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

[snow]

Oh boy, lots to respond on, where to start though?

"I want to make sure it's clear that our plans for the forums are completely separate from our plans for the optional in-game Real ID system now live with World of Warcraft and launching soon with StarCraft II. We believe that the powerful communications functionality enabled by Real ID, such as cross-game and cross-realm chat, make Battle.net a great place for players to stay connected to real-life friends and family while playing Blizzard games. And of course, you'll still be able to keep your relationships at the anonymous, character level if you so choose when you communicate with other players in game. Over time, we will continue to evolve Real ID on Battle.net to add new and exciting functionality within our games for players who decide to use the feature. "

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=25968987278&sid=1

"I want to make sure it's clear that our plans for the forums are completely separate from our plans for the optional in-game Real ID system now live with World of Warcraft and launching soon with StarCraft II."

I decided to highlight an important word in this document that I feel may relinquish your worries. By making this feature an option for players to use, you have the ability to ignore it all together. If you do not feel comfortable giving any information out, then you have the ability to not do so and still be able to enjoy the game in its fullest.

Even if you do decide to use this feature, you are still capable of remaining anonymous when playing the game.

If they were making this something manditory however, I would probably be just as upset as you are.

Chop Chop Chop.

Well, LAN does not require a connection to Blizzard. If Blizzard Servers go down, you cannot do any multiplayer. At all. If you have a friend in the room with you who has the game, you cannot play, for the servers are down. That is annoying as hell.

Well, at first just having basic BNet would work for me. But the longer the Beta has gone on, the worse it has gotten. In the longer it has been going on, the worse it has gotten. More games have been crashing, more disconnects, and just generally poor performance. This is also making me very worried that they are biting much more than they can chew.

Yeah, Blizzard really needs to make sure they fix this before the deadline. The constant drops and poor performance are really making the online part pretty....unenjoyable.

That does seem to pose a big threat to the game, seeing how it is going to be heavily used as a multiplayer game. I risk sounding like a Blizzard fanboy by saying that I have faith that Blizzard will have this mess taken care of. There is a lot put on the line for Blizzard to simply ignore such a big issue. To place so much money into a game and have it not work would not only be a waste of money for Blizzard, but a waste of all these years they dedicated into the creation of the game. I doubt blizzard would throw all that away just to have so many people buy the game and not be happy with it. We have all seen what happened to companies that have done this in the past.

Who knows though, maybe they have something they have been working on that they are waiting till the release of the game to add? It would be pretty stupid of them to not be prepared for the 27th with how many people will be trying to sign onto 2.0 at the same time. Companies have done some pretty stupid things though, so I can only hope blizzard has worked on this and prepared for release day.

snip

If it is for professional RTS players, I may be in trouble. I like the looks of the setting of the game(s) but I've always been a little slow in RTS games.

Would you consider this a bad game for me to buy into due to my inexperience?

Not at all! When Blizzard made Battle.net 2.0, they have implemented a matchmaking service so that way you are able to enjoy the game while playing with people who are around your skill level of the game. So any fear of accidentally being placed against some one who is a professional of the game are slim to none compared to Starcraft and BW's Battle.net.

They have even made a practice league for newcomers to play slower paced games where they can take the time to learn the game without the worry of being rushed right away. The entrances to both players bases are blocked off with destroyable boulders so there is no chance of an early in game rush from your opponent as you build up your base.

Even if your skill at RTS games are lacking, there's also a lot of communities out there on the interweb with strategies, and tutorials that you can read and look over. Youtube has tons of videos with little bits of information that are extremely helpful as well.

There are even communities that go as far as acting like teachers for newcomers that will guide them in the right direction to being a better player.

 

[FinalHeart95]

Dude, play Multiplayer for the custom maps. I've never played a single multiplayer game of Warcraft III, I just went straight to B.net and hit up those custom maps. They're so much fun...

Tag (Yes, tag.), different RTS's, those "Who's the killer?" games, Tower Defense, Roleplaying Games...

DotA.

Lots of fun to be had.

This. I suck at RTS games, but the amount of fun from the Wintermauls (and other games like it) of the custom games is just insane. I don't think I ever actually finished the campaign now that I think about it.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Spoiler: snip

snip

If it is for professional RTS players, I may be in trouble. I like the looks of the setting of the game(s) but I've always been a little slow in RTS games.

Would you consider this a bad game for me to buy into due to my inexperience?

Not at all! When Blizzard made Battle.net 2.0, they have implemented a matchmaking service so that way you are able to enjoy the game while playing with people who are around your skill level of the game. So any fear of accidentally being placed against some one who is a professional of the game are slim to none compared to Starcraft and BW's Battle.net.

