StarCraft 2 Wings of Libery Collector's Edition

If the CD soundtrack and large Art-Book is what you call 'standard fare' I'm over the moon for it.

I think it's pretty cool it's in the shape of a dog-tag, you don't know how many people will enjoy having that, just because you don't see any value in it, doesn't mean there isn't any. (That statement can apply to your entire rant on the special ed)

No that proves one of three things:
1. People actually have money to spend
2. People will pay extra for the sake of personal enjoyment.
3. You simply cannot afford it

Again it's about value to the customer, if you give people the option for more, there will be customers out there who will pay for it.

I think this is the most BS argument I have ever heard. The fact is this is a full stand alone game, the first of a total of 3. If you had no idea what StarCraft was and you played Wings of Liberty for the first time, you would have a full campaign experience with MP out of the box, you wouldn't ***** and moan that you want more, there is enough content in there.

They said years ago the option was 1 game with 3 campaigns, or 3 games with larger campaigns for each race. Don't try to justify this argument, if you don't want to fork out the extra money and moan about why you can't/don't feel the need to pay a fair price for their hard work then go look for this on ebay or wait till they reduce it on sale in the future.

And before you throw any BS my way, I'm a young guy working full time, supporting both myself and another, I too have to put money aside for this but I was happy to do it, and all of my friends were really happy about the special eddition and the extra stuff, so quit *****ing.

"half of a game" yeah right...

 

Most collectors editions contain art books, and there have been a few others with soundtrack as well, hence, standard fare.

As for the USB thing. Most of us already own the game. if it were a BLANK USB drive that we could put whatever we want on it, then it would be more useful.

Portraits have no practical use whatsoever. All they do is mark you as spending more money when you play on Battlenet.

My main concern isn't what is in it. My main issue is the pricing. Almost every PC game cost $50 for the base version while Blizzard is charging $60. You say the games are separate, but the issue is that there is a planned overarching story and each part only contains a third of it. Most other games contain the entire story in one box. A s for the collectors editions: I have seen those running from $60 to $80. This means that the BASE SCII is being sold at collectors edition prices while the collectors edition is being sold for the price of two games.

I am pointing out that they are clearly price gouging. I have no problem paying mony for a good game; I just don't think they should be taking advantage of that fact, and I don't think consumers should be letting them do so.

 

Remind me the next time I want any of you to get into the back of a white van with two large Russian dudes that I should offer you home videos of Dustin Browder playing with legos.

 

You don't get it, people will pay to look different, to stand out and to be an individual regardless of the context, be it online or real life. Portraits have no practical use? Are you a robot.. it's an emotional and personal value that the user has. Why do you think people like WOW pets.. I think thats a joke but I'm smart enough to realise there is still a market for it.

And in Australia most PC games cost $100 AUD, this one is $148 AUD.. so you have no clue what you are on about... stop being greedy when you have it far better off.

So the fact that they intend to show an overarching story somehow decreases the value of the first product? Are you retarded or something?? The fellowship of the ring should of been selling tickets at under half price and the first Harry Potter book should of been given away for free by your logic.

That is a fair call, I'll give you that much, but price and demand both hold hands in business, thats typical.

 

Well practically every other limited edition of a game is the same. No matter which company produced it. I saw the sims 3 limited edition in the store and was pretty much appalled ad the last of good things in the box. So of you believe Blizzard is price gauging, then so is every other game company that releases a limited edition. Mind you in saying that Blizzard's limited editions are soem of the better of what is out there on the market today.

And same goes for the price. Most limited editions are in the $125-$200 range here in Australia. So Blizzard's one is a little expensive. Even the standard SC2 here is $100. But if you think about it in another way, I will get many more hours of enjoyment out of SC2 then another game. So the price played per hour spent on the game will by way in blizzard's favour even with the higher cost of SC2 thanks to the (hypothetically) years we all will be spending playing SC2.

******************

A USB drive is not a CD or DVD. You can erase it, format it for windows or OS X or whateve system you like and then use it as a standard USB drive. I'm sure Blizzard will not lock it to make it read only. I'm sure it's only there for the people who do not have SC1 and are interested in the old lore. But for the rest of us erase the drive and use it as any other USB drive you own.

 

^
plus you get an extra copy of sc1. Incase you lose old CD key no problem. Or give to friend etc.

 

http://us.starcraft2.com/features/collector/

Blizzard updated their site with all the SC2 limited edition information and nice pretty pictures of everything.

 

Just picked up mine today.

 

You've missed my point. I am not complaining about the price itself, and I have no problem with collectors editions either (I have bought a few). My complaint is that they are charging more for SCII in EVERY country than they need to because they can. I haven't had a chance to play in the beta, so I don't know how much quality it has, but I know that all the other PC games from the best to the worst, are less expensive (Here games sell for $50 and the collectors editions range from $60 to $80).

