BlizzCon 2008: Starcraft II split into trilogy

Blizzard's Rob Pardo reveals sci-fi RTS will now be three separate products; Terran campaign Wings of Liberty will arrive first.

ANAHEIM, California--For many, this morning's keynote address from Blizzard president Mike Morhaime was a bit anticlimactic. After revealing Starcraft II, World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King, and Diablo III at three consecutive events, Blizzard had nothing new to report on a new game from the company. That changed during the Starcraft II panel, as Blizzard's Rob Pardo revealed that rather than a single real-time strategy game, Starcraft II will now be released as a trilogy.

After bemoaning the fact that Starcraft II was shaping up to be an undertaking far larger than the previous game, Pardo said the first game in the series--subtitled Wings of Liberty--will focus on the Terrans. Specifically, it will seek to resolve the conflict between Jim Raynor and Kerrigan, which was the crux of the original Starcraft. The second game, Heart of the Swarm, will focus on the Zerg, while the final game, Legacy of the Void, will be devoted to the Protoss.

Pardo noted that each release will be a fully fledged campaign, featuring 26 to 30 missions apiece. The celebrity World of Warcraft designer also noted that while the ending of each game will be set, the middle of the game will play heavily to player choice, allowing for branching storylines. Pardo also said that the second two releases could be considered expansion packs, but that "we really want them to feel like stand-alone products."

Unfortunately, Pardo did not reveal when the first game in the trilogy will arrive. For more on Starcraft II--now the Starcraft Trilogy--check out GameSpot's previous coverage.

761 Comments

  • Bracon901

    Posted May 7, 2009 2:42 pm PT

    Blizzard is releasing 3 "campaigns", not 3 games with 3 different races. You will be able to play each race, just not the campaign. This will offer (in my opinion) new units for each race to come out in the days ahead. Think of it as a real expensive book trilogy, you dont know what the story line will bring until the next release.

  • Early-Dayz

    Posted May 7, 2009 8:19 am PT

    wow so we have to buy all three different titles to enjoy each race :I u serious?

  • Neosword

    Posted May 6, 2009 7:55 pm PT

    Somehow I missed this little bit of news back when it was released. This has got me really excited. I just hope the quality of all the products are up to snuff.

  • Superfunk2000

    Posted Jan 22, 2009 8:34 am PT

    Rip off

  • dNam3b

    Posted Jan 12, 2009 2:25 am PT

    if the game comes out semi annual or 1 a year the battle chest will only come out in 2-3 years. I believe that each campaign is very complete and the graphics, gameplay, multiplayer, history are very good. Making it a trilogy, kind of make it more special!
    starcraft, if it comes out this year, will be the "game of the year"

  • Kool212

    Posted Jan 9, 2009 6:58 pm PT

    Wow. What a money grab.

  • Dahlgren

    Posted Jan 9, 2009 6:28 pm PT

    Well..., just another reason to wait for the 'StarCraft II Battle Chest'! After all, we've waited ~10 years since the last StarCraft addition -- what's a couple more?

  • masterlu

    Posted Jan 9, 2009 2:38 am PT

    itzjchung; "The company Activision/Blizzard corportate executives just wants to take advantage of this game franchise and do something ridiculous in order to soley profit themselves."

    ...well... you just defined "business", well done. Of course they do it for profit, it's a company for pete's sake. Just because Blizzard historically has shown a tendency to base their business strategy around the concept of unwavering production quality and strong brand-building doesn't mean it's not a BUSINESS. Just the fact that you and others react so strongly to what appears to be more mercenary profiteering than usual proves the strength of their brand - Blizzard is effectively the good guys while this kind of move would be something the general public would come to expect from, say, EA...

  • osiris

    Posted Jan 8, 2009 5:23 pm PT

    This is risky, for sure. I do, however, look forward to the always excellent work from Blizzard being used to supply 3 full campaigns to fully immerse us in the Starcraft world. Should be fun. Hopefully they set it up that it comes out on a yearly or maybe even semi-annually (I can always hope) timescale so we don't lose must interest.

