I don't see ANY reason to not like SC2 if you want a competitive RTS game. The game is the most balanced RTS out there and it has the best matchmaking system and league support. What other RTS is so highly competitive??
The answer to all of that is the original Starcraft. Which, by the way, still has considerably more active players worldwide than SC2. It's also considered to be way more balanced than SC2 by the players at the top of competitive play.
Bingo , come on sc2 was and is a average rts. Its custom maps are wrose than sc1. Its really not that fun, added nothign from sc1, had worse lobby system then sc1, had worse custom maps than sc1, no reconnect feature in, its weak. If you like it great, but any claims of its greatness ride along the same reason aion had claims of greatness that simply do not exists .... hype.
And people who play competitive games don't want variety. Variety is good as long as it doesn't come at the expense of balance. I mean I have played so many RTS games where you have a gazillion units yet you use only 2 of them -_- SC2 is both macro and micro intensive, requires good knowledge of the game and a solid strategy.
And yet, the original Starcraft had variety and is still the best and most popular competitive RTS ever.
SC2 is a great game so WoW is not the last great game from Blizzard. Looking at their track record they have not made a single bad game in the DIablo, Warcraft or Starcraft series.
SC2 is also the ONLY Blizzard game since WoW, and the vast majority of players who've played both SC and SC2 seem to prefer the original. The one made over 10 years ago. The one that has 2D graphics, doesn't support wide-screen, heck doesn't support any high resolutions at all. But apparently, despite all these shortcomings, the gameplay itself is so superior to make up for the rest. SC2 is a solid game, but calling it "great" is probably a stretch.
Seconded, lets be honest sc2 sold a ton becuase it was sc2 and made by blizzard, as an rts is lacking, as the predicessor for sc, following wc3, the best custom game rts'es made; its very weak.
Sure, the OP may not have the greatest of bases for his position that Blizzard won't make any more great games, but taking SC2 as the only counter-argument makes for an equally shaky position.
Only time (along with a few more Blizzard releases) will tell.
Originally posted by Krashner
Originally posted by troublmaker
Anyway, Blizzard will continue to make great games. Yes, World of Warcraft is a GREAT game. If you want evidence of that look at the number of purchases of expansions (ever so increasing every expansion), compare their in-game suppot to any other MMO, compare the number of updates to any other MMO or a more finished product.
By that logic, Farmville is the greatest game ever made.
You can't compare a free product to a paid one.
Sure you can, if they're both for-profit. And Farmville has been very profitable.
Having said all of this, i do not feel that sc2 was a great game, mainly because its not. However, blizzard very well make great games in the future , their bank alone allows for this.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
What? Starcraft 2 came last year and it has brung new spirit to e-sports and the money is there. Everyone is playing it, everyone has it, everyone is looking at it. Starcraft 2 gave new fire to e-sports and you say WoW was the last great game of Blizzard? Thats total bullshit, fuck I hate these forums, people knows nothing around here.
All of my 20 gaming friends bought sc2, none of the played it past 4 months....
Words are good but often not reality. Conversly we played sc1 for years , d2 for years, wow for years.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
Um... Diablo 3 looks epic to me. Just about every gamer I know is waiting with bated breath to play D3.
Now will D3 generate WoW revenue? No, but that's because WoW will likely have just about every revenue record for a PC game for the next 5-10 years (if not longer).
Oberon
I a bit tentitive about d3, i like the Ds , but the group limit size makes me a bit sad. But i bet it will be fun.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
Are you braindead? Starcraft 2 was bad? Starcraft 2 will rank as one of the top 5 RTS games for the decade. Everyone who reviewed the game gave it either a 4/5 or a 9/10 which is usually as high as sites will rate games. It's possible you just don't like the RTS genre, that's fine. But Starcraft 2 from start to finish and online play was and is amazing compared to ANY OTHER RTS OUT THERE.
If SC2 is a bad game you might either be deluded (with hate for Blizzard) or have an insanely high standard of games that no game can be good.
Anyway, Blizzard will continue to make great games. Yes, World of Warcraft is a GREAT game. If you want evidence of that look at the number of purchases of expansions (ever so increasing every expansion), compare their in-game suppot to any other MMO, compare the number of updates to any other MMO or a more finished product.
