Starcraft 2: Crap....you will buy it anways.

[slipknot4]

Protoss is ridiciously easy to pick up as beginner, but even in the beginner leagues, they're beatable once you understand the strengths and weaknesses of the faction you're playing as and how the Protoss works.

Well, I picked up Protoss in SC II and they're fun as hell. I made up a tactic of my own and since then things have just ended well. I even managed to total 2 large bases with 5 void rays.

 

[Acaroid]

After participating in the Beta, comparing the old with the new, and checking out the new battle.net 2.0, a thought came to me.

This new Starcraft isn't made for me. It is made for the professionals, the ones who perfected build orders, who do APM in the 70 and 80s, who have timed out builds for the race they play.

Not that I hate it. I think it is a fine game and will probably do better than the original just because its Starcraft.

And therein lies the problem.
Starcraft 2 and with it battlenet 2.0 could both be absolutely terrible, and a bunch of people would still go after it. Which brings me to the darkest thought in all of this.

They probably don't care if it sucks. They don't care if you can't have LAN, don't care if you are not a professional and can't really do online, and don't care that they have effectively isolated each nation to its own server, meaning it is next to impossible to play with friends in other countries.

They will get paid for the game by a bunch of people, and that is all that they want.

The discussion here is simple. Do you think that possibly the popularity of Starcraft has possibly already ruined the sequals? And what do you think of the lack of LAN, the compartmentalization of servers, and hell, while we are at it, the game in general?

I'm curious to see what you people think. Perhaps I'm just being a pessimist about the whole deal, but I do wonder what other people think of this.

It will be like any popular game, lets say Call of duty for example.
My opinion was that cod4 was a lot better than MW2, but yet MW2 being a less superior game still sold a damn lot. The multi-player was broken and more or less nerfed any chance of competitive play. It still sold and probably made someone a large bit of $$$

Or even better look at the elder scrolls series. No.2 daggerfall was hands down the better of the 4, but everyone goes on about Oblivion or Morrowind. Really, what are you going to do?

movies are the same, the first one is good, so they make a sequel, you know it isn't going to be as good but you go see it anyway. If one game is popular, the sequel will probably sell, even though it may not be better, it seems all you need to do is to give it better graphics and add more "stuff" into it.

It depends on what you mean by ruined? I can't think of any game that hasn't become better because of being popular. Yeah if it gets popular amongst the wrong crowd I guess, but generally popularity helps a game stay alive, keep development, patches, changes, mods, improvements. If the original starcraft wasn't so popular do you think it would even have a sequel? People in the end don't care about if SC2 is going to be good, because they will buy it, people who never knew the original will think it is the best thing ever, wont care about how the servers are, or the LAN etc etc etc

This is the world we live in, people just want new things and if you can attach a name to it then it will sell. Companies know this, will exploit it and life goes on. They will ruin games, try and make them more popular or fitting to what is in at the time, it is life.

 

[UnusualStranger]

I look forward to it. Oughta be fun! The apocalypse that is, not Starcraft 2. That's stupid.

Sorry man! Just trying to have a discussion about Starcraft 2 really. I just want people to look at it. It isn't perfect. No game ever will be.
Well....have fun getting ready for that, regardless!

Not just some guy, a Blizzard employee. It's been confirmed by Mr. Dustin B himself as well.

Again, its a company promising things. Just by words though. Just because the guy is an employee doesn't mean it will make it, or work properly. But I do hope that you are right.

I mean playing through the single-player campaign will give you some sense of what buildings produce which units, and give you the basics of macro/micro. The main focus there will still obviously be the story and unique gameplay elements.

Beta has at most between ten and twenty thousand players. That's an incredibly small fraction of the people that will be playing after release (based on the success of Warcraft 3 and Starcraft, approximately seven million plus). I can guarantee that just about everybody in the beta will end up in either the platinum or diamond league, leaving the other three leagues to people of varying skill. From very low skill/next to zero experience (bronze), to a reasonable amount of skill as they improve (silver/gold).

Of course. I don't have full numbers on the Beta, so I don't know where your figure comes from. But hey, since I can't predict the Singleplayer, we will just have to see how it goes!

It's still an opinion. I haven't heard anyone say it's the greatest game of all time personally, but I have heard people exclaim that it should be game of the year. That's their opinion, and your opinion is that it isn't that good.

