Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Do not buy SC2 if you are looking for something new

1235»

Comments

  • ErstokErstok Member Posts: 523

    So I can not only play SC 1 but also WC 3 with portable setup along with lan support already. Why waste money on SC2. What are you guys, money burning nerds who buy anything with a shiny coat of paint?

    image
    When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?

  • SauronasSauronas Member Posts: 183

    If something isn't broken it doesn't need fixing....

  • IllyssiaIllyssia Member UncommonPosts: 1,507
    Originally posted by Sauronas

    If something isn't broken it doesn't need fixing....

     

    Actually Blizzard could rebalance the game to make the online multiplayer more varied. The reality of it is there are only a couple of things that work for each faction, so it's rts by numbers to get a win, anything other is an auto loss against a half descent team.
  • Kilo_BravoKilo_Bravo Member Posts: 33

    I haven't purchased Starcraft 2 for entirely different reasons, but I'm not here to preach a personal preference. I thought at first you were talking about Supreme Commander 2, which I'd probably agree with you about halfway (50/50).

    I don't know about anything new, but as I've seen people play it, they are pretty happy about it. In a "wow!" kind of way (not the other WoW).

  • Excalaber2Excalaber2 Member UncommonPosts: 360

    Originally posted by Rydeson

    Originally posted by Illyssia

    I think the disappointing aspect to SC2 is they Blizzard have cut up the game into three. I think there single player story campaign doable in just a few hours gameplay. That leaves you with the esports online battles, which are alright, but really not enough to justify the huge hype Blizzard got for what is just another descent RTS game.

    and the E-sport online battles are a joke.. IMO..  90% of the are 10 min. long clickfest zergs.. There is no real strategy, it's basically whoever miss clicks first.. loses..  From what I gather as well, is that someone already did a min/max formula, so it's just a matter of time before 90% of all zerg battles will be done with the same faction and formula.. yeah.. that sounds challenging and fun...... NOT

    Where on EARTH did you get this information?  With all do respect, this is just stupid.  There are thousands of videos and discussions and casts about strategies and that's what ended up intriguing me about SC2 in the end.  I wasn't going to buy it at first...but I kind of got pulled in by the community and the casts and the strategies.  Plus, I ended up not being as bad as I thought I would be in it.

    But as the other poster said...you really should play a game before coming on gaming forums to spread what you "heard" from other people.  Because they are probably just crying over something that happened...but will disguise it as disgust for a game usually.

    Disclaimer: This is not a troll post and is not here to promote any negative energy. Although this may be a criticism, it is not meant to offend anyone. If a moderator feels the post is inappropriate, please remove it immediately before it is subject to consideration for a warning. Thank you.

  • Starcraft 2 is the best PVP game I have played in years. Single player was a bit 'meh' after more recent rts games that have wider feature sets, but the multiplayer is pure, perfectly balanced genius.

    You have to be good at it however, you have to be attentive,  speedy and able to multi-task to be good at it, and I can understand those who aren't hating it. The game is unapologetically made though for those that are :) I have never been one to chastise people to 'learn to play', but SC2 is the first game that I genuinely know I am taught with every defeat, and as long as I learn from them I become a better player.

    SC2 is a lesson to all other devs on how to balance PVP in an rts, and could probably tecah MMO devs a thing or two :p

  • McGamerMcGamer Member UncommonPosts: 1,073

    Originally posted by gauge2k3

    You already own this game.  It's called starcraft 1.  3 years since a playable version was seen and 100mil dollars later and what do we get.  Starcraft 1 with a 3d facelift.

    This honestly should have been SC 1.5 patch....The ONLY mechanic that was added was jumping units....I mean really....12 years of RTS advancement (looking at CoH here) and this is what you give us.  These mechanics were good when SC original released a decade ago, but now....come on people.

    This game is nothing more than a money grabber.  The fact that 3 episodes will be released and sold is further proof.  So keep paying out your wallets SC/Blizz fanboys cause that's all activision wants from you, and they will get it.

