You guys pretty much covered all the bases on why I won't be buying the game either. The beta was enough for me.
Upvote
0
[Game] Starcraft II
- Thread starter Amerikaner
- Start date
The game itself is amazing to me. What rank were you when the game got stale? I'm at the top of my diamond league as terran/zerg and always try out new **** and for the most part it works. Zerg can get boring if you go "standard" roach + hydra but ling + infester is just as powerful and a lot more fun.
Just check out this vid of some inventive Z play, reminds me of GLA from Zero hour!
YouTube - StarCraft: Legacy - Plays of the Week - 6/04/10 - Part 1/2
I wouldnt care so much to even post if the game was crap. But to me it's the best RTS since CoH so I'm really frustrated with this crap blizzard is trying to pull.
Upvote
0
I was in the silver Leage, I performed pretty bad in the fist test games so i was put in bronze, I learned how to do zerg rush and build fast (I don't like that, I prefer building my whole army before attacking, but in SC its either rush or die), so I wiped them out quickly and advanced to silver leage , but then there I had a 1/1 Win/Loss ratio there, and eventually got tired.
I like to plan my strategies, when they work, they do it fine, but I get mind blocked when I have to improvise. I'm more of a Total War type of strategist than classic RTS one. I prefer building a bigger picture and not having to micromanage everything, sometimes I just get entertained watching my units or my allies units fight, and I forget that I have a lot of stuff to do.
also, there is no 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4 modes in the beta... while I recall that in the original, 3 or 4 players joined to rush a single one in those modes, and it doesn't look like is gonna be too different in this one.
not saying the game was bad, its pretty good, but its still a classic RTS with the classic gameplay system with its virtues and flaws. But when I played the beta and got tired, I recalled why I stopped playing classic RTS. Its just not my kind of gameplay, at least not anymore.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Man, GLA was she sh!t! Great great game. I loved that one, truly diverse races.
Nothing better than racing a couple of techies to an enemy base and unloading a bunch of RPGs and suicide bombers
.I'm not looking forward to getting my *** whooped online though by people who already been playing for weeks.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Man, GLA was she sh!t! Great great game. I loved that one, truly diverse races.
Nothing better than racing a couple of techies to an enemy base and unloading a bunch of RPGs and suicide bombers
The sc2 equivelant is pretty close! I've done overlord drops with banelings (Zergling's exploding cousin) and hydras many times.
Upvote
0
Anyone else get into a battle then at about 20 minutes into the game lose interest and not care who lost or won? I just couldn't get interested enough in this game. It's a shame because starcraft was one of the first pc games I bought as a child and loved it back in the day. Oh well, I think Diablo 3 will be more my style.
Upvote
0
I am not an MMO fan at all. I'll pay once for my game, then maybe DLC. That's as far as I will go, so this battlenet stuff sucks. I also never liked Starcraft either, it was really hard unless I played easy mode as Protoss. I just...don't understand the huge following Starcraft has attained.
Upvote
0
You're not Korean, that's why.
I just read this thread and was like "WTF! When did they decide to start charging for Bnet 2.0?"
Then I realized you guys were interpreting statements made almost 2 years ago, and that I'd read this debate back then on the D3 forums.
Monetizing Bnet 2.0 means micro transactions, means paid DLC, means a lot of things other than a subscription fee. Simple as that. Blizzard-Activision is the king, and Kotik is involved....but not even they are that stupid. No one has successfully maintained a subscription-based gaming network other than Microsoft, and that's only because they have all of their customers by the short hairs.
My guess at why Russia will have to pay a sub fee, regardless of what the official line is, is because Russia is ground zero for hackers. If they're going to steal the game anyways, Blizzard wants to make sure they make at least some scratch off them getting anywhere near Bnet. Which will backfire, because they will just upgrade to credit card fraud in order to cheat Bnet.
Anyways, I stopped looking at D3 months ago. This thread reminds me I need to go brush up.
Oh and on topic....CoH > SC, new RTS > Classic RTS. /flees.
I just read this thread and was like "WTF! When did they decide to start charging for Bnet 2.0?"
Then I realized you guys were interpreting statements made almost 2 years ago, and that I'd read this debate back then on the D3 forums.
Monetizing Bnet 2.0 means micro transactions, means paid DLC, means a lot of things other than a subscription fee. Simple as that. Blizzard-Activision is the king, and Kotik is involved....but not even they are that stupid. No one has successfully maintained a subscription-based gaming network other than Microsoft, and that's only because they have all of their customers by the short hairs.
My guess at why Russia will have to pay a sub fee, regardless of what the official line is, is because Russia is ground zero for hackers. If they're going to steal the game anyways, Blizzard wants to make sure they make at least some scratch off them getting anywhere near Bnet. Which will backfire, because they will just upgrade to credit card fraud in order to cheat Bnet.
Anyways, I stopped looking at D3 months ago. This thread reminds me I need to go brush up.
Oh and on topic....CoH > SC, new RTS > Classic RTS. /flees.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Looks like I have to reconsider getting this game. Lots of stuff I didn't know about in this article:
http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battle-net-2-0-the-antithesis-of-consumer-confidence?df
http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battle-net-2-0-the-antithesis-of-consumer-confidence?df
Upvote
0
Yep.
Most pathetic thing ever is that there has been lag issues in lan tournaments. Not sure why Blizzard thinks they are making a competitive game.
Upvote
0
Played this for 8 hours straight after the midnight release.
Yeah, it's a blast.
And ya, Zerg = GLA. I just played a game where I had 8 nidus worms spread all over the map and was driving my opponent absolutely insane.
Now excuse me while I go back to playing it.
Yeah, it's a blast.
And ya, Zerg = GLA. I just played a game where I had 8 nidus worms spread all over the map and was driving my opponent absolutely insane.
Now excuse me while I go back to playing it.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I'm going to run through the campaigns with cheats just so I can watch those amazing cinematics. I always liked the StarCraft story, but to be honest the only RTS game I enjoy at all is Dawn of War 1. Managing the economy bores and frustrates me, I just want to make the tactical decisions. I swear the Blizzard CG department should just make full length video game movies, because the ones with live actors always end up being unmitigated ****.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Very impressed with the campaign so far. Usually RTS campaigns bore the **** out of me except for the story parts (if they're good)... but usually the missions are boring. Not so with SC2.
I won't give anything away, but it's very well designed. This could easily get GOTY.
I won't give anything away, but it's very well designed. This could easily get GOTY.
Upvote
0
I think I lied. I have my gamestop preorder receipt burning a hole in my pocket. I may just have to pick it up. Can't let that $5 preorder go to waste now can I?
Upvote
0