They have even made a practice league for newcomers to play slower paced games where they can take the time to learn the game without the worry of being rushed right away. The entrances to both players bases are blocked off with destroyable boulders so there is no chance of an early in game rush from your opponent as you build up your base.

Even if your skill at RTS games are lacking, there's also a lot of communities out there on the interweb with strategies, and tutorials that you can read and look over. Youtube has tons of videos with little bits of information that are extremely helpful as well.

There are even communities that go as far as acting like teachers for newcomers that will guide them in the right direction to being a better player.

Thanks! I've always enjoyed RTS games but I've never played online. I'm seriously considering investing in getting a copy.

 

[Deadman Walkin]

Well, personally I don't quite hit the 70-80 APMs, I have build orders but I don't always stick to them. I was (before they wiped it last time) a Platinum/Gold player, and I got enjoyment out of it.

I would agree with the professionals thing, however that is basically why they made the different leagues. My friend plays in Diamond, he could crush me in his sleep, and I know some silver/bronze players that are miles behind me. From what I can tell, the leagues split up the different levels of players pretty well.

I personally never used the LAN, but I am sure many people did. I will miss the chat channels, and the custom game list is pretty.....bad. The localization bit does kinda suck, because I am closer to Western Canada, and I have some American friends who live in Florida and area. Makes it suck, but there is nothing I can do about that because they will most likely (if they split it up like they did with the US West and US East in WCIII/SC then I own't be able to play with them.

Other then that, the game is awesome.

 

[UnusualStranger]

That does seem to pose a big threat to the game, seeing how it is going to be heavily used as a multiplayer game. I risk sounding like a Blizzard fanboy by saying that I have faith that Blizzard will have this mess taken care of. There is a lot put on the line for Blizzard to simply ignore such a big issue. To place so much money into a game and have it not work would not only be a waste of money for Blizzard, but a waste of all these years they dedicated into the creation of the game. I doubt blizzard would throw all that away just to have so many people buy the game and not be happy with it. We have all seen what happened to companies that have done this in the past.

Who knows though, maybe they have something they have been working on that they are waiting till the release of the game to add? It would be pretty stupid of them to not be prepared for the 27th with how many people will be trying to sign onto 2.0 at the same time. Companies have done some pretty stupid things though, so I can only hope blizzard has worked on this and prepared for release day

Yeah, that is why I made this. They could be really moving in the crap direction, but they will make loads of money anyway. I do not want that. At all. I want people to think and look at the things us more negative people bring up. Because some of the time they are very valid reasons...

But like you, I hope that they don't. The game is good. I think it will be good, but the new BNET and multiplayer is really up in the air, and that is all I can see right now. So it is a big concern.

However....I notice you were talking about the matchmaking. That didn't start out too good either. It used to start you off with. 1000 points I think it was. Which was a very bad move on their part (from what I see now it has been fixed), for people kept getting placed against very good players because they had a high score.

And also, I think the thread was even here on the escapist how perhaps it places people too well in its matchmaking. Because sometimes, you want to be able to roll someone in a game. or get rolled. It makes the game more humbling, or shows you how far you have come. That is just my opinion though.

 

[snow]

Spoiler: snip

snip

If it is for professional RTS players, I may be in trouble. I like the looks of the setting of the game(s) but I've always been a little slow in RTS games.

Would you consider this a bad game for me to buy into due to my inexperience?

Not at all! When Blizzard made Battle.net 2.0, they have implemented a matchmaking service so that way you are able to enjoy the game while playing with people who are around your skill level of the game. So any fear of accidentally being placed against some one who is a professional of the game are slim to none compared to Starcraft and BW's Battle.net.

They have even made a practice league for newcomers to play slower paced games where they can take the time to learn the game without the worry of being rushed right away. The entrances to both players bases are blocked off with destroyable boulders so there is no chance of an early in game rush from your opponent as you build up your base.

Even if your skill at RTS games are lacking, there's also a lot of communities out there on the interweb with strategies, and tutorials that you can read and look over. Youtube has tons of videos with little bits of information that are extremely helpful as well.

There are even communities that go as far as acting like teachers for newcomers that will guide them in the right direction to being a better player.

Thanks! I've always enjoyed RTS games but I've never played online. I'm seriously considering investing in getting a copy.

Not a problem! If you haven't already, I would definitely suggest picking up Starcraft and Starcraft: BroodWars if you haven't already. The storyline from SC2 will carry off from those 2 games. Not to mention it will be a cheap way of seeing if you like starcraft at all before purchasing the second game for the full price.

the Battle.net for those games don't have the matchmaking service however. That is something they created for Starcraft 2.

