Should I buy StarCraft II?

Recommended Videos

Fenring

New member
Sep 5, 2008
2,041
0
0
Instead of buying it, bug one of your PC gamer friends who bought it to give you a 7 hour trial key like I'm doing. In the mean time, you could find a copy of DoW2 to get your strategy chops ready for the strategy chocolate that is SCII.
 

Reveras

New member
Nov 9, 2009
465
0
0
seaotter said:
-first game is 60 bucks, next two expansions are 60 + "premium battle.net features", with blizz hinting at more DLC
-only 5 custom maps can be stored, and you will have to pay for "battle.net premium features" to have more map slots
-(possibly)game modes will be unlockable "dlc" that was already on the disc
-you must have a facebook account connected to your battle.net account to use community features
-campaign is VERY repetitive, even more than DoW2
-single player missions are just bot matches
-cutscenes are poor quality
-map editor is very restrictive, not possible to make detailed maps
-fairly ineffective matchmaking
-terran is currently slightly OP, unlikely to change as this is the seemingly dedicated "beginners race"
-"crushing blows" added
-maps are unbalanced and asymmetrical, so that often the person who gets the lucky spawn point will steamroll
-persistent stats and upgrades that make players who play longer much more powerful, with exclusive units, more damage and less damage taken
-some iconic and popular units removed
U are 100% talking out of ur ass. Seriously the only thing u said that is true is the last sentence, true some units are removed but where's the problem there ? It's Starcraft 2 not Starcraft 1 again. Also there is no such thing as persistent stats, every campaign mission makes you do something else, no two missions are the same, terran seems op because no one has the right strats yet, also if cutscenes are poor quality you might want to not try to play the game on ur PentiumIV, mmm kay ?
 

seaotter

New member
Dec 25, 2008
18
0
0
Reveras said:
seaotter said:
-first game is 60 bucks, next two expansions are 60 + "premium battle.net features", with blizz hinting at more DLC
-only 5 custom maps can be stored, and you will have to pay for "battle.net premium features" to have more map slots
-(possibly)game modes will be unlockable "dlc" that was already on the disc
-you must have a facebook account connected to your battle.net account to use community features
-campaign is VERY repetitive, even more than DoW2
-single player missions are just bot matches
-cutscenes are poor quality
-map editor is very restrictive, not possible to make detailed maps
-fairly ineffective matchmaking
-terran is currently slightly OP, unlikely to change as this is the seemingly dedicated "beginners race"
-"crushing blows" added
-maps are unbalanced and asymmetrical, so that often the person who gets the lucky spawn point will steamroll
-persistent stats and upgrades that make players who play longer much more powerful, with exclusive units, more damage and less damage taken
-some iconic and popular units removed
U are 100% talking out of ur ass. Seriously the only thing u said that is true is the last sentence, true some units are removed but where's the problem there ? It's Starcraft 2 not Starcraft 1 again. Also there is no such thing as persistent stats, every campaign mission makes you do something else, no two missions are the same, terran seems op because no one has the right strats yet, also if cutscenes are poor quality you might want to not try to play the game on ur PentiumIV, mmm kay ?

Well jeez, don't lash out at me.
 

Reveras

New member
Nov 9, 2009
465
0
0
seaotter said:
Well jeez, don't lash out at me.
Soz, but so many people are trying to make Blizz as evil just because of their somewhat stupid recent decisions, I will admit, they made some of the most retarded decisions in the company's history recently. And I was amongst those people who wanted to bash this game and call it shit, till I played it. I got nothing bad to say about it except for the retarded 1 liners in the campaign, besides that, everything is great.
 

TrogzTheTroll

New member
Aug 11, 2009
429
0
0
Fun and reasonably long campaign, good multiplayer, man custom games, acheivements for those who love to do those... Yeah its pretty good. Its also the first game Im trying to 100% on for campaign.

That Lost Viking arcade game is going to be hard for the 500k points achievement
 

TerranReaper

New member
Mar 28, 2009
953
0
0
seaotter said:
-first game is 60 bucks, next two expansions are 60 + "premium battle.net features", with blizz hinting at more DLC
-only 5 custom maps can be stored, and you will have to pay for "battle.net premium features" to have more map slots
-(possibly)game modes will be unlockable "dlc" that was already on the disc
-you must have a facebook account connected to your battle.net account to use community features
-campaign is VERY repetitive, even more than DoW2
-single player missions are just bot matches
-cutscenes are poor quality
-map editor is very restrictive, not possible to make detailed maps
-fairly ineffective matchmaking
-terran is currently slightly OP, unlikely to change as this is the seemingly dedicated "beginners race"
-"crushing blows" added
-maps are unbalanced and asymmetrical, so that often the person who gets the lucky spawn point will steamroll
-persistent stats and upgrades that make players who play longer much more powerful, with exclusive units, more damage and less damage taken
-some iconic and popular units removed
I almost want to think you're trolling with this, because nothing here is actually true. Leave the anti-SC2 comments to the pros please.
 

