Starcraft 2

[Otherside]

Seeing as its release day.

Who has a copy ?

I got mine played a few games and a few custom maps.

Hate Battle.net 2.0 but oh well.

[maackey]

A friend encouraged me to pre-order it from gamestop and get in the beta a few months ago. Only played it for a few hours and lost interest. Battles were too micro-dependent (my apm is abysmal) unless you caught your opponent off guard with some "cheesy tactics". That said I did enjoy it, but couldn't justify dropping 50 bucks on it, so I canceled.

I'm more of a spectator anyway (at least half my ingame time ranks are from spectating ) and there are tons of commentated videos on youtube and live streaming sites which I can only imagine will grow even more now that the game is actually out.

[Otherside]

tbh the main reason i got it was due to the custom maps I dont like clickfests

[Gota]

Only getting after price reduction if at all.

[Otherside]

Only getting after price reduction if at all.

HF waiting 2 years or so till the next part is released.

[Gota]

Only getting after price reduction if at all.

HF waiting 2 years or so till the next part is released.

Why would i wait 2 years
Also,i played the beta i know what im missing.

[Otherside]

price wont go down till the next game is out which will be around 2 years.

Custom maps is what i bought SC2 for and the campaign which u didn't see in beta.

But you seem to be really stingy in general and never want to pay for a game .

[Gota]

price wont go down till the next game is out which will be around 2 years.

Custom maps is what i bought SC2 for and the campaign which u didn't see in beta.

But you seem to be really stingy in general and never want to pay for a game .

Price will go down way earlier and i am stingy cause i usually dont play any game for more than 1-2 hours making it silly for me to buy any of them,not to mention that most games have zero originality in them.
yay call of duty 10...this time with one extra shader...give me a break im still tormenting myself for buying bad company 2.
Ill let the rich spoiled kids that must must must have every game pay for the development.

[Otherside]

even the ones you play you dont pay for.

Case in point whenever you make a "lets play xgame online" thread

[Erom]

Got it at midnight, played the first 3 missions before work. Kicks so much ass. Very excited to get home tonight.

Blizzard games = only thing I buy on release rather than waiting for low prices.

Battle.net 2.0 = unfortunate step backwards.

Single player campaign = worth every penny.

[Gota]

even the ones you play you dont pay for.

Case in point whenever you make a "lets play xgame online" thread

not my fault greedy bastards dont lower prices after years of the game being released and dont go all white knight on me.
You buy every game that gets released but it doesn't mean every one must.
If you have cash to throw and the personality to do so than have fun.
even if i was a millionaire i wouldn't buy most games.

[KaiserJ]

bad company 2.

map pack 5 released tomorrow!

but seriously, i dont mind buying a game, im just worried about wasting my money on sc2... from what ive heard it's very similar to sc1, which i played to death and now find boring...

i've also heard people complaining that there wasn't all that much new stuff in the game, which, if im sick of starcraft, seems like it would be a bit of a waste. campaign... well, i can see myself playing it and enjoying it, but am i going to get my moneys worth out of it? probably not.

so yeah, i'll grab it maybe at a price reduction; but really, the idea of a pre-planned 3-parter game kind of shocks and annoys me. sequels should only be for things that have found acceptance and high critical acclaim, rather than a pre-planned marketing technique. ('nouncin' mah 3 gaems!) blizzard has created this feeling of implied value on a product that wasn't even out yet... would super mario 3 have been as awesome if nintendo planned mario games as a 3-part series? no freaking way

i've been annoyed in previous years being suckered into purchasing new versions of sports games, only to find out that it's essentially the same thing with a different player roster and a few gimmicks thrown in.

[Otherside]

Blizzard are on a ego trip cos they know their games will sell just cos of the brand and the amount of fanboi's they have.

I dont play any of the blizzard games all that regularly anymore but i do own them all (I cant purchase anything else on Battle.net!).

Only blizzard can get away with making battle.net 2.0 a horrid piece of crap (no chatrooms come on...) and still sell by the bucket load.

Its a shame i liked blizzard Pre-WoW when they actually cared about making a good product. Now its more like it has blizzard on it so you must buy it (though the games most of the time are above most other developers standards, they could still do better)

Heres hoping Diablo 3 is awesome and not a step backwards or just a pure Diablo 2 clone.

