@Nintendo_Man I think Microsoft has really messed up with this one. There is absolutely no reason to buy Xbox One over PS4 at the moment, unless you want some of their exclusives or are a complete fanboy.
I personally am a PC gamer, but I just can't see how this could turn favourable to Microsoft, unless they make some drastic changes to, hmm, almost everything they have announced.
@davidAG While I somewhat agree with you, you can't blame EA alone. In fact if you want to blame someone, blame Blizzard.
And it's not just that, it is how the industry is going more and more these days. When people say that everyone should boycott EA products, because of always-online DRM, DLCs and micro transactions etc., they should just say don't buy (nearly) any game these days, from anyone.
Like said, Blizzard (Activison) does it, Ubisoft does it I believe, Sega... Nearly every game these days, regardless of the publisher/producer/whatnot, has something of that sort in them. Bioshock Infinite for example, and Tomb Raider, not forgetting SC2 (in case you are wondering, I think butchering SC2 into 3 parts is worse than any DLC) as a whole.
Yes, SimCity is not perfect (I personally haven't bought it) and lack of offline-mode is extremely bad alongside with maps that aren't big enough and so forth, but I won't blame them (EA) alone. Also, Maxis did play a part in this, let's not forget that.
The way things are, everything has changed anyway. Where you previously bought a game, you got the whole 100% game. Now, you simply don't.
Where copy-protection (which is useless anyway) used to be typing the cd-key when installing, we get online req. as mandatory now, whether it's the way like in SimCity or D3 or through Steam etc.
It's all different. And I don't think there is anything that we can do about it. Boycotting a game(s) ain't going to change that, it won't change how practically the whole industry works.
Look at MS for example with their new console, rumoured to be online-always with games that are permanently linked to your console. It's not just about DRM, but total control from their part. If they go ahead and do that, they can one day just say; oh well, let's pull the plug, and basically ending your use of the console you bought.
@---Cipher--- Also, I would like to point out that 150+ hours is nothing, at least not in my case, if compared to hours I have put in the previous games in the series.
Over the years I have clocked up weeks and weeks of playing time in D2 for example, so saying 150 hours is absolutely nothing.
I gave D3 a proper chance, but in the end I just couldn't take it anymore. It just isn't fun, especially in the long run.
@Fanible I'm not saying which price would be right for an expansion, but it just shouldn't be more than full games. Not talking about SC2 WoL necessarily, but I've noticed that I can get a huge load of games, whether brand new, or even pre-order ones for cheaper than HotS would cost.
Now, if that isn't absurd I don't know what is.
Just an example, Bioshock Infinite costs less in quite a few places than HotS. And upcoming Watch_Dogs, which looks awesome, is less as well.
I can't remember exactly how much I, unfortunately, paid for WoL, maybe £35?, but for an expansion to cost about the same, something is wrong.
I don't care if someone argues that it is long enough to warrant the price. Point is, like you said as well, it is an expansion, nothing more.
But, like said, whether you buy it or not, your money, not mine. I won't be. I'm fed with Blizzard, not just SC2.
In my books, their downfall from top to flop in matter of few years has been an achievement on its own :D
I was trying to put that I would only want that, if it would mean that the single player FOs would still be released. That probably wouldn't happen, unless a different developer did the other.
S4E's comments