When I first saw the picture of the Ragnarov on the orange background with the word "REBELLION" sprawled out on the side, I thought it a dream come true. My favorite game had spawned a sequel, or so I thought.After awhile I learned it was a "stand-alone expansion." This "expansion" came with a hefty tag though: $40. So, having faith in the company that did amazing work with mini-expansions that were $10, I plunked down my coin and said "Bring it on!"As the weeks turned into months, the information slowly began to come together: Titans, a new capital ship, and corvettes, three all new factions, all new tech trees (implied for the factions). All was well and good, I could live without screenshots or videos or interviews from the devs because they were hard at work on all the new content that would be provided.When the beta came out, I loved every minute of it, even with the balance issues that (inevitably) came up. As new patches were released, however, my excitement dwindled.The thing that has disappointed me most was hearing "3 new factions!" "All new tech trees!" "New UI." The way it was pitched to the public was a totally new way of going at things: the Loyalists being traditionalists and the Rebels being more radical and cutting-edge. The bottom line was that they both would have enough new tech to deal with the splintering factions in addition to the other races."Twin Fortresses" alone does not a new tech tree make.A nearly-identical set of tech trees does not a new faction make.A light-green tint to the Advent HUD does not a New UI make.Granted, I did buy this back right when the first teasing shot of the "Ragnarov" came out: perhaps it is my mistake for putting so much behind this franchise and the devs. But as back-and-forth as the "Diplomacy" mini-expansion ended up being, it added more game-changing bang-for-the-buck than Rebellion has.Seems like I am getting shorthanded in the end: corvettes, titans. Woot. Knock off about $15 from the Rebellion price and quit hyping it as the "almost sequel."Note: I'm not mad, just disappointed.
@jartigerx>
Yeah, but then you are willing to shell 40 EUROs minimum for Heart of Swarm. Its pointless to argue about, how significant those new units and gameplay adjustments there will be, cause this is rather subjective - same way as with Rebellion. But going by objective measures - added content, which seems to be major source of complaints with Rebellion anyway, HoS wont be no more of a sequel than Rebellion is.
Felt like I got my money's worth and more.
Just the balancing needs a ton of work for any good multiplayer play.
Ok... where to begin with this. Firstly I want to say that I understand your sentiment and your disappointment. However that being said I have to ask you a fairly simple question. Do you not understand how business works? Retail perhaps? The whole point of a company is to make a product and/or service and sell it. Once upon a time you sold good products and gained merit thus more sales for and it became a chain of "Good branding".
Throw that out the window. In today's market it has nothing to do with good products and services it has to do with simply selling selling selling. These days deception in the marketplace is common. Do you know how many crappy products there are on the market that if you were to actually value them they'd be say... $50 but they are overvalued by hundreds if not thousands of percent to the 500-2000 dollar range. You know why? Because they can hype up the product so much that people will buy it even though it's crap and the company/brand doesn't even have to have any real reputation. We are a cheap and disposable society and it has filtered into every corner of the capitalist market including the game industry.
Now I don't want to apply that to Ironclad or Sins because that isn't really fair. Rebellion is $40 because Rebellion is a STAND ALONE game. Which means if you did not purchase sins and the expansions you are getting the full game for afaik around the same price you would have had you bought the full game back when it first came out plus expansions. Now yes that kind of shafts everyone who has already bought the sins series (especially like myself who bought Sins... then bought Sins Trinity so I've essentially bought the game 3 times now). The thing is you really did know what you were getting unlike other companies who sell you on BS and features that don't exist or never make it into a game I don't think Ironclad really decieved anyone with Rebellion. Perhaps they didn't use the best terminology but did we get new factions? Yes if you go by the definition of what a "faction" is in modern gaming YES we did get that. Did we get new tech trees? I see quite a few new tech that wasn't in the original + expansion so again... YES. Did we get new ships and new abilities? Well YES that one is obvious. Graphical overhaul? YES! New UI? YES! Sure they might have been built off the old and simply improved and rebranded as new... but that concept is certainly not new and EVERY company does that. It's an annoying concept but it's one that is here to stay. Buy v1 of something which is really the same as v2 but they intentionally took features out so they could resell you the same thing later. But wait! There's v3 on the horizon which is still the same product with a few more bells and whistles that probably cost them very little to add... but guess what? Not only are you paying roughly the same as you did for the previous two iterations... you're gonna pay MORE for it. See what I mean? This is a marketing trend that has been going on for probably around 30-50 years and it's getting worse and worse and worse. But Ironclad/SoSE isn't doing anything different to any other company and what they have done isn't even near the worst of the worst when it comes to these sort of marketing ploys.