Blizzard will continue to make great products. Starcraft 2 has two expansions due out. Diablo 3 is coming out. Diablo 1 and 2 was developed by Blizzard North (nolonger with Blizzard and has since bankrupted). Diablo 3 will be coming out by Blizzard-Activision and will be stellar.
Titan will 100% be a success as long as it is opened up after World of Warcraft stops doing updates.
Blizzard isn't a one-trick pony. Long before WoW came along they had tones of games, Lost Vikings, RocknRoll Racing, Blackthorne, Warcraft 1-3, Starcraft (and Brood Wars), and Diablo 1-2. None of them have been as successful as World of Warcraft is but that shouldn't be a hit against their development.
The OP is more referring to past products. SC2 compared to SC1 is medicore. The differences is there if you can weed out the fluff and the fancy graphics. Also of course it's gonna be rated the top RTS because A. The Blizzard name and the SC fanbase, B. There have been no real good RTSs for a long time, C. Hype level of SC2 was massive compared to any other RTS, and D. If you think major reviews weren't biased then think again as Blizzard is a gaming giant and they bridded good reviews in some form or fashion.
SC2 was well done but definately a good RTS, but compared to past products of the franchise it is a bid of a downgrade.
I don't see ANY reason to not like SC2 if you want a competitive RTS game. The game is the most balanced RTS out there and it has the best matchmaking system and league support. What other RTS is so highly competitive??
The answer to all of that is the original Starcraft. Which, by the way, still has considerably more active players worldwide than SC2. It's also considered to be way more balanced than SC2 by the players at the top of competitive play.
I beg to differ. SC2 is much more active and is one of the most played RTS at the moment. Yes, BW is considered to a bit more balanced but BW is an expansion which had about 16 patches. SC2 is vastly superior to the original SC. SC2 offers the same amount of units and buildings as SC+BW. Imagine what it will look like with another 2 xpacs.
I follow pro SC games and I can tell you that the vast majority of pro players swicthed to SC2 a long time ago. You can even see a lot of Warcraft 3 pro players who switched to SC2. Also there are tons of tournaments for SC2 so I fail to see how SC1 is even remotely as popular as SC2.
And people who play competitive games don't want variety. Variety is good as long as it doesn't come at the expense of balance. I mean I have played so many RTS games where you have a gazillion units yet you use only 2 of them -_- SC2 is both macro and micro intensive, requires good knowledge of the game and a solid strategy.
And yet, the original Starcraft had variety and is still the best and most popular competitive RTS ever.
SC2 is the most popular competitive RTS now.
SC2 is a great game so WoW is not the last great game from Blizzard. Looking at their track record they have not made a single bad game in the DIablo, Warcraft or Starcraft series.
SC2 is also the ONLY Blizzard game since WoW, and the vast majority of players who've played both SC and SC2 seem to prefer the original. The one made over 10 years ago. The one that has 2D graphics, doesn't support wide-screen, heck doesn't support any high resolutions at all. But apparently, despite all these shortcomings, the gameplay itself is so superior to make up for the rest. SC2 is a solid game, but calling it "great" is probably a stretch.
I am a huge SC1 fan but I prefer SC2 and it seems that most people do prefer SC2 to SC1.
Sure, the OP may not have the greatest of bases for his position that Blizzard won't make any more great games, but taking SC2 as the only counter-argument makes for an equally shaky position.
Only time (along with a few more Blizzard releases) will tell.
Originally posted by Krashner
Originally posted by troublmaker
Anyway, Blizzard will continue to make great games. Yes, World of Warcraft is a GREAT game. If you want evidence of that look at the number of purchases of expansions (ever so increasing every expansion), compare their in-game suppot to any other MMO, compare the number of updates to any other MMO or a more finished product.
By that logic, Farmville is the greatest game ever made.
You can't compare a free product to a paid one.
Sure you can, if they're both for-profit. And Farmville has been very profitable.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Well, I kind of thought Starcraft 2 was the best RTS I ever played, singleplayer and multiplayer. Every time I see someone claiming otherwise it's:
a)they like Dawn of War and Company of Heroes mode of play more so it's understandable
b)they are quoting some strawman arguments made long before Starcraft 2 was even out and almost never have anything to do with actual gameplay
But hey, I'm no pro, not even a pretend one, I can't claim any of my opinions as fact, I just like to play fun games.