[Gota]

ahhh all i want is diablo 2 but with tons of random events along the game so it doesnt feel like a grind.
I dislike the fact they are going with the wowish visual style.

[Pxtl]

My problem with SC2 is that it's being planned as a 90-mission story.

Now, I appreciate that some people like a long game. That's good for them. I, on the other hand, found that the classic StarCraft volumes were just about the right length - they seemed to exhaust most of the possible gameplay for each faction.

30 missions with a single faction is going to have to try really, really hard to keep fresh. The expected cliffhanger at the end will be a definite kick in the pants.

So it will start out awesome, introduce you to the units gradually and you have a grand time... but then it's just going to be permuting gameplay with the same faction for about 20 missions, and StarCraft missions often run pretty long. The plot will be wonderfully written and acted, of course, this is Blizzard.... but it won't end. It will end with a massive question mark, leaving you to wait for the next race campaign.

Basically, they're marketing to WoW-style gamers - guys who have the patience to spend a lot of money on a long slog. Those of us who prefer a short, taut, exciting single-player adventure before we go back to playing online aren't going to like it, I'd wager.

[Master-Athmos]

I might buy it once it's around 20-25 Ôé¼. The actual SC2 gameplay is way too micro-intensive and I hate certain things about it which I find annoying (like e.g. a Zerg player blocking a geyser by building an own on it and aborting it again to rebuild). Blizzard always made good singeplayer campaigns though and that's what I like about it...

So for me this some singleplayer only game...

[Caydr]

I haven't followed SC2 much, but my understanding is that they're releasing "part 1" right now, to be followed by two more add-ons of some kind later, emphasizing the story of the other races.

I don't understand how this makes sense though... Seems like a cash grab more than anything. Coming from a company that could literally buy a small country with what they probably spend on coffee every day, I don't get why they'd be so stingy.

Aside from the ripoff factor, will more units be added with each expansion, or just missions? If it's just missions, that's an even bigger ripoff, but if more units come with each pack, and the basic game probably has a pretty good number of units already, it's not going to be Starcraft anymore. Starcraft is about a small number of well-defined units... if they make it too complex, it will probably lose some of its appeal to its original audience.

If it's just missions, or just missions plus a few units (like Brood War sort of) it wouldn't take very long to develop, so why not just release one big game? It's not like they're risking that people will lose interest or something...

I'm probably just bitching... I'm tired...

[Hobo Joe]

Single player campaign = worth every penny.

You payed $60 for a third of it fyi, rest doesn't come out for years



Pretty much agree with what you said about Blizzard "pre-WoW", otherside. I mean, before that they had milked a bit but it wasn't overboard. Now it's all they do. They haven't come up with an original product for 13 years. All they do is milk their 3 stale franchises.

It's depressing because they have the potential to be amazing, with some of the biggest production capabilities, nobody over them telling them what to do(At least that's how it was pre-Activistion, and they would have started sc2 development by then), hands down the best in-house art department(with both game-art and cinematics), and yet they waste it.

Compared to a company like Valve (who is/was in similar shoes as them, ability-wise.), after their first big hit they started to do other things while still continuing the original franchise. HL2 came with CSS (A remake, yeah, but a freebe and the first of Valve's re-released mods that eventually led to TF2), then they made Portal and TF2, then L4D and now Alien Swarm. The point is that they did a ton of new creative stuff, compared to someone like Blizzard that is stuck in a creative rut and can't make any new games.

[JohannesH]

They will add units... If they didn't it'd kinda make sense to let people without the addon play multiplayer with people who have it. And that'd mean less people buying it.

If they add a unit or 2 per race per addon it wont be still that much, maybe they will remove some unit as well, time will tell.

Of course it's to get money but thats kinda what companys do. If people consider it worth buying it was a good plan...

Then again another company might make SC2, 3, and 4 within the same time and there'd be still same amount of singleplayer and worse balanced multiplayers and more shattered playerbase - dunno if that would be better

[Licho]

It costs 60Ôé¼ to download - gimme a break, thats 80$..
I will wait until price is reasonable.
Last game I purchased was mass effect 2 - it now costs 20Ôé¼ too.