  • Kitsukage

    Posted Nov 20, 2008 12:54 am PT

    I doubt they took into account the state of the economy, when they did this. Moreover, I hope they don't charge full price for a third of the game, each time. Its nice that they're giving each StarCraft race their own game, but... as said, it just looks like a fleecing tactic.

    Since they're going to be 'individual games', I'm guessing we're going to have to wait for the latter two to be released, as well. Unfortunately, they'll be releasing the game dedicated to my favourite race last.

    Its a nice touch, but considering money issues and the already huge wait for this game, it wasn't exactly something done with the fans of the series in mind, really.
    Saying all that, though, I'll probably still get them-- eventually.

  • itzjchung

    Posted Nov 9, 2008 10:36 am PT

    So in order for me to actually play Starcraft 2 in full experience, they want to milk out $150+ for a game. WHO DO YOU THINK YOU'RE KIDDING?? Cut the bullsh*t! The company Activision/Blizzard corportate executives just wants to take advantage of this game franchise and do something ridiculous in order to soley profit themselves.

  • tespac

    Posted Nov 8, 2008 10:15 am PT

    If the story line & the graphics are great. Plentiful mission play and new units. And hard to beat AI, why not? I go for it! I hope the AI is like chess. Every piece is essential on defensive and the downfall of the opponent. And most exciting is, research on enemy's weaponry and incorporate that of you units. And you can send reinforcement from the previous conquered map(s). Of course you have to spend resources to do this. And most of all, if you loss that battle the story continues on a different battle map. Until you have sufficient units and conquer or retake the map. I like to see multiple battle maps in real time. If you dont organized you units on one of maps your are F*#@$! big time! That would be nice, dont you think?

  • Noodle001

    Posted Oct 26, 2008 3:23 am PT

    Does this mean that the Zerg and Protoss are in the disadvantage in customplay and multiplay? or will they just split up the campaigns and leave the customplay and multiplay as it is? They sure got antention now

  • mr111111

    Posted Oct 16, 2008 8:17 am PT

    it's the consumer stupid

  • rockutd

    Posted Oct 16, 2008 5:00 am PT

    Lol.Blizzard just stabbed all loyal fans in the back.Well done.

  • TehUndeadHorror

    Posted Oct 16, 2008 1:46 am PT

    Somehow I think it would have been better if he didn't tell us this...

  • ssj5_nick

    Posted Oct 15, 2008 9:52 pm PT

    And the award for the most "Arrogant Move By a Video Game Developer" goes to ... Blizzard.

  • x-TwilighT-x

    Posted Oct 15, 2008 5:53 pm PT

    I remember starcraft, I remember the game comming out. I also very well remember being a loyal fan of the game and playing it as one of my main games for the past 10 years. I love starcraft, the gameplay the story, et cetra... However at 50$... 60$ a pop... 3 games to get the full effect of the game... Wow now that is a rip off my friend. I'm not sure if they're doing this for money or not. However let's take a look at the economy... enough said, we can't afford that. It's not as if Blizzards revenue from WoW Can't support releasing these at 20$ so that you can get all 3 for the expected price of a single game.

  • ThresherJ

    Posted Oct 15, 2008 1:26 pm PT

    I guess my main concern is: What's this going to do to the multiplayer?
    If it's going to be split into 3 games, each focusing on a different race, are we only going to be able to play as Terrans in the first game? Adding races as each of the next two come out :\
    And if that's NOT the case, and we can play as all the races in MP right off the bat, that'll just make me sick, because then I'm going to want to play the campaign for that race!!!!




    AUGH!

  • tudyniuz

    Posted Oct 15, 2008 10:10 am PT

    If Starcraft II doesn't deliver it will be the end of the series

  • NandoSupes

    Posted Oct 15, 2008 8:40 am PT

    I really don't know what to say about this,I mean,is their game. if they want to split it into three,they can do whatever the hell they want.