(Btw you know of World of WarCraft right? Do you realize that a good 40-80% of the content in each expansion is really rehashed content from the previous base game? Models... Items... Abilities... save for the few they do create new tech for... it is ALL built off the same previous content. They make billions if not trillions of dollars and they don't even TRY to make unique stuff so yeah... don't fret too much about it)
I get what you mean , I was a bit sketpical with Starcraft2 too ... I was playing Supreme Commander FA when i bought sc2 and felt totally hoaxed, it seemed so dull... then I realized how complicated it is and now I appreciate it even if games like Soase or Homeworld reflect my taste in videogames.
Don't wanna sound a Blizzy fan , but here's just some confirmed new contents for Heart of the swarm (the last two points themselves are worth the buy imho)
Stop it bgilliford, you are speaking logic and reason.
CUT
Ok but that does not change what many people are saying ... .
the innovations brought by Rebellion are not that much. period.
Only if you don't factor in the giant campaign that's in HoS that has no equivalent in Rebellion whatsoever.
Hype, i.e. "Hyper-", prefix, lit. "in excess" or "above"
Try not to have expectations and you will remain pleasantly surprised under all circumstances.
Expectation...a preconceived resolution to have reasons to dislike something.
They don't have to be. The OP was going on about how he was disappointed and that it wasn't enough to justify this and that. My entire post was outlining the fact that this is how business works in todays world not just in the video game industry but all industries. If everyone complained everytime they had to shell out the same price for a slightly improved version of something they've already bought you would see a crapload more complaining going on than you currently do.
The main reason people don't complain about it is because we all make choices to buy a product based on what we're told... sometimes we make that choice with being told very little simply off the faith of the company or merchant. Guess what? When we do that we have noone to blame but ourselves. If I tell you I'll sell you this nice box that has something good inside and you buy it and what ends up being inside is a pile of dung, who's fault is it? Point is they didn't lie... they didn't decieve and they delivered what they said they would so really we don't have the right to complain other than the simple basic "I complain because I can" (Which tbh kinda makes you look like a bit of an ass)
Edit: Btw if you guys are going to start comparing "let downs" in regards to games... I have one word for you. Spore. Spore outdoes every other game in existance when it comes to false promises and deceptive marketing and hype. (Except maybe Universal Combat but that wasn't so much a marketing thing as it was that 90% of what was advertised on the box was simply false, inaccurate or broken)
This is the single biggest reason to despise blizzard. Gamers pay a premium price for sub-premium service(yet even as sub prime, its better then most games made today). Reminds me of my ISP.
The only reason I support stardock and ironclad is that they have in the past and will in the future provide some actual competition in the video game market by making great games. But since there are so few well designed games out there, I HAVE to play blizzard products as well, and endure their underlying annoying game design idealogy.
In reality, the game industry is the way it is because big money wanted to infiltrate the game market(to make loads of cash), and they did so the best way big money knows how. Buy out the best, combine the best, invest shitloads of cash into it so that there is no real quality competition, and profit excessively because you are the main provider of the "thneed"(dr. suess reference). Its a tried and true ancient battle plan that will always be relevant as long as people compete for resources.
Gamers get angry at other developers for not providing them with the same quality of merchandise, yet at the same time the developers themselves aren't creative enough (due to legal constraints, mainly loss of control of their product) to create new cashflows, because their specialty isn't in creating new cashflows, its in game design. I am not insulting them by any means, as I consider creating new cashflows to be the enterprise of dull, boring individuals. But that's my own personal bias.
Having a lot of money means you can hire entire teams of people to incorporate much more cashflow into your game. Teams of boring cashflow creators.
To me, an angry gamer is a trukula tree(dr. suess reference, same story as before), the trust can be regrown over time but the reaper has already come for it. Other game designers get upset by how the market is because in all reality, blizzard's/EA's exploitation of the market has trained gamers to want more for their money. Game companies that can provide this (stardock/Ironclad) will do well in this market. Gamers that want more for their money will be the gamers that will buy blizzards TITAN mmo. They are completely in control of the mmo market.
Blizzard has a good position, yet the problem with being one of the top dogs is that ANY game company that starts to make good games will be a threat.
