? Much less 3.

Can't speak for anyone else, but sure I can.

That's not the issue here though. The issue is that they're going to be "balancing these 3 new units per race" by gating them off and requiring Heart of the Swarm to utilize these units.

That is not the issue at hand, however. The issue at hand is that

 DemetriDominov wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I really don't get all the complaints, if you look at the amount of content it's more then most full price games out there. Especialy if you compare to any modern FPS game.

Haters gonna hate, that's why.

Thats even more empty than most strawmen. HotS isn't just adding new units to multiplayer, it is actually removing at least one.

Yeah, I'm just gonna echo it then, haters gonna hate. I have no love for blizzard left but I don't see anything wrong here.

If you enjoyed the original campaign OR enjoy multiplayer, it will be worth it. If not, then it won't.
Blizzard are going to release a quality expansion that will be worth the money. It all comes down to if you like the original game or not.

I've actually been getting back into SC2 in preparation for it. I think I just might get it, since most of my skills are relatively intact. The new units look interesting, and I really enjoyed the WoL campaign.

 Brother SRM wrote:
I've actually been getting back into SC2 in preparation for it. I think I just might get it, since most of my skills are relatively intact. The new units look interesting, and I really enjoyed the WoL campaign.

Im actually surprised how much Im interested in it considering how I dont even like playing the Zerg. I was planning on buying WoL and thats it (sense I like the Terrans) but I thought the trailer looked pretty cool that I find myself wondering what this campaign will be like.