Well, I was more shooting for an opinion that the game is just settling for "good". If there is one thing I understand, its a game being just good. Make it GREAT, I say. But perhaps my expectations are a bit unrealistic.

Of course I'm familiar with those communities, and we've had a lot of great maps come out of them. But why not add some new ideas to the mix instead of simply sticking with traditional tower defense, DoTA, Risk, and etc? The only way to do that is add more map makers who might not have been involved otherwise. And to do that you need to involve money.

I don't think you understand how the map marketplace works. Map makers can either publish their map to be available to everyone, for free, or if they consider their map to truly be something special with premium content (RPGs complete with story, classes, etc), they can put it up for purchase on the map marketplace. Nobody is stealing anything.

I think what you're referring to is the part of Blizzard's ToS that states they have the right to any and all content created using their campaign editor. For the most part that's just legalese put in there to protect the company in case of certain circumstances, and it was part of the Starcraft/Warcraft 3 ToS's as well. Yet you didn't see them stealing DoTA and calling it their own. They created their own variations of certain maps, though, such as the Blizzard Tower Defense map, and that's fine. Just adds more diversity to the custom map pool.

Again, it's all a work in progress, and there will undoubtedly be changes/tweaks to every part of the game, including campaign editor specifics as time goes on. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a LOT of differences between the current beta version and release, though. After all, MANY features are locked for beta.

I disagree with your first point. Money is not what will bring creativity. Like I said, the people who brought us all those great games did so for free, so simply attaching a price to it brings in people who are just in it for the money, not the fun like it is supposed to be intended.

With the ToS part, yes, I am kind of looking at that.....because they might be charging for maps. Meaning that they could take all those maps you listed above, and make them themselves, and charge for them. And no one could do anything. My main OP gripe is that they are much more concerned with money now.

But you are right. I need to remind myself it is a beta, and that things may be different. I just worry because I loved the first, and all this new stuff can bring a lot of failure with it.

 

[UnusualStranger]

It will be like any popular game, lets say Call of duty for example.
My opinion was that cod4 was a lot better than MW2, but yet MW2 being a less superior game still sold a damn lot. The multi-player was broken and more or less nerfed any chance of competitive play. It still sold and probably made someone a large bit of $$$

Or even better look at the elder scrolls series. No.2 daggerfall was hands down the better of the 4, but everyone goes on about Oblivion or Morrowind. Really, what are you going to do?

People in the end don't care about if SC2 is going to be good, because they will buy it, people who never knew the original will think it is the best thing ever, wont care about how the servers are, or the LAN etc etc etc

You bring up the exact point that I have in the title.

We let them get away with making games that are not as good as their originals. Actually, we reward them. We should not settle with being good, just because the previous game was great. The same with they things they are taking away. What is their full reasoning behind it? Pirates? If your first concern is pirates, you are doing things wrong, in my opinion.

And also like I said in the title. They could absolutely slaughter this game, in singleplayer or what have you, but people would still buy it in droves because of popularity, and hold it high because "ITS BLIZZARD!". I find it foolish to do that.

 

[UnusualStranger]

It's really foolish to think you can jump into starcraft at this point and have any realistic chance of lasting an entire minute in a game. Most SC players have 10 years experience under their belts. They know the process like clockwork. You're just not going to catch up with those people, ever.

Blizzard makes SCII for pros, because only pros play it.

Starcraft 2 is just as balanced as the original. Battle.net 2.0 may be rather shitty, but the actual game itself is phenomenal.

And if you think it was exclusively made for the competitive people, well, you're mistaken.

I just wanted to put you two next to each other, just to see if this thread would explode in the process.

But yeah. Thats about what changed. Avarage player that doesn't bother with competitive multiplayer will have hard time using those properly. But hey, it is the reason why multiplayer is competitive.

RTSes that build their community around multiplayer are similar to shooters in that regard. You either are good at it, or you can't hope for much. Was like that in SC1, WC3, DoW, CoH, DoW2 and now SC2. In all those games, if you don't know some game specific laws of gameplay, you will get stomped in first minutes. All those games are based on build orders and transitions between different unit productions.