Sins doing well is a threat to their attempted monopoly, as it could revive the importance of RTS game play by actually evolving the game genre past blizzards simple starcraft 2 (same as starcraft 1, with a shiny coat of paint). This provides competition in the marketplace which will ensure that game players will get more for their money's worth. When there isn't competition gamers lose, and we are all forced to live with mediocrity. This trickles down into other areas of our lives and could be used effectively as a social "glass ceiling". I'm not by any means suggesting that this is the ONLY glass ceiling out there, i'm just pointing out that another ceiling is being made.
As for the efficacy of this social glass ceiling, the jury is still out. This is a social experiment by big money interests to ensure that the class system is maintained, with them at the top. You can prove this yourself by creating a viable new control scheme and prove to the ruling class that you can provide another form of control for them to exploit. You will get more funding you desire. Yet so few of us are in a position to do this that the experiences of this form of business isn't widely known, and people go on avoiding the fact that big brother is watching you. I'm going to add a line to that famous quote (from the book 1984), Big brother is holding you back, intentionally.
food for thought.
That campaign does not make the HotS full sequel either, so i can happily disregard it. I was under impression, we are talking more the multiplayer related side of things anyway.
@jartigerx> you just got to give Rebellion more time. Its that type of game, that grows on you. To truly enjoy the new stuff and see, how it actually changes the game compared to Diplomacy. If you think, that new units in HotS are going to turn the gampeplay upside down, but you dont feel the same with Titans in Rebellion, you simply have not played it enough, period. How much anyway, did you gave a try to all the subfactions factions? Could you just out of your head name some of the new techs for each side in Rebellion, and what abilities their Titans have? If not, you again probably have not played the game enough to really appreciate, how game-changing the new stuff is.
Ive played Rebellion quite a bit actually. Ive owned SoSE since 2009 and as stated, I love the game. I just dont feel and probably wont feel that the content was worth the cost. And thats ok. My opinion wont shut down Ironclad or force change on any level.
When I discuss HotS, im referring to the game as a whole. Not as one aspect or the other. Starcraft is just one of those games that no matter how many times you play it, you can always be better....in MY opinion. As far as SoSE Rebellion, I will keep playing it cause I like SoSE, but tbh, I should get about 20 bucks back based on previous expansion costs and the fact that there is not enough to warrant paying what I paid for Trinity.
My 37 cents.
Since neither game is advertised as a sequel, I fail to see why that's relevant whatsoever to the discussion. Disregarding the campaign is silly, since it's huge with really high production values, and is something that has been in demand in Sins since it came out (but never done). I mean really, I could also say that Rebellion is bad because they only added Titans (ignoring Corvettes because I dont' like them). It's a pretty nonsensical argument.
And if we're talking MP... Rebellion doesn't add more then Entrenchment and Diplomacy did combined, and is 50%-100% more expensive then the duo. The only upside is that you don't have to buy Sins first... but most of us already had it so that's not a selling feature here.
Don't get me wrong, I'm enjoying it. But the value for money isn't near what it used to be out of Ironclad.
Most of the value here is under the hood.
Assuming the graphics work ever gets done(models and effects aren't my line of work here), there are numerous serious failings in the original engine that flat out kill SOA2 design needs.
To do a charged particle effect on a weapon, it has to be an ability. As an ability, the only way you can control firing direction is with a requirement to face the target. Most weapons in TNG and DS9 have charging effects. None of this can be reliably done for SOA2 in Diplomacy. The most extensively boned being the rear firing energy dampening weapon the Ferengi have. It's utterly impossible to replicate even a halfass version of it. The little things like charging effects for torpedoes being before their launch we can live without, but phaser arrays not lighting up is a real bummer.
Rebellion adds charging delays to regular weapon entities. Phaser arrays lighting up is now a simple matter to solve. It also adds a directional cone attack system to the ability architecture. No more restricted ability designs with that damned target facing requirement.
Targeting specific ships, or types of ships, with area wide buffs, requires a complex layering of delayed actions using abilities on the target ships to determine the affect.
With Rebellion, we have conditional applications that will check for specific buff files. No more delays in layered systems filled with useless file calls purely to set up the necessary finish conditions. It's a simple one file application now, just like a broader ability. In Diplomacy, it works, if with a hefty processing overhead. In Rebellion it will be easy, and I wont have to explain them when people are trying to read what I've done...