As for Titan and Diablo 3, I have yet to play a Blizzard game that has anything but stellar mechanics, by it's own right and even doubly so compared to competition. Nothing suggests that games coming in the future from Blizzard will be any different.
Well, I kind of thought Starcraft 2 was the best RTS I ever played, singleplayer and multiplayer. Every time I see someone claiming otherwise it's:
a)they like Dawn of War and Company of Heroes mode of play more so it's understandable
b)they are quoting some strawman arguments made long before Starcraft was even out and almost never have anything to do with actual gameplay
Most reviews agree with you, one with 91% aggregate rating and another calling it "Starcraft 2.0 -- in all the best ways".
Sometimes a company does things right, and most companies will take their things done right and make changes merely for the sake of profit, getting messier and nastier but making more money. Blizzard, in unusual for for them, realized they got Starcraft right and #2 was an acknowledgement of that.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
blizzard is simply cunning, they dont make really good games.... They just make games that will make money from them using their cunning design and marketing
sc2 sold a lot due to marketing and its reputation not due to its gameplay....
SC2 is great game........ if you are 15 years old noob. For us older gamers who grow up on Warcraft 2 and Starcraft BW SC2 is prettly lame and crappy game. Same thing will happen with D3 i am sure, it will be solid game but crap compared to D1 and 2.
SC2 is great game........ if you are 15 years old noob. For us older gamers who grow up on Warcraft 2 and Starcraft BW SC2 is prettly lame and crappy game. Same thing will happen with D3 i am sure, it will be solid game but crap compared to D1 and 2.
I was there foraging oil on top of wood and gold in WC2...and using M.A.D. trucks in red alert. I still think Starcraft 2 is a great game. I dont know how you think you can speak for anyone other than yourself and be taken seriously.
WEll ill state it agian, all of my gamer friends and myself no longer play SC2. There a reason for this, its custom maps are trash ... its amazing map creater/edit was worse than the orginal . The game itself offers no more than Sc1 yet some how its a better game... Not to mention it was released how many years after sc1? Oh and no reconnect... that fact itself makes sc2 a failure (a top of the line dev. doesn't include reconnect function in this day and age...)
Lets expand it any player of mutliplayer games who are faster than a 7 year old at clicking know you can click through options in the lobby so fast that it breask and takes 2-10 mins to fix or a foced logout. I could keep going , patchign issues, loading issues, etc.
Sc2 is not at the pinical of anything, most multiplayer fps'es offer more in the area of fuctionality and custom maps than the game that should ahve been king of player generated content.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
SC2 is great game........ if you are 15 years old noob. For us older gamers who grow up on Warcraft 2 and Starcraft BW SC2 is prettly lame and crappy game. Same thing will happen with D3 i am sure, it will be solid game but crap compared to D1 and 2.
I was there foraging oil on top of wood and gold in WC2...and using M.A.D. trucks in red alert. I still think Starcraft 2 is a great game. I dont know how you think you can speak for anyone other than yourself and be taken seriously.
WEll ill state it agian, all of my gamer friends and myself no longer play SC2. There a reason for this, its custom maps are trash ... its amazing map creater/edit was worse than the orginal . The game itself offers no more than Sc1 yet some how its a better game... Not to mention it was released how many years after sc1? Oh and no reconnect... that fact itself makes sc2 a failure (a top of the line dev. doesn't include reconnect function in this day and age...)
Do you mean to tell me that you bought SC2 for the custom maps? Well, I can't comment on this because I don't play custom maps. But the whole appeal of SC was the competitive side of the game not some custom games. WC3 did a pretty good job at this.
The new editor is much more powerful than either WC3 or SC's editor so you might want to get your facts straight okay?
The most common complain was about the whole publishing rights thingie. But they fixed that some time ago and you also have chat channels etc.
From my 500-1000 hours (not sure how many ) I think I've spent about 10 hours playing custom games. It's all about league games mannn!!!!
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
WoW... got worse with Cataclysm. For the fanboys that shoot down anything that is remotely negative about WoW.... I used to be one of you. I have tried 2-3 times to come back to WoW and find something that I like about Cataclysm. No joy. Sick of same old treadmill wrapped in a new package.