Most people will buy SC2 because it is SC2. Majority won't ever play competitive multiplayer as was the case with all previous RTSes. They will play singleplayer, they will play co-op AI-stomps with friends, they will play mod maps like DotA, if someone manages to get one past the idiotic Battle.Net 2.0 limitations. That is how 'casuals' play RTSes.

I felt the need to chat with you about this.
When did multiplayer become strictly about Competitiveness? When I think online, I shouldn't think "This is serious business". It is a damned game, and I know I am not going to get paid if I make it to Platinum league. It almost sounds like the people having fun are the griefers in games now, because they are not playing how it is meant to be played. Multiplayer should be available for the common player. I should not buy a game and be unable to play a certain mode longer than 10 minutes because I end up fighting people who are serious and learning about the whole multiplayer thing all the time.

And having DoW2, I can tell you there isn't a build order. Because I've seen insane things people do that work, and its just fun stuff. I liked that multiplayer, because while some people take it seriously, a lot of people just do crazy stuff, and its fun. No can do in Starcraft 2.

 

[Keava]

I felt the need to chat with you about this.
When did multiplayer become strictly about Competitiveness? When I think online, I shouldn't think "This is serious business". It is a damned game, and I know I am not going to get paid if I make it to Platinum league. It almost sounds like the people having fun are the griefers in games now, because they are not playing how it is meant to be played. Multiplayer should be available for the common player. I should not buy a game and be unable to play a certain mode longer than 10 minutes because I end up fighting people who are serious and learning about the whole multiplayer thing all the time.

And having DoW2, I can tell you there isn't a build order. Because I've seen insane things people do that work, and its just fun stuff. I liked that multiplayer, because while some people take it seriously, a lot of people just do crazy stuff, and its fun. No can do in Starcraft 2.

My bad i simplified a little, but i blame the temperature.
When im talking about multiplayer i mostly have Automatch in mind. When someone decided to play in automatch they do enter the competitive part of the gameplay, like it or not. Keep in mind that competitive is not exactly the same as professional. You have custom games for just fooling around, but ladders/ranked games are for those who seek challenge. Thats why different companies worked on all those fancy algorithms for matchmaking, so you don't end up against people way out of your league in most cases.

As for DoW2, it has 'pro' community as well. TrueSkill is shitty in that regard, but there is plenty of people playing mostly for the competitive edge. With build orders i could argue, because there is difference between starting off with either scout unit builds or straight to T1 core unit, or heavy weapon build. How fast will tech up, will go vehicles, quick T3, or focus on T1 blob. The more serious the game gets the more it counts how you start the game. DoW2 is more about micro-tactics, sure, but the general rule of online RTS gameplay stays. You want your win:loose ratio at decent level, you need to know how the game works.

For casual gameplay you have always custom games, granted B.Net2.0 sucks in that regard with no custom names and no way in seeing which game is about what, sorting them according to popularity whatever this means. But as i said, i have plenty complains about B.Net and SC2 in general, they just don't come even near the whole 'getting raeped by proz'.
In SC2 if you won't rather play players that will outmatch you by a great margin. Bronze League doesn't get matched against Silver+, you will always be matched only against people that have skill level near to yours. I really don't see how any company, in any RTS could do anything more to make it more 'casual' friendly, unless you want RTS that doesn't require any skill, but, what's the point then?

 

[UnusualStranger]

My bad i simplified a little, but i blame the temperature.
When im talking about multiplayer i mostly have Automatch in mind. When someone decided to play in automatch they do enter the competitive part of the gameplay, like it or not. Keep in mind that competitive is not exactly the same as professional. You have custom games for just fooling around, but ladders/ranked games are for those who seek challenge. Thats why different companies worked on all those fancy algorithms for matchmaking, so you don't end up against people way out of your league in most cases.

As for DoW2, it has 'pro' community as well. TrueSkill is shitty in that regard, but there is plenty of people playing mostly for the competitive edge. With build orders i could argue, because there is difference between starting off with either scout unit builds or straight to T1 core unit, or heavy weapon build. How fast will tech up, will go vehicles, quick T3, or focus on T1 blob. The more serious the game gets the more it counts how you start the game. DoW2 is more about micro-tactics, sure, but the general rule of online RTS gameplay stays. You want your win:loose ratio at decent level, you need to know how the game works.