The first game came out in 1998 and has remained very popular and one of the games I still play to this day. So it's worth looking into none-the-less if you have any interest in the game.

However, if you don't wish to purchase the older games, I'm pretty sure you can find a "Let's Play Starcraft" Video or 2 on youtube where you can watch some one else play through the campaign of the game.

infact.. I just searched for that right there and it was the first thing that popped up.

 

[Da_Schwartz]

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

That sir is a BOLD statement. I'm pretty sure the original SC is a religion in the eastern world.

But i hear what your saying. I'm so out of practice i'd be a discrace to my former self in that game. Multiplayer anyway.

 

[snow]

snip snip

Yeah, that is why I made this. They could be really moving in the crap direction, but they will make loads of money anyway. I do not want that. At all. I want people to think and look at the things us more negative people bring up. Because some of the time they are very valid reasons...

But like you, I hope that they don't. The game is good. I think it will be good, but the new BNET and multiplayer is really up in the air, and that is all I can see right now. So it is a big concern.

However....I notice you were talking about the matchmaking. That didn't start out too good either. It used to start you off with. 1000 points I think it was. Which was a very bad move on their part (from what I see now it has been fixed), for people kept getting placed against very good players because they had a high score.

And also, I think the thread was even here on the escapist how perhaps it places people too well in its matchmaking. Because sometimes, you want to be able to roll someone in a game. or get rolled. It makes the game more humbling, or shows you how far you have come. That is just my opinion though.

Yeah I read that post a while ago myself, they have decided to add a little variation in there so that you are able to have those moments. What you're bringing up reminds me of the day Killing Floor was released on steam. Within the first 5 hours of the game being released, only about 12 people were able to sign on because there was a bug in the system that prevented people from playing the game online. They fixed it rather quickly and the system has been fine ever since.

So even though it's a different company, it is probably the same thing that will happen for SC2 if it comes to that. If there are any problems with b.net 2.0, they will be only temporary, for as I said, it will play a huge role in how successful the next 2 SC campaigns will be if this first one doesn't set a bright example.

 

[UnusualStranger]

That sir is a BOLD statement. I'm pretty sure the original SC is a religion in the eastern world.
But i hear what your saying. I'm so out of practice i'd be a discrace to my former self in that game. Multiplayer anyway.

If you are going to say something, might as well be as drastic as you can be!

Yeah I read that post a while ago myself, they have decided to add a little variation in there so that you are able to have those moments. What you're bringing up reminds me of the day Killing Floor was released on steam. Within the first 5 hours of the game being released, only about 12 people were able to sign on because there was a bug in the system that prevented people from playing the game online. They fixed it rather quickly and the system has been fine ever since.

So even though it's a different company, it is probably the same thing that will happen for SC2 if it comes to that. If there are any problems with b.net 2.0, they will be only temporary, for as I said, it will play a huge role in how successful the next 2 SC campaigns will be if this first one doesn't set a bright example.

Huh, did not know that about killing floor. Interesting. However, I get the feeling that Starcraft 2 is going to be MUCH MUCH bigger than killing floor. With people around the entire WORLD jumping in on this. A failure will hit the news. I can damn well guarantee it.

But yep, this is the big step right here. They had better have some miracles in progress over there. Because a failure on the first day is going to be a hell of a PR problem.

Here's to hoping they don't screw up royally!

 

[snow]

That sir is a BOLD statement. I'm pretty sure the original SC is a religion in the eastern world.
But i hear what your saying. I'm so out of practice i'd be a discrace to my former self in that game. Multiplayer anyway.

If you are going to say something, might as well be as drastic as you can be!

Yeah I read that post a while ago myself, they have decided to add a little variation in there so that you are able to have those moments. What you're bringing up reminds me of the day Killing Floor was released on steam. Within the first 5 hours of the game being released, only about 12 people were able to sign on because there was a bug in the system that prevented people from playing the game online. They fixed it rather quickly and the system has been fine ever since.

So even though it's a different company, it is probably the same thing that will happen for SC2 if it comes to that. If there are any problems with b.net 2.0, they will be only temporary, for as I said, it will play a huge role in how successful the next 2 SC campaigns will be if this first one doesn't set a bright example.

Huh, did not know that about killing floor. Interesting. However, I get the feeling that Starcraft 2 is going to be MUCH MUCH bigger than killing floor. With people around the entire WORLD jumping in on this. A failure will hit the news. I can damn well guarantee it.

But yep, this is the big step right here. They had better have some miracles in progress over there. Because a failure on the first day is going to be a hell of a PR problem.

Here's to hoping they don't screw up royally!