SC2... I don't see much difference between original and the sequel. I'm sorry. I don't see the big draw to SC as 'an E-sport'. And yeah, I used to play SC, AoE, EE, etc.,.. Nothing about SC2 really makes me think 'damn, if I don't play this game... then I am missing out on something 'epic' in the gaming world'.
It's not like any other games are necessarily kicking their teeth in, tbh. But these games aren't 'standouts', not to the degree that they used to be.
Granted. I don't give a rip about Battlenet and I don't care about E-Sports.
Do these games move a lot of units? Yes.
Does that = quality? Not necessarily.
and everyone spits out units sold: But... but... 'if they moved that many units, then the games must be amazing.. right?'
Exec's and stock holders are freaking out and loving life. So, the company isn't going anywhere from a business perspective. But their games aren't going in the right direction, either. WoW had how many fewer sub's this quarter?
So, Diablo III is supposed to be the next big hit. I have high hopes for the game. But it should be head and shoulders above Diablo 1 and 2 in terms of quality, innovation, and content. From a single player perspective... this game had better absolutely destroy the previous 2 iterations.
And... is Diablo III going to suffer as they try to wedge in some E-Sportiness to it as well? As a player, if you grow to love a class in terms of your single player experience, never set foot in the 'pvp' portion offered, yet PvP gets your favorite class changed to the point where you no longer enjoy playing it... what then? "Play another class". Wrong answer.
Again, Diablo III better be the major monster hit they expect.... or they will be placing that much more pressure on Titan. The game that will allow you to do virtually anything you wish, playstyle/preference-wise.
SC2 is bad? LOL. Surely a few people here don't like it.
It has a score of 93 in metacritic (same score as WOW). It is becoming the national sports of S Korea.
Actully if you had a clue what you are talking about you would know that S Korea is still all about SC:BW. Thats were all big money is, also almost all best players still play BW cuz they are under contract by Kespa. Possible skill celling is way to low currently is SC2,hope they will add some interesting units in HOTS cuz game is full of generic,boring and counter a- move units like Roach, Immortal,Maurader, Colossus, Thor, .... These units are complete crap compared to what can player do with Lurkers, Vultures, Reaver with Shuttle and so many more
sry bud wow isn't a great game unless you're going by number size.
Coincidently that is the only thing we can go by.
No, actually you can go by your own opinion rather than jumping on the band-wagon. Not saying that's what you did, if you actually like the game more power to you, but simply declaring something good just because everyone's into it is not a valid argument. For instance, Lady Gaga and the shoes not even she can walk in without help.
Originally posted by osc8r
For me, WC3 was blizzard's last great game.
This.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
SC2 did not fail. Maybe you didn't like it, but by all means...
Now I do feel like Blizzard is getting much greedier lately with less content being released outside of expansion packs, cash shops for vanity items and soon for in game features... which is why this is the best time for any competing game studio to try and steal subscriptions off World of Warcraft.
SC2 did not fail. Maybe you didn't like it, but by all means...
Now I do feel like Blizzard is getting much greedier lately with less content being released outside of expansion packs, cash shops for vanity items and soon for in game features... which is why this is the best time for any competing game studio to try and steal subscriptions off World of Warcraft.
No No, if I don't like a game, it has failed. Or if every single person I know didn't like it, it has failed.
The end. Sales don't matter, nor does that there are 1 million players on B.Net playing sc2 daily.
And while many of my friends are not so impressed with D3 in any way, and personally, I most likely won't get it, I'm sure it will do fine. I'm sure it will have big sales and do great. Good for it. If you will enjoy it, do so.
SC2 did not fail. Maybe you didn't like it, but by all means...
Now I do feel like Blizzard is getting much greedier lately with less content being released outside of expansion packs, cash shops for vanity items and soon for in game features... which is why this is the best time for any competing game studio to try and steal subscriptions off World of Warcraft.
No No, if I don't like a game, it has failed. Or if every single person I know didn't like it, it has failed.
The end. Sales don't matter, nor does that there are 1 million players on B.Net playing sc2 daily.
And while many of my friends are not so impressed with D3 in any way, and personally, I most likely won't get it, I'm sure it will do fine. I'm sure it will have big sales and do great. Good for it. If you will enjoy it, do so.