For casual gameplay you have always custom games, granted B.Net2.0 sucks in that regard with no custom names and no way in seeing which game is about what, sorting them according to popularity whatever this means. But as i said, i have plenty complains about B.Net and SC2 in general, they just don't come even near the whole 'getting raeped by proz'.
In SC2 if you won't rather play players that will outmatch you by a great margin. Bronze League doesn't get matched against Silver+, you will always be matched only against people that have skill level near to yours. I really don't see how any company, in any RTS could do anything more to make it more 'casual' friendly, unless you want RTS that doesn't require any skill, but, what's the point then?

Yeah, its hot outside. Lets blame that.

Yeah, but at the moment, the matchmaking system is very custom game unfriendly. While it is said that this is a Bnet 2 issue, BNET 2 is being released with Starcraft 2. They have to be judged together, because the have to come together.

While the DoW2 match thing isn't all that great, I just find it to be much friendlier than Starcraft 2. You can make what you wish, and still possibly win. It isn't pro, but it feels fun while its still competitive. Some general understanding is needed for any game in general though. You can't play Mario if you want to explore every pit. That isn't how Mario works!

But I understand not wanting to push away people who are good at a game. But with the popularity of this game, I worry that its main focus to be the pros. And only looking at those who are in it for the competitive play is not how the online parts of starcraft and Warcraft lived. They lived on custom content made by the users for fun, which the matchmaking system doesn't play nice with.

But hey, just a beta, so I am looking at it a little harshly. Maybe things will change. It is a hell of a lot of change, but maybe it will work....
Or it will be delayed >

 

[IamQ]

Optimist eh?

I did not say it sucks. I am trying to make you read. READ DAMMIT! I SAID IT WAS A FINE GAME!

What I was getting at is that the game might not be as good as it could be because people will simply pick it up because it is Starcraft 2, and so damned popular.

And hoping that someone will figure out LAN is not how it is supposed to be. If LAN is still going to be put in the game by other means, shouldn't it be put in by the game creators?

Though I do know being placed in a lower league. I like that. Its a good change, especially if you want to rise through the ranks and all that stuff.

Especially since they fixed the points system where everyone started at 1000 I think it was? Meaning you would HAVE to get slaughtered by experienced players before finally getting to your level of play.

How does that affect the game? Why does it matter what reasoning they had behind the purchase of the game?

 

[ThePirateMan]

I completely disagree about the professional thing.

I did try out SC 1 earlier and I got utterly f***ed on the Multiplayer whenever my opponent wasn't afk.

But it has gone a lot better for me on the SC 2 beta, I'm a relatively casual player, I barely even macro at all and my "build order" barely goes beyond the 3 first buildings, yet I still win some fair matches and I'm able to enjoy the game.

I don't know what to think of the lan, personaly I don't really mind it's removal but I can see why some people are pissed about it. I am however a bit upset about not being able to play with friends from other continents at the moment/ever.

And for those that really can't handle the melee games with other players, go play co-op against A.I. or the endless waves of custom maps like I did on Warcraft 3.

 

[Ch@Z]

I'm not getting it because of the stupid stupid region lock

 

[Keava]

Except it doesn't suck. Battle.net 2.0 isn't great, but the game itself is awesome. You can play ladder even if you're really bad since you'll just get placed in a league with other bad players. Then of course there's limitless custom map potential with one of the best map editors I've ever seen. No LAN and no chat are really my only gripes, but they'll be adding chat later and I guarantee we get a third-party LAN play patch within a couple months of release. So yea.

Yeah, best map editor ever that community will not be able to use in even half. Because empty skirmish map takes ~250 kb / 500kb uploaded and you have 10mb limit / map with 20 mb upload limit total. Any addition of custom content will just make it too big. Then there is also censoring issue where you can't use the word "bomb" in your scripting. Fun? Very. Enjoy generic skirmish maps.

Third-party LAN will only possible if someone cracks it in or the supposed 'pro' edition that will be used on tournaments gets leaked into public.
Soon in Blizzards mouth is always best portrayed by their Soon(TM) theory.

NowEnd of Days.

But yeah. Except this and some other minor issues, Ladder and Custom games with friends from friendliest are working very good, and frankly that + singleplayer is all i am interested in.

 

[UnusualStranger]

How does that affect the game? Why does it matter what reasoning they had behind the purchase of the game?