People will make a big deal out of it, but once it's fixed, they'll hop on and play. It's like... The law of gaming I suppose! Game issues on release day are something that I have come to expect, so that may explain the difference between our outlooks on the near future.

I only knew that bit about Killing Floor because I was one of the many that were unable to log in the day it was released. It was a bit frustrating, some people acted as if it was the end of the world, but it got fixed and it was as if it never happened.

Then again, the issues with Beta are simply just that. I've beta-tested games that felt completely different when the final product came out. It's why they do these tests. I think it's better for them to have b.net 2.0 start screwing up during beta testing so they can fix it it before the game comes out, rather than have it screw up after release and have millions of people cry foul at the same exact time.

No one will blame you if you decide to hold out on purchasing it right away just to see what's going on. If you're worried that things aren't going to go over so smoothly, that may just be the best bet for you. I myself have been taking a break from Team Fortress 2 to wait till the hype from the engineer update dies down.

 

[UnusualStranger]

People will make a big deal out of it, but once it's fixed, they'll hop on and play. It's like... The law of gaming I suppose! Game issues on release day are something that I have come to expect, so that may explain the difference between our outlooks on the near future.

Then again, the issues with Beta are simply just that. I've beta-tested games that felt completely different when the final product came out. It's why they do these tests. I think it's better for them to have b.net 2.0 start screwing up during beta testing so they can fix it it before the game comes out, rather than have it screw up after release and have millions of people cry foul at the same exact time.

No one will blame you if you decide to hold out on purchasing it right away just to see what's going on. If you're worried that things aren't going to go over so smoothly, that may just be the best bet for you. I myself have been taking a break from Team Fortress 2 to wait till the hype from the engineer update dies down.

The law of gaming huh? Well, I wish there were more lawbreakers then!

Yes, that is what I have kept in mind. Its just that the date is very close now for release. Meaning that the corrections need to be in place already. Otherwise, its going to be as glitchy as hell on release, which will not blow over well with anyone.

But yeah, I will be holding out. I'm just not sure how the campaign is going to roll out, because I've heard next to nothing about it, and the multiplayer is already turning out to be not my style. So, if the single player screws up, I just don't think I will get it. Which kinda sucks, cause it looks good, and has quite a few interesting gimmicks and concepts on it.

 

[snow]

People will make a big deal out of it, but once it's fixed, they'll hop on and play. It's like... The law of gaming I suppose! Game issues on release day are something that I have come to expect, so that may explain the difference between our outlooks on the near future.

Then again, the issues with Beta are simply just that. I've beta-tested games that felt completely different when the final product came out. It's why they do these tests. I think it's better for them to have b.net 2.0 start screwing up during beta testing so they can fix it it before the game comes out, rather than have it screw up after release and have millions of people cry foul at the same exact time.

No one will blame you if you decide to hold out on purchasing it right away just to see what's going on. If you're worried that things aren't going to go over so smoothly, that may just be the best bet for you. I myself have been taking a break from Team Fortress 2 to wait till the hype from the engineer update dies down.

The law of gaming huh? Well, I wish there were more lawbreakers then!

Yes, that is what I have kept in mind. Its just that the date is very close now for release. Meaning that the corrections need to be in place already. Otherwise, its going to be as glitchy as hell on release, which will not blow over well with anyone.

But yeah, I will be holding out. I'm just not sure how the campaign is going to roll out, because I've heard next to nothing about it, and the multiplayer is already turning out to be not my style. So, if the single player screws up, I just don't think I will get it. Which kinda sucks, cause it looks good, and has quite a few interesting gimmicks and concepts on it.

I don't know if you have seen these yet or not but here, these are for you.

Spoiler: Youtube footage of Single Player Campaign.

 

[tetron]

Starcaft II can be as elitist and sucky as blizzard wants it to be, most of my online playing with starcraft 1 was spent playing custom campaigns that threw out the conventional rules and stats anyways. I'm looking forward to SC2 just because of what people will do with the campaign editor. I do think it's gonna be totally awesome though and I can't wait to play the regular campaign(yeah I was one of the few who actually worked through the single player campaign and enjoyed the story)

 

[UnusualStranger]

I don't know if you have seen these yet or not but here, these are for you.

Spoiler: Youtube footage of Single Player Campaign.

Ah yes, but things have changed quite a bit from that showing.
Those colossi in the second video actually do splash shots. And the game moves a hell of a lot faster than that.

Buildings fly a lot faster too. Though I hope it is something like that, other than those somewhat old and not even true videos any more, there really hasn't been much.

