If you really feel that way, then don't worry about the expansions and focus on playing the real Sins game--which is online multiplayer.  It's doubtful that the expansions will get played in online multiplayer at all and you'll get to play the real Sins game--against real human opponents and not silly, predictable, AI that can't formulate a real strategy.

As for me...if people actually start playing the expansion content online and they say that it's really good then I'd probably drop the $10.

LOL @ the OP, and I suppose stardock should have just given us the whole game for free as well. And I dont think it is valid to say the original sins release was incomplete, even the OP says he has been playing it that it is "Great", so you got you enjoyment out of it so dont complain.

Fanboys never read before posting, you're wasting your time as nobody will listen.

Sins was very unpolished when it was relased. It was around the price of a regular game, but without a campaign and an unbalanced multiplayer.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, but the op has a point. Its not fair for him to be shot down by fanboys who refuse to read.

That said, I will still be buying the expansions. (Though I doubt many will read this point, and flame me anyways)

It's nothing to do with fanboyism. The OP stated right in his first post that he thought the game was great. Again, how does that suddenly change when Stardock decides to add content in an expansion?

If he'd originally said the game was unfinished due to the lack of content that Stardock is now adding, then he'd have a point. As it stands, he doesn't.

Sins was released and became successful to a degree I`m not sure anybody counted on. The developers then decide that they can improve the experience and offer us more. Thats a good thing. Splitting the expansions into 3 smaller parts is unusual, but not detractive.

We *got* a complete game with Sins. What we`re looking forward to is an expansion on an effort that had an arguably restricted scope because of the original budget. This is not a screw-job by Ironclad... they honestly completed the game, maintained web presence and communications directly with the community who bought it post-release, and now they are committed to expanding that game not once but three times in such a way that each expansion hits us more quickly and with a measure of consumer selectiveness. Would that 99% of developers/publishers did the same.

Ironclad could have moved on a long time ago.

Maybe the original poster is an EA agent trying to invent some measure of 'grass roots' negativity... not going to work, if thats the case...

ok you have a great game for $30 no one can dissagre with that. you then have imporvements to all aspects of the game (3 expantions all together) for $30 again and who is to say they didnt think of these things after the origal release and only had enough to go in the full size expantion with that content as well. you then have a whole new expansion for $30 (assume this is what they are going to market it as) which will give people a campaign who want it and add loads more probs going to add bout as much as the micro expantions together. so now you have paid $90 which is $10 less than maximum milkage which was showen earlier. and you have the equivilent of one great game and 2 full size expantions.

if it is your view that it was imcompleat when first released that is fine but alot of people view it as a bargin.

i belive its dont feed the trolls

and thats you $90 which i think most people will be willing to part with.

and where is the OP reply to all this debate eh eh

Geez if it's $10 an expansion pack, they can make 5 or 6 and I'd gladly buy them.

Sins is my new favorite game. I got it as a gift, but I would have bought it the second I realized it was a Stardock game.

I'm really looking forward to the new expansions. I check Impulse and the website everyday to see when the expansions will be available and then curse and scream and bite people's ears when I see that they aren't yet released.

Save an ear, Stardock! Release Entrenchment soon!

It's releasing in like 2 and a half weeks, that not soon enough

Again, I don't agree with him, but his line of thought isn't that hard to follow.

The lack of campaign was a design descision. One will likely be added eventually simply due to the high demand.

Obvious troll?

The value for SoaSE is better than most games, I think OP just got confused about the 3 pieces comming and not even thought strait. The expasions might has well have great value just for comming in 3 parts, because each can be more relevant or maybe not.

Some games don't even have any replayability and costs more than SoaSE

Anyway the value for the game is good, but complainers are bound to come. The first version of the game did lacked polishing, but the price was low, the game still fun nonetheless, and a huge mass accepted it and gave good rating.

Now is these expansions turn out really good, it will be an amazing package. I just hope they worth their price.

And Spore 1st expansion pack that add parts to the creatures costs 20$.

I stand by my previous statement. No, I don't find it easy to follow a train of thought that a game that he thought was great is suddenly only good for the trash, never to be played again, just beacuse new content is showing up for a minimal charge. I can't follow the thought process behind that at all.

Since the game has been released, how many free patches have been released.  I believe over a gig's worth of content has already been made available and all free of charge.

These expansions are a result of what most can assume is Ironclad sitting down trying to think of ways to make the game better.  There is no conspiracy here guys...

I'll buy the expansions but I won't buy your next game IronClad. I remember reading how a dev bragged that they had "left out" some parts to the game so they could focus on a single aspect. That is a problem. When you make a car, you don't stop at the engine and then charge the buyer for the rest. Especially in individual pieces. If they had just done their job and tryed to play the game from several perspectives, they'd see there were holes in their cake. I will buy an expansions when they release something that I might not need but is interesting none the less. Like and new race or expanded tech. But when you charge me for something that should have been included in the box, its just wrong. Ironclad sells it in pieces too "microexpansion" my ass. If you can't include everything you want in the package, at least make a solid expansion. In entrenchment I paying ten bucks for stabases, decent defenses, and bigger lrm. By the end of this I may pay more for the expansion than the game itself.