Quite the acute perception. Do you apply these same principles to say, food? If you don't like a food, it's gross. If you don't like a genre of music, they suck?
Just because something doesn't fit into your mold doesn't make it bad, gross, sucky, a failure, etc.
I agree that Blizzard games are... well, they are high quality. But SC2 for example was just a remake, offering nothing new. Diablo 2? I didn't follow it that closely, but it just seems to be a more polished version of what has been there for a long time as well.
I mean sure, that is a concept to make games. Take something that exists, polish it, and sell it. It results in good games, but not in really new experiences or something like that.
Comments
Having said all of this, i do not feel that sc2 was a great game, mainly because its not. However, blizzard very well make great games in the future , their bank alone allows for this.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
All of my 20 gaming friends bought sc2, none of the played it past 4 months....
Words are good but often not reality. Conversly we played sc1 for years , d2 for years, wow for years.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I a bit tentitive about d3, i like the Ds , but the group limit size makes me a bit sad. But i bet it will be fun.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
The OP is more referring to past products. SC2 compared to SC1 is medicore. The differences is there if you can weed out the fluff and the fancy graphics. Also of course it's gonna be rated the top RTS because A. The Blizzard name and the SC fanbase, B. There have been no real good RTSs for a long time, C. Hype level of SC2 was massive compared to any other RTS, and D. If you think major reviews weren't biased then think again as Blizzard is a gaming giant and they bridded good reviews in some form or fashion.
SC2 was well done but definately a good RTS, but compared to past products of the franchise it is a bid of a downgrade.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Well, I kind of thought Starcraft 2 was the best RTS I ever played, singleplayer and multiplayer. Every time I see someone claiming otherwise it's:
a)they like Dawn of War and Company of Heroes mode of play more so it's understandable
b)they are quoting some strawman arguments made long before Starcraft 2 was even out and almost never have anything to do with actual gameplay
But hey, I'm no pro, not even a pretend one, I can't claim any of my opinions as fact, I just like to play fun games.
As for Titan and Diablo 3, I have yet to play a Blizzard game that has anything but stellar mechanics, by it's own right and even doubly so compared to competition. Nothing suggests that games coming in the future from Blizzard will be any different.
Most reviews agree with you, one with 91% aggregate rating and another calling it "Starcraft 2.0 -- in all the best ways".
Sometimes a company does things right, and most companies will take their things done right and make changes merely for the sake of profit, getting messier and nastier but making more money. Blizzard, in unusual for for them, realized they got Starcraft right and #2 was an acknowledgement of that.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
Starcraft 2 was pretty good, exept for the lame campaign story but players don't play an RTS for the story.
Anyway, I'm not sure on what basis the OP thinks that WoW will be Blizzards last great game, intuition?
blizzard is simply cunning, they dont make really good games.... They just make games that will make money from them using their cunning design and marketing
sc2 sold a lot due to marketing and its reputation not due to its gameplay....
SC2 is great game........ if you are 15 years old noob. For us older gamers who grow up on Warcraft 2 and Starcraft BW SC2 is prettly lame and crappy game. Same thing will happen with D3 i am sure, it will be solid game but crap compared to D1 and 2.
WEll ill state it agian, all of my gamer friends and myself no longer play SC2. There a reason for this, its custom maps are trash ... its amazing map creater/edit was worse than the orginal . The game itself offers no more than Sc1 yet some how its a better game... Not to mention it was released how many years after sc1? Oh and no reconnect... that fact itself makes sc2 a failure (a top of the line dev. doesn't include reconnect function in this day and age...)
Lets expand it any player of mutliplayer games who are faster than a 7 year old at clicking know you can click through options in the lobby so fast that it breask and takes 2-10 mins to fix or a foced logout. I could keep going , patchign issues, loading issues, etc.
Sc2 is not at the pinical of anything, most multiplayer fps'es offer more in the area of fuctionality and custom maps than the game that should ahve been king of player generated content.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
Do you mean to tell me that you bought SC2 for the custom maps? Well, I can't comment on this because I don't play custom maps. But the whole appeal of SC was the competitive side of the game not some custom games. WC3 did a pretty good job at this.
The new editor is much more powerful than either WC3 or SC's editor so you might want to get your facts straight okay?