I am a Blizzard fan; have been for year, but I don't appreciate them trying to take advantage of me.


As for the USB: you don't know that it can be deleted (in fact making the game deletable from the USB drive would probably be a bad idea since you'd have a bunch of people accidentally deleting the game and then complaining about it).


As for the three games thing. They made it three games because they work slow. I say this as a person who waited a YEAR for the Diablo II version 1.10 PATCH. Massive or not, I am pretty sure any other company would be able to complete all three campaigns in the time it takes Blizzard to make one.

 

Im sensing a moaning contest. I didn't buy Modern Warfare 2 partially because it was $60. Most of the reason was im just sick of the entire series (although some were good, the series just needs to die now) and they had even less campaign than 4. I could justify spending $60 or $100 on what I know already is a great game (beta ftw).

 

Yes other companies could do this. But could they do it at the quality that Blizzard does? Probably not.

 

no company has managed to top blizzard's quality (except maybe valve). sure, other companies can easily complete a bunch of missions for all 3 races, but no other company bothers to invest the time to produce the quality that blizzard consistently puts in their games.

how about instead of *****ing at blizzard for putting out one extremely high-quality game every few years, you ***** about all the other companies producing half-baked sequels over and over, every single year?

 

Left 4 Dead 2, case in point. Crappy game, ruined the series. Yay!

I also thought CoD:WaW was a bag of crud as was CoD:MW2. Wastes of money, the lot of them.

 

BioWare doesn't disappoint, and Valve's games have been great overall. As evidenced by them and my comments below time != quality

Every few years? The last game they released was WoW and that came out 6 years ago.

They aren't making sequels. Sequels are completely new games. All Blizzard is doing is making two additional campaigns. It shouldn't take this long.

E3 1996: The initial build of Starcraft is laughed at as "Warcraft in space" It was completely rebuilt and revived positive review one year later
November 1998: Starcraft: Brood War is released only eight months after the base game hit shelves.

It's been three years and SC II hasn't made it out of beta, so Blizzard has failed to meet the standards of excellence they had in the past, you know, back when they completed projects in a timely manner. Not only did they complete them in a timely manner, people still play them today. The entire SCI Campaign spanning 6 parts took them 2 years to make. They have had three years, more experience, and a larger team and are producing 1 part of a campaign.

You might think Blizzard ****s gold bricks, but from where I am sitting, this doesn't appear to be the same Blizzard that gave us earth shattering quality once a year (More proof that it doesn't take that much time to come up with something good eg. they are working very, very slowly.)

 

Well, StarCraft 2 had an extremely long production cycle, so I expected it to be a tad more expensive than most titles. You seem to think that Blizzard are not charging you a fair price. Let's look at this together, shall we? As you know, StarCraft 2 expounds on its predecessors 3 famous races: the Zerg, the Protoss, and the Terran. Each race has been touched up, and they are leaner, sexier beasts. Ever wonder what a marine or a zergling really looks like? The new game engine that powers SC2 will bring the StarCraft battlefield to life like never before. As for the campaign, it offers over 20 hours of play and over 40 minutes of cutscenes. And multiplayer, between skirmish and UMS maps, will offer you hundreds of hours of enjoyment.

You've been waiting for this game, or so you say, for years.

We agree that at $60 SC2 is a little more expensive than the "average game" that goes for $50 in your area. But average games are those that you discard after 100 hours of play. I think you'll agree that SC2 will be anything but average. Yet you maintain that Blizzard are somehow taking advantage of you. Had Blizzard decided to charge you $80 USD for the basic game, I'd be inclined to agree that they were milking their American fans. But they're asking for $60, not $80. Please don't try to say you object to the $10 disparity "on principle". I work as a customer service representative for a large ISP. Unbelievably, customers that object to raises "on principle" are typically the wealthier ones --people that can actually easily afford raises. They object for the same reason that you do: you're both cheap. Why else would you raise a fuss over $10? $10 USD is an hour's wages for the average American student.

Name me a $50 title which will provide you with as much play time as SC2. ...couldn't think of anything, could ye? Now, tell me, with a straight face, that SC2, the game that you have been waiting years for, is not worth $60.

 

@BirdsOfPrey: Did you REALLY just compare development time of a game during the mid-late nineties to now??? REALLY????

Games today take a lot longer to make and need several times the number of developers. Also, StarCraft had little to no (relative) hype compared to StarCraft 2. Blizzard has to get this right or ruin one of the biggest eSports in the world. Looking at it this way, the situation isn't really comparable at all.