Completely separate - that much I know. My guess is they’re going to tweak a lot of things that have already been introduced (such as the diplomacy system) while adding a lot more. Entrenchment and Diplomacy were “micro expansions” afterall.
A standalone is usually always a chance for the dev/publisher to start fresh and attract more players. Correct me if I’m worng, but isn’t the current wisdom on traditional expansions that it will typically have a 30% sell rate to existing owners of the base game?
I’d imagine that the rate of adoption on an expansion to a three year old game that has already had two previous micro-expansions would be pretty low. A standalone seems like a much smarter strategy, especially if you want multiplayer to still foster a community.
Looking forward to this.
That sounds about right, Telefrog.
So would this completely replace the original then? Like some sort of sequel-but-not? Or would owning the original and expansions add more things?
I can’t speak with any certainty as I’m just pulling my info from multiple boards and a lot of guesswork, but from what I’ve read I don’t think there would be any “cross-contamination” between a Sins: Trinity install and a Sins: Rebellion install.
That said, the original is a fantastic game and you can sometimes find it for a song.
Well, yeah, so why not just call it a sequel? “Sins of a Solar Empire 2” sounds much more credible in the marketplace than a “standalone expansion”, and it’s clear as to what it is. I don’t think they’ve got their marketing heads on straight.
Because it wouldn’t be a sequel as most people understand it.
Also, the success of many other standalone expansions would seem to refute your idea of good marketing.
Perhaps there’s not enough changes/additions/improvements to warrant a full sequel. I’m sure Sins 2 is in the cards, somewhere.
It may be they have something else in mind for Sins of a Solar Empire 2.
Perhaps. Possibly.
As an unrelated side-note, I find it fascinating that the only report of ongoing development at Ironclad over the last year was an unconfirmed magazine blurb about a land based RTS. But it’s probably nothing.
My problem is that the entire scale is too weighted to the slow end, I would prefer the middle be somewhere higher up. The game simply does not have the depth to justify its default speed, let alone anything lower, in any setup.
I don’t think you have any idea what “most people” would understand by “Standalone Expansion”. The phrase itself is very nebulous. Is Fallout New Vegas a standalone expansion? GTA San Andreas? STALKER Call of Pripyat?
No, I think the features Stardock and Ironclad have revealed don’t measure up to what most people would consider a full sequel. A few new units and some graphical enhancements aren’t what traditionally get marketed as a sequel, mainly because owners of the previous product would pitch a fit.
The three titles you mentioned all had massively different stories and assets. I’m not seeing how that helps your case.
Standalone expansion is a normal expansion but it’s possible for new players to purchase it and play too. That’s it.
Pre-orders and pricing infoz:
Eager RTS gamers can now pre-order the upcoming Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion! All pre-order customers will gain access to the Rebellion beta scheduled for later this year (your credit card will be charged at that time).
New Sins of a Solar Empire customers can pre-order Rebellion for $39.95. Existing registered Sins players can upgrade to Rebellion for $29.95.
Please note that Impulse currently doesn’t seem to offer the reduced upgrade rate for some odd reason, but the website does (requiring a login when checking out):
Figured something like this might be coming down the pipe with the sudden interest in patching Diplomacy after so long. Always liked the response from Ironclad and their work even when they broke something they usually quickly turned right around and fixed it. Not too enthusiastic about more Impulse tie-ins especially since Reactor has been a bit of a joke for a long time now. Ready to Play, remember that? Oh well, I guess it’s impossible to think Ironclad might go off on their own and sell on Steam someday, but I’ll sure hope so.
Titans were something many wanted after capital ships were not the behemoths of firepower some imagined, but they sound rough to balance. $30 is a bit much for me to go pre-order right now knowing so little, but can’t wait to see some more details.
I, on the other hand, hope Steam & all other equally consumer hostile disservices vanish now & for all time, and that global copyright legislation, at the very least, gets changed to include and enforce at bazooka-point, a total ban on exclusive distribution deals.
You do know that the release version of Reactor, which was announced as ready at GDC, is designed to allow such a thing (Reactor games don’t require the Impulse client, just that they can sold non-exclusively on Impulse) ? I wish Steam games would not require the Steam client running to play them (I know that’s a pipe dream).
Sorry Impulse defenders, didn’t mean to start some war here by expressing my personal desire. As for Reactor, I already stated what I didn’t like about it in that it seems to be coming along as swiftly as Ready to Play did. If it’s made a lot of progress since I last heard about it, good.
Can we go back to Sins discussion now? How do you think the Titan-class ships will end up working? Are they going to be highly vulnerable expensive targets that can dish out immense damage or be more like mobile starbases in regards to hitpoints?