The most common complain was about the whole publishing rights thingie. But they fixed that some time ago and you also have chat channels etc.
From my 500-1000 hours (not sure how many
) I think I've spent about 10 hours playing custom games. It's all about league games mannn!!!!
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
I agree with the OP.
WoW... got worse with Cataclysm. For the fanboys that shoot down anything that is remotely negative about WoW.... I used to be one of you. I have tried 2-3 times to come back to WoW and find something that I like about Cataclysm. No joy. Sick of same old treadmill wrapped in a new package.
SC2... I don't see much difference between original and the sequel. I'm sorry. I don't see the big draw to SC as 'an E-sport'. And yeah, I used to play SC, AoE, EE, etc.,.. Nothing about SC2 really makes me think 'damn, if I don't play this game... then I am missing out on something 'epic' in the gaming world'.
It's not like any other games are necessarily kicking their teeth in, tbh. But these games aren't 'standouts', not to the degree that they used to be.
Granted. I don't give a rip about Battlenet and I don't care about E-Sports.
Do these games move a lot of units? Yes.
Does that = quality? Not necessarily.
and everyone spits out units sold: But... but... 'if they moved that many units, then the games must be amazing.. right?'
Exec's and stock holders are freaking out and loving life. So, the company isn't going anywhere from a business perspective. But their games aren't going in the right direction, either. WoW had how many fewer sub's this quarter?
So, Diablo III is supposed to be the next big hit. I have high hopes for the game. But it should be head and shoulders above Diablo 1 and 2 in terms of quality, innovation, and content. From a single player perspective... this game had better absolutely destroy the previous 2 iterations.
And... is Diablo III going to suffer as they try to wedge in some E-Sportiness to it as well? As a player, if you grow to love a class in terms of your single player experience, never set foot in the 'pvp' portion offered, yet PvP gets your favorite class changed to the point where you no longer enjoy playing it... what then? "Play another class". Wrong answer.
Again, Diablo III better be the major monster hit they expect.... or they will be placing that much more pressure on Titan. The game that will allow you to do virtually anything you wish, playstyle/preference-wise.
Diablo 3
SC2 is bad? LOL. Surely a few people here don't like it.
It has a score of 93 in metacritic (same score as WOW). It is becoming the national sports of S Korea.
Actully if you had a clue what you are talking about you would know that S Korea is still all about SC:BW. Thats were all big money is, also almost all best players still play BW cuz they are under contract by Kespa. Possible skill celling is way to low currently is SC2,hope they will add some interesting units in HOTS cuz game is full of generic,boring and counter a- move units like Roach, Immortal,Maurader, Colossus, Thor, .... These units are complete crap compared to what can player do with Lurkers, Vultures, Reaver with Shuttle and so many more
Agreed.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Coincidently that is the only thing we can go by.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Metallica8589/videos?view=0
For me, WC3 was blizzard's last great game.
Starcraft 2? Diablo 3?
If you're talking about MMO's, maybe. I'm sure Titan will grab quite a few though.
He who keeps his cool best wins.
This.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
SC2 did not fail. Maybe you didn't like it, but by all means...
Now I do feel like Blizzard is getting much greedier lately with less content being released outside of expansion packs, cash shops for vanity items and soon for in game features... which is why this is the best time for any competing game studio to try and steal subscriptions off World of Warcraft.
No No, if I don't like a game, it has failed. Or if every single person I know didn't like it, it has failed.
The end. Sales don't matter, nor does that there are 1 million players on B.Net playing sc2 daily.
And while many of my friends are not so impressed with D3 in any way, and personally, I most likely won't get it, I'm sure it will do fine. I'm sure it will have big sales and do great. Good for it. If you will enjoy it, do so.
Quite the acute perception. Do you apply these same principles to say, food? If you don't like a food, it's gross. If you don't like a genre of music, they suck?
Just because something doesn't fit into your mold doesn't make it bad, gross, sucky, a failure, etc.
He who keeps his cool best wins.
I agree that Blizzard games are... well, they are high quality. But SC2 for example was just a remake, offering nothing new. Diablo 2? I didn't follow it that closely, but it just seems to be a more polished version of what has been there for a long time as well.
I mean sure, that is a concept to make games. Take something that exists, polish it, and sell it. It results in good games, but not in really new experiences or something like that.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)