As everyone knows, I don’t do strategy games. But some of you out there do, and may be interested in what’s going on with Starcraft II, especially after the “three-parter” announcement.

That one certainly came as a shock to everyone, and many are saying Blizzard is trying to milk the franchise. Others feel this is the heavy hand of Activision.

Over at Edge Online, they have an interview with Blizzard’s StarCraft rep Bob Colayco. In it, he claims that they’re not “milking the franchise”, and that fans misunderstand what Blizzard is doing.

He says: “Instead of getting all three race experiences at once, to make it a more epic experience, we’re focusing on one faction per entry for the single-player.”

MMM, yes, but with a long lead time between releases, won’t that become rather dull for the solo gamers? You’ll only play the Terrans until the next game comes along. Of course, that’s single player.

Multiplayer is different, as Colayco remarked: “When we ship StarCraft II, the multiplayer will be included. You’re getting all three races there”. I guess in MP, there are no campaigns as such; you just play on maps until somebody wins.

Then at 1up, there’s a piece with lead producer Chris Sigaty. He says that each SC2 game (or expansion) is expected to have 26-30 missions for the single player. And he’s hoping there won’t be more than a year between each release.

You know, this does sound a little over-the-top to me. Surely they could have had all three races in the first game, and released extra stuff in the expansions later. Yeah, a lot of missions is nice, but does that really make up for being stuck with one side for a year or more?

And just to finish up, there’s a mischievous post over on Shrapnel Games forum, poking fun at all this.

We’re Not Milking Starcraft at Edge Online

SC2 games Could Be Released Years Apart at 1Up.

Poking Fun At SC2 on Sharpnel Games forum