It has an effect, because you are going to be paying for a game that does not have all the features it should. (or could)

And you can bet a company knows when a game is going to be picked up just because of its name. Which means that they will try to get away with things that ordinarily they wouldn't get away with. And then still make money.

 

[TerranReaper]

How does that affect the game? Why does it matter what reasoning they had behind the purchase of the game?

It has an effect, because you are going to be paying for a game that does not have all the features it should. (or could)

And you can bet a company knows when a game is going to be picked up just because of its name. Which means that they will try to get away with things that ordinarily they wouldn't get away with. And then still make money.

It's a matter of trust that they will bring back the features that are missing. Would you trust a big name company that is known for listening to its fans to uphold their word on restoring missing features or some random developer that has no reputation whatsoever? Granted, Blizzard has made some "interesting and questionable" decisions in recent times, but we'll see.

 

[Ryank1908]

So you're judging a game on the fact that it's removed the LAN capabilities, which is, admittedly, in the age of wireless connections, outdated, and the fact that the online is, ultimately, too hard.

Silly thing to judge it on. Play the campaign and the skirmish mode, then. Wait for the mod tools to be released to the public and wait for the EPIC custom games to be made. Blizzard don't make 'crap' games, and you know that. you're raging because you got your ass kicked by a 200+ APMer in the Beta. Happens to the best of us, but just understand that because it's changed, it's not 'crap'. The multiplayer scene is, like Halo, or EVE, not for everyone. It tailors to different gamers, which is clearly just not you.
And about the LAN - okay, it's sad you can't play against friends in other countries, but how imperative is it that you do that? You can still access the other servers and play them there. The new Battlenet certainly overrides any functionality LAN had that playing online didn't.

Edit - 'because people will simply pick it up because it is Starcraft 2, and so damned popular.' Sorry but no. They'll pick it up based on the assumption that because Starcraft was excellent, and this has had so much polish, time, and effort put into it, that it is also excellent.

 

[UnusualStranger]

It's a matter of trust that they will bring back the features that are missing. Would you trust a big name company that is known for listening to its fans to uphold their word on restoring missing features or some random developer that has no reputation whatsoever? Granted, Blizzard has made some "interesting and questionable" decisions in recent times, but we'll see.

Trust is something I do not give to any company in good supply. I'm suspicious like that.

And when you start acting suspicious, do not expect me to trust you completely in another regard just because. Its hard to trust a company to do what people want when things appear that no matter what they get the cash they want. Which is their ultimate goal.

I hope for better things, but all the suspicious behavior doesn't exactly inspire hope, and I think people are blind to the odd things going on around the game.

So you're judging a game on the fact that it's removed the LAN capabilities, which is, admittedly, in the age of wireless connections, outdated, and the fact that the online is, ultimately, too hard.

Silly thing to judge it on. Play the campaign and the skirmish mode, then. Wait for the mod tools to be released to the public and wait for the EPIC custom games to be made. Blizzard don't make 'crap' games, and you know that. you're raging because you got your ass kicked by a 200+ APMer in the Beta. Happens to the best of us, but just understand that because it's changed, it's not 'crap'. The multiplayer scene is, like Halo, or EVE, not for everyone. It tailors to different gamers, which is clearly just not you.
And about the LAN - okay, it's sad you can't play against friends in other countries, but how imperative is it that you do that? You can still access the other servers and play them there. The new Battlenet certainly overrides any functionality LAN had that playing online didn't.

Sir, there is a thread up top that you need to look at. It is regarding the modding (And therefore, custom map) community.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=127066

Read this. It will show you a lot of things. About custom maps, that are supposedly for "everyone else"

I have nothing against losing. Hell, I played a couple of times and got my ass kicked. No problems there. Its just that the games multiplayer is nothing but "serious business". Multiplayer right now is questionable, especially since matchmaking doesn't play nice with custom games, which is the only option for those who are just in it for the fun, and not ranking or being competitive.

Supposedly, Bnet 2.0 is supposed to be good enough that LAN isn't needed, and I am not seeing that. The even bigger problem is that it purely relies on blizzard servers to play with anyone. Even the sibling or roommate in the same room as you cannot play with you right now because blizzard is working on their servers. LAN doesn't need Blizzard servers, and is absolutely reliable. I don't like paying for a game, then finding that I can't play in a room full of guys with it because Blizzard servers are down. It is a simple scenario.