Starcaft II can be as elitist and sucky as blizzard wants it to be, most of my online playing with starcraft 1 was spent playing custom campaigns that threw out the conventional units anyways. I'm looking forward to SC2 just because of what people will do with the campaign editor. I do think it's gonna be totally awesome though and I can't wait to play the regular campaign(yeah I was one of the few who actually worked through the single player campaign and enjoyed the story)

Yeah, same here....However, news hasn't been good on the custom maps front either. Read through this thread, and there is a team liquid site listed showing some huge problems with it. The editor is amazing, but the ability to make and test those maps is.....very limited.

 

[tetron]

I don't know if you have seen these yet or not but here, these are for you.

Spoiler: Youtube footage of Single Player Campaign.

Ah yes, but things have changed quite a bit from that showing.
Those colossi in the second video actually do splash shots. And the game moves a hell of a lot faster than that.

Buildings fly a lot faster too. Though I hope it is something like that, other than those somewhat old and not even true videos any more, there really hasn't been much.

Starcaft II can be as elitist and sucky as blizzard wants it to be, most of my online playing with starcraft 1 was spent playing custom campaigns that threw out the conventional units anyways. I'm looking forward to SC2 just because of what people will do with the campaign editor. I do think it's gonna be totally awesome though and I can't wait to play the regular campaign(yeah I was one of the few who actually worked through the single player campaign and enjoyed the story)

Yeah, same here....However, news hasn't been good on the custom maps front either. Read through this thread, and there is a team liquid site listed showing some huge problems with it. The editor is amazing, but the ability to make and test those maps is.....very limited.

Ah really ? I heard that the campaign editor was going to be really good too, I'm sure people will find some way to bring out its full potential though. The stuff people did with just the SC1 editor never ceased to amaze me.

 

[UnusualStranger]

Ah really ? I heard that the campaign editor was going to be really good too, I'm sure people will find some way to bring out its full potential though. The stuff people did with just the SC1 editor never ceased to amaze me.

Yeah....and their interface for it is.....very very complex. Way beyond what the original Map editor was. I mean, worlds and galaxies beyond it. You can now change Stracraft into anything, it seems. I've seen a few already, and they are amazing. But spreading them around to people is no small task with the limitations in place. And the Filters. Oh god, the filters....

 

[snow]

I don't know if you have seen these yet or not but here, these are for you.

Spoiler: Youtube footage of Single Player Campaign.

Ah yes, but things have changed quite a bit from that showing.
Those colossi in the second video actually do splash shots. And the game moves a hell of a lot faster than that.

Buildings fly a lot faster too. Though I hope it is something like that, other than those somewhat old and not even true videos any more, there really hasn't been much.

Yeah, the actual ingame play has changed, I have been following some replays on youtube for the longest time now. I was watching through the second one just now and noticed a bunch of little things about it that they changed.

Though if this is the basic foundation of the single player game that they decided was good enough to present, then I'm pretty stoked. I hope they stuck to something like this as well. The single player is probably something they kept secret on purpose. Since one of the big reasons for getting this game is for the continuation of a storyline that was left silent for so many years.

 

[TheBaron87]

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?

This is true for nearly any game series. Popularity always creates overconfidence and too much reliance on name recognition and marketing, while original titles have no reputation to carry them and succeed or fail mostly on how interesting and good they are.

In Starcraft's case, I see Starcraft 2 like this: it's a mountain of gold buried under a bucket of crap. No LAN, crap. B.net 2.0, crap. The RealID New Coke scheme (look up New Coke, you people are being fooled), crap. Facebook integration, crap. Achievements, crap. Map publishing, crap. Open-ended campaign, crap. That bimbo Helfer stealing Glynnis' role, crap. 100-man divisions, crap. Crap, crap, everywhere. Maybe a single bucket is an understatement, it could be a whole swimming pool of rancid liquid feces.

Blizzard seems to be trying as hard as they can to cover that mountain of gold with all the crap they can come up with, and make no mistake, all the crap still sucks no matter how you look at it. However, underneath it all is still A FREAKING MOUNTAIN OF GOLD.

So yeah, everything Blizzard is doing is rage worthy, to the point I'm starting to like EA more than Blizzard, but somehow despite it all, their actual design team is able to push a game through their marketing and B.net team's "systems" that is such pure gold it's still worth it all.

Blizzard has the gaming equivalent of the golden goose, we just have to pray they're satisfied to sell us an egg every couple years.

 

[blankedboy]

My only view is that Starcraft 2 is the most unnecessary game in the history of existence. All it does is get the nostalgia running and Blizzard some more money. There is absolutely NOTHING that Starcraft 1 didn't do right (other than no difficulty settings for skirmish, but no-one with an internet connection cares), so why expand on it and just bring in some more issues?