Kagim

New member
Aug 26, 2009
1,200
0
0
Even if your bad at multiplayer, like me, the campaign is a god damn blast. Honestly holy shit its amazing.

As for online if your bad at the twitch addict RTS go play custom maps. There are always lots of neat and intresting custom maps being made and sent out. Blizzard RTS have a lot of holding power for me though so maybe i am different.

I played WC2 till SC came out, and SC till WC3 came out only stopping playing that one when Dota took over the custom matches.

Also, ignore that Seaotter guy, hes full of shit.
 

TheJwalkR

New member
May 20, 2009
148
0
0
I am in a similar boat (except the console bit). I really enjoy Civilization and I was thinking of trying out SC2. I think it is because I have gotten caught up in the hype but whatever. For the winning thing, when I play Civ4( I know its a tbs but...) I just have fun with the process of the game (building your armies ect.) I don't know if it is a similar experience with SC
 

Jolly Madness

New member
Mar 21, 2008
446
0
0
Starcraft 2 is much more accessible than Starcraft 1, and you don't need to pay for the online bit (like Halo: Reach), the campaign is epic and even more enjoyable if you enjoy lore. It's VERY easy to play with friends (and make new ones thanks to the 2v2, 3v3, 4v4 and FFA modes) despite the lack of LAN-functionality.
You don't have to buy anything other than the first game, though you'll miss out on the two other campaigns.
I've been playing Starcraft 2 since beta and I'd absolutely recommend it.

Oh, and the league system'll give you wins since you'll be paired up with people of your own skill level.
 

Phoenixlight

New member
Aug 24, 2008
1,169
0
0
I wouldn't bother as you don't seem to be very interested in the actual game itself just the hype that's been created for it.
 

Alfador_VII

New member
Nov 2, 2009
1,326
0
0
tsb247 said:
I've never really been a Starcraft fan either. I would wait and get it when the price drops and when they release a fix for the GPU melting bug.
They did, or at least a temporary fix, This Escapist news story details the problem and a very simple config file edit to work around it [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102465-Blizzard-Offers-Fix-for-StarCraft-Computer-Melting-Bug]
 

Ertol

New member
Jul 8, 2010
327
0
0
If you like RTS games, then get it. I haven't played it, but from what I hear it's probably the best RTS seen in a long long time, if not the best one ever. But if you don't like RTS's nothing is going to fix that. You might want to try playing it at a friends house, or waiting for the price to go down. I have heard that multiplayer is a little bit more forgiving then the 5 minute matches I used to see in Starcraft.
 

Zarthek

New member
Apr 12, 2009
533
0
0
I'd go with Starcraft 2... even if you're bad at the melee games there's... heck I don't even know how many custom games to be played...
 

Helbrecht

New member
Jul 30, 2010
16
0
0
The game itself is good, BUT, personally I don't really like some things (as in DoW II and C&C 4), for example the rock-paper-scissors system, and that it requires much micro (so I'll wait for Grid Hotkeys to be released for it) to win. The missions are different each time, you won't ever get bored, story is good as always; almost classical RTS. Good addition to aforementioned C&C 4 and DoW II (although the gameplay resembles C&C 3 a LOT more now).
 

Rack

New member
Jan 18, 2008
1,379
0
0
If you play online expect savage beatings. Expect to be killed in the first 3 minutes every game and have no idea what the hell happened. If you're short on money and haven't already it might make more sense to get Company of Heroes. I don't know what the online is like but it's probably hard to get a game and that game will be even more savagely brutal than SC2. The campaign will be much shorter but you should be able to get a copy of the gold edition really cheap, which will amount to at least as much content.

If you want to play online then expect to put in some serious work. You'll definitely get your moneys worth in terms of hours played as you'll need to put in hundreds of hours practise, reading guides and watching videos. If you want some help on strategy I recommend looking up "I suck at starcraft 2." This is a really great strategy series and on some level it's almost worth getting the game so it will make sense. There's bound to be better beginners guides but this one is very interesting and fun to watch.