Pardon me but... hogwash. There are three microexpansions planned at 10 bucks each. And they've stated they're planning on releasing them all as one single pack next summer. Want to take a guess what the cost of that will be?

As for bragging about left out content, you got a link? I highly doubt there was bragging going on. Sure, they may have left out aspects they'd have liked to put in, but I challenge you to find many games where that isn't the case. It by no means indicates the product was unfinished. It simply means some features that they'd have liked to have added had to be dropped.

And you car analogy isn't even close. The 'car' you bought ran as advertised (with a little free maintenance, i.e. patches thrown in to tune it up), while they're releasing and charging for some extras.

Campaigns are not standard in 4x games.  Mainly because they tend to really fucking suck.

That said, I think the game is much more conducive to one than a standard 4X and probably should have had one just to appease the masses, but what's really the drawback of it?  An individual game can take hours, even days to complete.

Well then, my advice for you is to NOT buy the expansions and simply play the original game. The original game is fully fuctional (except for multiplayer during release) and with the latest patch it will be as polished as it will ever be. If you want the developers to cover 'Everything' then this game would be released in maybe 5+ years time, cost maybe 100+ US dollars and cause the company to collapse as no one wants to fork out that much money for a 'Complete' game.

The expansions are expansions, they add on EXTRAs, so its not a life and death matter if you want to buy them or not. Look at all the other RTS around, Brood War, Frozen Throne, Forged Alliance, Opposing Fronts and so forth, why did These developers not release their original games 1-2 years late with the expansions in them? and cost maybe 60-90 US dollars. Because its simply not viable and people will not fork out that much money just for a 'Uber' game. People prefer 'tasters' and like expansions to build up from the previous game.

Games are 'luxuries' you don't need to buy em if you don't need em and in this case, who is forcing you to buy the expansions as stated in your post? You don't need em to enjoy Sins. Oh and if you want a 'Solid' expansion, buy all three expansions at once then when they are all finally released...................for the same price as buying them seperately

P.S. If you want a Car analogy, you got a perfectly fine car with Sins and the 3 expansions are simply adding a More powerful engine, NOS and better wheels. (You don't get em for free either in the real world........)

Yay! I was quoted for hilarious purposes!

Some people take this whole expansion pack thing way too seriously. It's clear the only real reason some of these people are pissed off is that they feel pressured into buying expansion packs just so they can continue to play the game online with other up to date players. OH NOES!

If a game that you really like later has an expansion released, why not buy it? If you enjoyed the game, why not see it as a way to refresh an old experience with some fun new content? Sure you are paying some money for it, but if the game was so popular that the makers decided to add some stuff or expand on an earlier idea that they were forced to cut out or marginalize, that doesn't mean that the game was intentionally released "unfinished" just so they could force you to buy down the road.

I think very few games are ever released with all the content that originally went into their creation. There are some exceptions, but I think expansion packs are called expansion packs for a reason. They aren't called "Finishing packs" or "Forgot-to-add-this-gimmick packs" or "OMG-I-can't-believe-we-left-this-out packs". And personally I found it refreshing that there wasn't a campaign mode in Sins.

So either buy it and have fun, or find people to play with who don't buy expansion packs either.

Sigh. Has anyone ever noticed that video games seem to have their own special type of, dare I say...politics?

ZOMG! I said the P-word! Everyone run!

.........I'm scared now

I thought I heard a long time ago it wasn't added due to time and budget constraints. Though what I just said is going off of ancient memories so take it with a grain of salt, because I could be misremembering it.

im looking forward to the micros, fuck you ppl.

well, considering that there was very likely a distinct desire to tell the story, some concept of a campaign must have existed in the devs minds, bc otherwise I would not understand why they give us a background and intro at all, if they never planned to build on it.

nevertheless, while I would like a campaign, I do not necessarily feel the game incomplete as it was released. it has a lot of fun and many hours of gameplay and mp can be one of the best experiences to have, if you are willing to go for it. and just bc there is a way to improve something does not mean that the original status was bad.

in a way though, the op does have a point, not necessarily for sins, but in the way that it does happen that companies deliberately leave one or two small aspects out or make sure there are enough points to work on for an expansion pack, while the product is still under development. this can of course be a good thing also, if you deliver a base product, maybe at a slightly lower price and then offer several smaller packs with vastly different foci and the customer can pack just those that he likes instead of a whole big pack that might include features that are uninteresting to some.

The game, when it was released, was "incomplete" from a normal point of view ... but it was a high-quality game nonetheless.

The IC/SD synergy was (and still is) a great success, especially if you consider their very rare customer-care approach.

Why not, then, invest more money in such a rare, high-quality gaming series ?

" I remember reading how a dev bragged that they had "left out" some parts to the game so they could focus on a single aspect. "

Is that so? You mind linking this one up for me?

Aside from an utter lack of context, I believe that's an accurate statement.

I'm pretty sure I remember one of you saying that you didn't do a campaign because it would take to much focus away from the gameplay.