Then there's the expansion of research. The additions for faction usage have huge scope. Branched research is impossible. It just can't be done. It can in Rebellion.
Take the newly mobilized starbases, you could put that on a branched research path. Does your faction specialize in offensive, or defensive tactics? Just set up your two options, have them set your faction, and off you go. You can trade movement for additional defenses, weapons for shields, whatever you want. The scope of modding potential in the research department has been greatly expanded.
Would I like more? Yeah, but it's nowhere near as simple as "they added titans and corvettes". They made major architectural changes to the engine that will expand the versatility of content creation.
Might as well add my 2 cents....... I bought Sins when it first came out, I have the boxed version $60 bucks.....I then bought both expansions 10$ a pop, so a total of 80 bucks....While I wasnt expecting a totally new and improved everything with Rebellion, I was expecting much more than a few techs and a few new ships. So after putting down another 30$ for a total of 110 bucks, I do feel like I overpaid for what has been provided. When I started up Rebellion, I was excited, when I started actually playing the game, I was confused at first, and then dissapointed....I felt like I was playing the same old game.....
And to compound the issue, The Single most annoying Bug that has happened since initial release of Sins, Ships flying way way out of the system and forcing every enemy ship that enters the system to go after them....causing massive fleets of ships to basically become useless and go on a never ending chase.
And guess what I had happen after 30 min or so of playing? A enemy ship in a star system started flying straight down.....I didnt catch it till after my fleet had flown way way down towards it, finally some fighters caught up to it and blew it up, but if it happened once, it will be happening again and again, just like it always has......How much money do they want from me to fix this dang bug? So it they are going to release sub par expansions, at least polish the game up nice.......and fix that stupid bug!!!!
Edit: I do love Sins, and I will reserve my final judgement for the release.....Titans are cool though, but not sure if they are 30 dollars cool....
Its relevant, cause people are bashing Rebellion for its steep asking price for only expansion, while happily paying the same money for HotS, if not more, despite it being not really adding more content than Rebellion does. 12 new units and 40 new techs - it plays the same as diplomacy. HotS adds 9 new units and hooray, completely new game. Rebellion adds selfshadowing - it looks the same as diplomacy. HotS adds creep on building - improved graphics... and so on Double standards.
Fair enough about campaign. IMHO Rebellion does add about as much as Entrenchement and Diplomacy combined. Is HotS standalone game?
Nope, but its far more of an expansion than Rebellion based on the campaign alone, the new (even if just a couple) of new units, the adjustments to the game play, maps & usability (IE actually using my computers specs to make the game *gasp* not lag). My internet blows but thats because I live 15 miles outside of town.
I've never seen that bug before?
Your lucky then....it happens almost every single game I play through.....seems to happen more near wormholes and stars.....
So it they are going to release sub par expansions, at least polish the game up nice.......and fix that stupid bug!!!!
While I agree with what you've said, I do want to say that I understand bugs and issues atm since it is a Beta Test.
I dont hold that against Ironclad.
Well, compare this expansion to Entrenchment and Diplomacy. Those micro-expansions were $10 each, so does Rebellion add at least three times as much stuff as either of those? The last $10 is for the fact that it's a stand alone game.
OP here. After playing another ten hours of Rebellion, and reading the back and forth that is on this forum, I just want to clarify a few original points that I tried to make that might have been misinterpreted. Well, just one really. The "Hype" came from the company promising "All New" things to us like tech trees, factions, scenarios, existing versions of sins ships (the last of which I've yet to see).They didn't do this in Entrenchment and Diplomacy. In fact, it seemed like they took it from a "this is a different way to play the game" versus "whole new content." That, I can live with (I paid $10 for each expansion + the $30 originally). By all means, Rebellion SHOULDN'T be only $10. My gut says that $5-$10 of the $40 Rebellion price tag is going to help their other games, more so than Rebellion. Which... I'm 75% ok with. But back to the game: Corvettes and Titans are totally new for the SINS landscape and do a good job of freshening it up. The factions also seem to play a good deal differently than they did in the end of Trinity. I appreciate the work handled by the devs, and the research done by the community, the game today is stellar because of such hard work.But my original point stands: be it "marketing" or not, I expected more from Ironclad/Stardock. And I'll note that you guys are still my favorite. Have been for the past 4 years. My faith, however, is dented.I feel this could have been remedied by more detailed information.I hope I don't sound bitter, mean, or cranky. I absolutely love this game, and it has a special place in my heart.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