    As for me, after the adoption of the policy of "it's ok to release bad games" that companies have had, I refuse to buy games that are not up to standard.  Make it right, or don't get my money.  I will not be buying SC2 (I beta'd), I say uncounted times that SC needed more mechanic upgrades to be a legitimate sale/upgrade to no avail.

    This is not blizzard standard, this is activision standard.  Enjoy blizzard while it lasts, cause it's not going to much longer.  I'll sit back while they rape diablo for cash as well.

    This thread is completely ridiculous. Your opinion is not fact and certainly not even an supported opinion at best. There are so many new units, tactics and features that if you haven't seen them already then there is a problem. 


  • Originally posted by Illyssia

    Originally posted by Sauronas

    If something isn't broken it doesn't need fixing....

     

    Actually Blizzard could rebalance the game to make the online multiplayer more varied. The reality of it is there are only a couple of things that work for each faction, so it's rts by numbers to get a win, anything other is an auto loss against a half descent team.

    Have you played above bronze? Yup, in bronze people rely on set builds because they can't multi-task, get up to silver, gold and beyond and you have to scout, learn and react. The 2v2 I play in (even in silver) we still have over a dozen possible strats (and that is just for our own personal combos and preferences).

    The 'it is just a clickfest' myth just comes from people that have never really given it a chance.

    Yes, you can lose in five mins flat, if I scout a true noob in 1v1, I will win with my rush, and I only play bronze in 1v1, much prefer 2v2.

    They key to enjoying SC2 is the willingness to accept it is very competitive and speed based, and isnt an old fashioned sedate strategy title. It must be ok to just not like it without having to accuse those who do of not actually haveing deep strategy, because most of those who play above bronze very much appreciate just how deep and detailed the complexity is. 

  • IllyssiaIllyssia Member UncommonPosts: 1,507
    Originally posted by CyanSword


    Originally posted by Illyssia


    Originally posted by Sauronas

    If something isn't broken it doesn't need fixing....

     

    Actually Blizzard could rebalance the game to make the online multiplayer more varied. The reality of it is there are only a couple of things that work for each faction, so it's rts by numbers to get a win, anything other is an auto loss against a half descent team.

    Have you played above bronze? Yup, in bronze people rely on set builds because they can't multi-task, get up to silver, gold and beyond and you have to scout, learn and react. The 2v2 I play in (even in silver) we still have over a dozen possible strats (and that is just for our own personal combos and preferences).

    The 'it is just a clickfest' myth just comes from people that have never really given it a chance.

    Yes, you can lose in five mins flat, if I scout a true noob in 1v1, I will win with my rush, and I only play bronze in 1v1, much prefer 2v2.

    They key to enjoying SC2 is the willingness to accept it is very competitive and speed based, and isnt an old fashioned sedate strategy title. It must be ok to just not like it without having to accuse those who do of not actually haveing deep strategy, because most of those who play above bronze very much appreciate just how deep and detailed the complexity is. 

     

    SC2 isn't speed-based though beyond the simple get a handful of units and rush, it's actually a slow-paced rts of the type most popular a decade ago.
  • JonnyBigBossJonnyBigBoss Member UncommonPosts: 702

    I'm LOVING StarCraft II, and it is something new to me. I haven't played an RTS since Dawn of War, and this game has outstanding content.

    I'd give it a 9/10.

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 9,067

    Some of the comments here are beyond mean spirited. I think we should spend money on anything that manages to entertain us and Starcraft 2 has done that in spades for me.  I don't spend my money on designer jeans or handbags and shoes so this is my vice....games. If it manages to entertain me I do not understand why it gets your knickers in a twist.

     

    Why do you all have to belittle our expenditure and make fun of it as if your point of view is the only relevant and correct one. I found this game to be both entertaining and visually pleasing. I have dabbled a little in RTS before but it never captured me. As a direct result of Starcraft 2 enthralling me I have since then purchased and started playing Dawn of War and Command and Conquer games. This game has been an eye opener for me on the wonders of this genre and I personally want to thank Blizzard for making me take an interest in this genre. They just got another player into this genre and those other games I bought have also boosted their sales thanks to starcraft 2.  I am sure I am not the only one that has been brought to this genre by this game.

    Chamber of Chains
Sign In or Register to comment.