    I won't be buying this because I don't play RTS'S but Blizzard, is one of the best game developers out there. they make great games no doubt.

    let's hope that the trilogy is worth it and that it does exceeds everyone's expectations,because theres a lot of fans that are not happy about this decision for sure.

  • Kabals

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 9:49 pm PT

    Blizzard should change their name to "Fleece." This is purely a money-grab stunt being pulled off. Pardo said "We really want them to feel like stand-alone products." Yeah, I bet Pardo, I also would be willing to take out a second mortgage and use that money to bet that you're going to charge full game prices for games 2 and 3.

    What a way to treat the fans of this franchise: "Hey everyone! We know you've been waiting patiently for almost 11 years now, so here's the deal: we're going to make you wait even longer to play the full game. We're going to release it a third at a time, all the while shoving our foot up your a$$."

    Go to hell Blizzard.

  • ghost_orc_man posted Oct 14, 2008 8:09 pm PT (does not meet display criteria. login to show)

    ghost_orc_man

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 8:09 pm PT (hide)

    I think its a pretty good idea plus each game has 25-30 missions which is like any other rts game.

  • MatzeEdend

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 5:39 pm PT

    Well, I'll still get all three of them... call me a sheep (since I usually end up as one in WoW anyway) but these games are too good to simply pass on.

    Hopefully the releases are relatively close together, but that's probably just wishful thinking.

  • fujimujiwuji

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 1:05 pm PT

    I was there at Blizzcon at the front row and he specifically said that full multiplayer play will be released in the first game, Wings of Liberty. You WILL be able to fully play Zerg and Protoss, so anyone buying the game to play multiplayer will not have to worry about that. He also explained that they do not know what they would add to the next 2 games since full multiplayer will be available in the first game, but they will figure something out.~

  • sheeda_blade

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 11:01 am PT

    I am not defending them or anything I am just saying to blizzard that its still your fault and we shouldn't pay for it.

    That said I would still buy the game.

  • sheeda_blade

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 10:59 am PT

    Well I Guess the problem is that Blizzard tends to over engineer its games and that is why the price has gone up. They have been working on it for some time now and they have to break even all that investment that they actually put into the game.

    Considering the fact that they have been working for more than five years now.

  • GolgoThirteen

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 4:17 am PT

    Pardo also said that the second two releases could be considered expansion packs, but that "we really want them to feel like stand-alone products." Yeah, with stand-alone price points too, no doubt.

  • IMP_ACT

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 2:57 am PT

    @ Cerebis:
    "Plus, they've already talked about their design that will prevent torrents from working, by requiring an online check-in after install, to register the cd-key to the product ID of your disc / discs."

    hehe, same as Company of Heroes, right?
    So how was that available as a playable torrent on it's official release?

    It'll be cracked (wrong as it is) as soon as it's released. Only multiplayer will require verification.

  • syafiqjabar

    Posted Oct 14, 2008 1:10 am PT

    The way I see it, one faction gets as much missions as the entire first game. That means, if they release Starcraft 2 as one game. You'll get it in 2013. THIS IS NOT A JOKE!!!

  • Poedon

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 11:57 pm PT

    If you take away the first few introductory missions for each faction, didn't the first starcraft only have around 30 missions? This one is going to have close to that for one faction. AND Blzz has to make up for all of the development money they lost on Starcraft: Ghost for the consoles

  • canis_rah

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 11:22 pm PT

    Yeah, that sucks. Blizzard are going to milk this cash cow for all its worth, and splitting one game into 3 parts is a good way to extract every last ounce of revenue from the gaming public. Very disappointing.

  • ff7cloudking

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 5:02 pm PT

    As long as the two "expansion packs" are cheap, and there is still online, this doesnt bother me at all.