And that assumption is what I was referring to. That kind of assumption means that you trust them way too much. Do not simply expect a good thing from a company, demand it. Demand LAN, better matchmaking, more balance, or what have you. Simply thinking it will be good doesn't make it so. It needs to be pushed their, by both the company and the community.

 

[TerranReaper]

Silly thing to judge it on. Play the campaign and the skirmish mode, then. Wait for the mod tools to be released to the public and wait for the EPIC custom games to be made. Blizzard don't make 'crap' games, and you know that. you're raging because you got your ass kicked by a 200+ APMer in the Beta. Happens to the best of us, but just understand that because it's changed, it's not 'crap'. The multiplayer scene is, like Halo, or EVE, not for everyone. It tailors to different gamers, which is clearly just not you.
And about the LAN - okay, it's sad you can't play against friends in other countries, but how imperative is it that you do that? You can still access the other servers and play them there. The new Battlenet certainly overrides any functionality LAN had that playing online didn't.

Let's not jump to conclusions that the OP is raging about that, because it's not the case. And actually, I do have quite a bit of friends in other regions that I would like to play with, but can't due to the restricted region settings. Considering my time in beta, I'm sure B.net wouldn't have this problem very often but let's just say you're hosting a tourney and B.net just happens to be down for that time. It would be a hassle to reschedule everything just because B.net was down for maintenance. Having LAN would remove that inconvenience and you'll be amazed, people still do have LAN parties and such.

 

[Ryank1908]

Snip.

Let's not jump to conclusions that the OP is raging about that, because it's not the case. And actually, I do have quite a bit of friends in other regions that I would like to play with, but can't due to the restricted region settings. Considering my time in beta, I'm sure B.net wouldn't have this problem very often but let's just say you're hosting a tourney and B.net just happens to be down for that time. It would be a hassle to reschedule everything just because B.net was down for maintenance. Having LAN would remove that inconvenience and you'll be amazed, people still do have LAN parties and such.

True, that is a conclusion-hop, but still, he titled it 'Starcraft 2:Crap', which doesn't denote a happy customer.
I appreciate the 'not being able to play people on other servers' thing but it's still not a strong enough basis to call a game crap.

The last point isn't exactly true, though. Blizzard have very set maintenance periods and stick to them. If you don't schedule your tournament during that time, the odds that Bnet will go down are a million to one, it's a very polished service.
Aside from that, connecting to LAN IS outdated. It's old and it's dying. Bnet is a far better, more advanced system.

 

[snow]

My bad i simplified a little, but i blame the temperature.
When im talking about multiplayer i mostly have Automatch in mind. When someone decided to play in automatch they do enter the competitive part of the gameplay, like it or not. Keep in mind that competitive is not exactly the same as professional. You have custom games for just fooling around, but ladders/ranked games are for those who seek challenge. Thats why different companies worked on all those fancy algorithms for matchmaking, so you don't end up against people way out of your league in most cases.

As for DoW2, it has 'pro' community as well. TrueSkill is shitty in that regard, but there is plenty of people playing mostly for the competitive edge. With build orders i could argue, because there is difference between starting off with either scout unit builds or straight to T1 core unit, or heavy weapon build. How fast will tech up, will go vehicles, quick T3, or focus on T1 blob. The more serious the game gets the more it counts how you start the game. DoW2 is more about micro-tactics, sure, but the general rule of online RTS gameplay stays. You want your win:loose ratio at decent level, you need to know how the game works.

For casual gameplay you have always custom games, granted B.Net2.0 sucks in that regard with no custom names and no way in seeing which game is about what, sorting them according to popularity whatever this means. But as i said, i have plenty complains about B.Net and SC2 in general, they just don't come even near the whole 'getting raeped by proz'.
In SC2 if you won't rather play players that will outmatch you by a great margin. Bronze League doesn't get matched against Silver+, you will always be matched only against people that have skill level near to yours. I really don't see how any company, in any RTS could do anything more to make it more 'casual' friendly, unless you want RTS that doesn't require any skill, but, what's the point then?

Yeah, its hot outside. Lets blame that.

Yeah, but at the moment, the matchmaking system is very custom game unfriendly. While it is said that this is a Bnet 2 issue, BNET 2 is being released with Starcraft 2. They have to be judged together, because the have to come together.

