@Gaara42, Sure many games do not sell as many copies as their former titles. But you're ignoring the fact that many newer games sell just as well as those older titles, they're just different titles. Not to mention many of the games you talk about as selling best years ago, are games that have been around for 25 years. Starcraft isn't an old title in comparison and it hasnt' had sequel after sequel diluting the series, like the games you talk about have. This is the first sequel to SC, it hasn't been oversaturated.
You talk about fragmentation of the market, but that has happened mostly in the console space, not PC gaming. And that has to do with the type of audiences, PC gaming has a more core gaming audience.
I don't believe in comparing Michaeal Jacksons Thriller, because that is a completely different entertainment, despite your analogy. And I don't believe in comparing Starcraft 2 to The Sims. As I mentioned earlier, with your comparison of very old franchises (Mario); The Sims was oversaturated while Starcraft is the furthest thing from oversaturation.
Then there is the case that The Sims is a casual title, people had their fill with the first release and expansions, and maybe even spin off Sim titles. Which is the total opposite of Starcraft with its single title and different audience. People have wanted a sequel for years, are core gamers, and are willing to support the franchise. The Sims & Starcraft could not be more different!
The argument about older players having less time to play Starcraft 2 is a bit mute IMO. Starcraft is not a game that requires tons of time, the first title was of average length and could be played in bite sized junks due to the level layout. Blizzard has the talent and expertise to continue that. Plus you're not considering the emerging younger audience that will more than fill in any people who may be 'too old' now.
Consoles haven't become that much more popular compared to PC than they were at the time of Starcrafts release with the huge expansion of the console market at that time and the most popular titles almost all console exclusive.
Your arguments seem to be general arguments, not anything inherently tied to Starcraft.
I did not ignore your comment about Game Cafes, before my last post about this I read that entire article you posted regarding gaming in Korea as well as all the posts you had links for. I alluded to the state of gaming in Korea with these quotes: ----- "You state that SC2 won't get good sales in Korea because piracy is too prevalent there, yet SC1 itself sold 1 million copies between Jan 15 2006-May 21 2007 in Korea. (1 million in Korea in the past year, for a 10 year old title which is much easier to pirate!).
True piracy is a problem in Korea but that doesn't change the fact that 4.5 million people there have purchased a copy of SC1, which is easier to pirate than SC2 will be. And what if Blizzard adapts the new norm in Korea with a free game or very cheap game that is supported by microtransactions, thereby eschewing many people's reason to piracy as other successful recent games have done in Korea..." -----
Not directly talking about game cafes, but I still showed that Starcraft has sold very well in the past year in Korea despite the effect of game cafes & piracy, not to mention it sold 1 million in Korea almost 10 years after its release.
Starcraft 2 is not a game that will require great system spec requirements. It's graphics are as much of a step above Warcraft 3 which released in 2003, as Starcraft 1 was over Warcraft 2. Blizzard obviously knows what they're doing in that regard and they've already showed the same spec progression from their past which worked out perfectly.
Enemy Territory, Crysis, and Unreal Tournament III are all much much more spec intensive than Starcraft 2. I wouldn't compare any of those games situation with Starcraft 2. One need only look at the differences in graphics between those games and Starcraft 2. Not to mention Crysis is notorious for being the spec pusher of this era.
5
Sure many games do not sell as many copies as their former titles. But you're ignoring the fact that many newer games sell just as well as those older titles, they're just different titles. Not to mention many of the games you talk about as selling best years ago, are games that have been around for 25 years. Starcraft isn't an old title in comparison and it hasnt' had sequel after sequel diluting the series, like the games you talk about have. This is the first sequel to SC, it hasn't been oversaturated.
You talk about fragmentation of the market, but that has happened mostly in the console space, not PC gaming. And that has to do with the type of audiences, PC gaming has a more core gaming audience.
I don't believe in comparing Michaeal Jacksons Thriller, because that is a completely different entertainment, despite your analogy. And I don't believe in comparing Starcraft 2 to The Sims. As I mentioned earlier, with your comparison of very old franchises (Mario); The Sims was oversaturated while Starcraft is the furthest thing from oversaturation.
Then there is the case that The Sims is a casual title, people had their fill with the first release and expansions, and maybe even spin off Sim titles. Which is the total opposite of Starcraft with its single title and different audience. People have wanted a sequel for years, are core gamers, and are willing to support the franchise. The Sims & Starcraft could not be more different!
The argument about older players having less time to play Starcraft 2 is a bit mute IMO. Starcraft is not a game that requires tons of time, the first title was of average length and could be played in bite sized junks due to the level layout. Blizzard has the talent and expertise to continue that. Plus you're not considering the emerging younger audience that will more than fill in any people who may be 'too old' now.
Consoles haven't become that much more popular compared to PC than they were at the time of Starcrafts release with the huge expansion of the console market at that time and the most popular titles almost all console exclusive.
Your arguments seem to be general arguments, not anything inherently tied to Starcraft.
I did not ignore your comment about Game Cafes, before my last post about this I read that entire article you posted regarding gaming in Korea as well as all the posts you had links for. I alluded to the state of gaming in Korea with these quotes:
-----
"You state that SC2 won't get good sales in Korea because piracy is too prevalent there, yet SC1 itself sold 1 million copies between Jan 15 2006-May 21 2007 in Korea. (1 million in Korea in the past year, for a 10 year old title which is much easier to pirate!).
True piracy is a problem in Korea but that doesn't change the fact that 4.5 million people there have purchased a copy of SC1, which is easier to pirate than SC2 will be. And what if Blizzard adapts the new norm in Korea with a free game or very cheap game that is supported by microtransactions, thereby eschewing many people's reason to piracy as other successful recent games have done in Korea..."
-----
Not directly talking about game cafes, but I still showed that Starcraft has sold very well in the past year in Korea despite the effect of game cafes & piracy, not to mention it sold 1 million in Korea almost 10 years after its release.
Starcraft 2 is not a game that will require great system spec requirements. It's graphics are as much of a step above Warcraft 3 which released in 2003, as Starcraft 1 was over Warcraft 2. Blizzard obviously knows what they're doing in that regard and they've already showed the same spec progression from their past which worked out perfectly.
Enemy Territory, Crysis, and Unreal Tournament III are all much much more spec intensive than Starcraft 2. I wouldn't compare any of those games situation with Starcraft 2. One need only look at the differences in graphics between those games and Starcraft 2. Not to mention Crysis is notorious for being the spec pusher of this era.