  • unr2

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 5:01 pm PT

    Even though I cant wait for the game to come, I think it absolutely sucks that they are diverging what is essentially one game into three different standalone releases. How long are we going to have to wait for each release? Typically, it will about a year for one pack to come after the first game is released. So, in theory, we have to wait a total of 3 years for the 'full' starcraft 2 game to released, are you kidding me? That just sounds stupid, especially that since the 'sequel' games are going to be more like expansions, hence meaning same game mechanics and graphics. From a commercial standpoint I think it may just work, seeing that the first starcraft is STILL played in large numbers around the world, but I'm just dissappointed that someone like Blizzard is going to be rolling out the same, but slightly varied products, for the 2 years following the Terran release. I just don't think I'll be interested enough to purchase the follow ups, especially if they come at full price.

  • Bludlusted

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 4:17 pm PT

    I dont care much bout dis, cause the first game will come out earlier and the multiplayer will b the same, if any1 has watched blizzcon they would know bout dis

  • breed101

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 4:16 pm PT

    Great. Just great. I don't mind buying 3 different games, but shelling out at least $300 for them all is just stupid.

  • Jackelz24

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 3:49 pm PT

    I can't believe people are complaining about this "we really want them to feel like stand-alone products" just means that each game is going to be epic and enhance the game greatly. Frozen Throne was just as good, if not better then Reign of Chaos. Plus, now we won't have to wait as long for the game to come out. This sounds like great news to me.

  • HoushiSama1l

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 1:47 pm PT

    The only fools that would agree with this corporate decision are the most loyal butt-licking Blizzard fanboys.

  • Cerebris

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 1:25 pm PT

    Starcraft had 4 expansions actually.

    They had 2 non related to blizzard expansions, as well as BroodWar, and a community mappack.

  • UnknownPerson55

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 12:53 pm PT

    LAME!!

    I wanted one ****ing game, not three...
    ...better not make it cost more, which is the only reason why I'd be mad.

  • dzimm

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 12:49 pm PT

    gamergallore: "Starcraft had 2 expansions?"

    There was an unofficial "expansion" released prior to Brood War that was nothing but a bit of shovelware where somebody gathered up a bunch of user made maps, slapped them on a disc, and charged for it. It's odd to think that people used to be able to get away with something like that.

  • dzimm

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 12:46 pm PT

    I guess after the success of World of WarCraft, Blizzard is rather fond of the idea of its customers paying for the same product multiple times. Let's just hope that kind of thinking doesn't worm its way into Diablo III, but I'm not optimistic.

  • rikhan_z

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 12:36 pm PT

    with increasing technologies in the field of computers and having something like 200GB free space and 8GB Ram chips and Windows Vista 64 bit to powering it on... it's a GOOD move from Blizzard I think to make use of all of this hardware... I'm looking forward to it.

  • greedom

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 12:13 pm PT

    I'll wait and see for this game. Not thrilled that it's going to be 3 parts but it's not like this is any different than the way they've always presented their RTS's. Not to mention Blizzard has made some pretty fantastic games in the past leaving me with 100's of hours of entertainment.

  • tekken0908

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 11:57 am PT

    is it true they are in the making of warcraft 4?

  • Vote_For_McCain

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 11:53 am PT

    Looks like They just lost all of my money. I don't feel like paying over $100 for this game.

  • gamergallore

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 11:50 am PT

    Starcraft had 2 expansions?

  • blackace

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 11:24 am PT

    As long a the first game comes out in 2009, the 2nd and 2010 and the 3rd in 2011, I don't have a problem with this. They better not release all 3 games within a years time though, as that would suck. When the original StarCraft was released it received 2 expansions many months later. This is basically the same deal. So I don't have a problem with it. We shouldn't see any real expansion until after the 3rd game is released.

advertisement

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!

Related Game

Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty Boxshot
Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty

Game Stats

Full Game Details »Close

Related Games

Site Blogs