While the DoW2 match thing isn't all that great, I just find it to be much friendlier than Starcraft 2. You can make what you wish, and still possibly win. It isn't pro, but it feels fun while its still competitive. Some general understanding is needed for any game in general though. You can't play Mario if you want to explore every pit. That isn't how Mario works!

But I understand not wanting to push away people who are good at a game. But with the popularity of this game, I worry that its main focus to be the pros. And only looking at those who are in it for the competitive play is not how the online parts of starcraft and Warcraft lived. They lived on custom content made by the users for fun, which the matchmaking system doesn't play nice with.

But hey, just a beta, so I am looking at it a little harshly. Maybe things will change. It is a hell of a lot of change, but maybe it will work....
Or it will be delayed >

Don't know how familiar you are with the first game, but Starcraft and Brood wars received a butt load of patches after the game came out, so you're pretty much worrying over nothing.

Here's the thing about all this that's bothering me though, you're worried that SC2 is for professionals only right? Back when Medal of Honor Allied assault was out, I was 14 years old and in a clan filled with people who were 22, 23 or older. This is because they needed a good sniper, and I was there to supply that at such a young age. We held a very high rank in ladder and league matches for the longest time.

Same goes for CoD4, I played in leagues and ladders with a clan doing 5v5 s&d. The point I'm trying to make is that there's room for competition in just about every multiplayer game. Ever go to a Rock Band 2 Competition?

The match-making of SC2 is not all about the professionals, or all about the competition. If you get stuck in bronze, who cares? You play against other people who are bronze as well, you all learn the game together, and at your own pace. You have fun because you know that the other people aren't going to have a big ball of tanks and marines within the first 6 minutes of the game.

Of course there's a way for you to move up in rank, but this is because the game would then feel that you are getting better at the game, so that way you're not getting bored playing against those in bronze. They give you an opponent that would be worth your time to play against. The game gives you a challenge, you have fun with it, as so will your opponent, it's all good right?

There's also the ability to play with friends. Husky from youtube often does commentary for TheLittleOne and Whitera and various other people. He even plays 3v3's and 4v4s with them all, for they are his friends and they all have fun together.

There are always going to be people who take the game serious... You have it in Halo, in CoD, Rock Band, and believe it or not, I got trash talked in Peggle once, but considering you're a casual gamer, you will never have to worry about playing these people unless you improve enough to reach the higher rankings of the matchmaker.

Not to mention that Blizzard IS trying to make the game as newcomer friendly as they possibly can with the practice league and the matchmaking service.

I'm upset that I've said this many times before, and you have yet to respond to what I have had to say. It feels like you're ignoring posts that speak the truth about the game and going after those that have some logical flaw that you can twist for sake of debate.

I feel your a bit late on worrying about being put against professionals or people who are better than you. Because if you ever played Starcraft or Broodwars, you would know that they don't have any sort of match-making service for b.net 1.0 and the chances of you getting put up against some one twice your skill level were rather very great.

 

[Nautical Honors Society]

Here's the thing; if Starcraft 2 does not meet the expectations of the Starcraft veterans, it will spell doom for Blizzard.

Whahahaha! No. They have WoW.

Well doom for Blizzard in terms of the Starcraft franchise.

I highly doubt that. Especially with the growing number of casual gamers who have enough disposable income to throw it at anything just to give it a whirl.

I bet tons of buys will be based on "Oh Starcraft? I bet it is like WoW in space! That is so ill! Who do I write the check out to?"

Also even if Starcraft fails Blizzard is far from ever being doomed.

 

[Uber Waddles]

Blizzard is one of my favorite companies, because when they make a game, they put quality into it, instead of rushing it. By-in-large, Blizzard listens to its fanbase and tailors their games and patches to tailor their players.

StarCraft II had a lot of it tailored because of the hardcore crowd; because thats what the fans of the first game wanted. The game is accessable to everyone, hence why it has difficulty settings and a matchmaking system that wont throw you in over your head.

Not to mention the tools to make content, by modifying... well, anything...

StarCraft II wont suck, because its made by developers who care more about their fanbase and less about all the other stuff. Its a game made for the fans. Now, if this was Halo or something, I would agree. But with Blizzards track record.