Starcraft II

[Branwulf]

Anyone else got the beta? I hear this game is a big deal or something.

[Rokolith]

3 of my friends got invites already and all of them are so busy playing it they haven't given me an opinion of it yet.

[Reinholt]

Cant wait for this and the next 2 sequels... =P

[Branwulf]

I didn't play the first one as i'm not Korean, but it seems decent to me, not too many units to worry about so it's relatively simple.

Sadly my 280 GTX is dying so half the time I try and play it PSODs my PC : /

[Reinholt]

Originally Posted by Branwulf

I didn't play the first one as i'm not Korean, but it seems decent to me, not too many units to worry about so it's relatively simple.

Sadly my 280 GTX is dying so half the time I try and play it PSODs my PC : /

Not too many units but you still need superior micro to win against an opponent who knows how the game is meant to be played.

[Sabbathius]

I didn't get in, though a few people I know did. The depressing thing is, one guy got in and his PC is identical to mine, literally, even the same mouse and monitor. But that's the way it crumbles, cookie-wise.

I played the first one until my eyes bled, hell I played it again just last year. It's a classic. And 12 years is a long wait to see a sequel, so I hope it'll be worth it.

So far, feedback has been mostly positive, so I remain hopeful.

[drno172000]

Wasn't it supposed to be out last year? I remember giving gamestop $5 dollars to reserve and they told me it would be out in November.

[Taisenki]

I won't buy this game as it offers nothing new that any other strategy game delivers. Its just different.

Yeah, Was meant to be out last year =) Delay delay delay x3.

Wonder if they'll do another warcraft game...If they do it'll probobly take freaking ages to be made =(

[Kiev]

it is sad that they want for retro RTS look. These companies should take some example from Company of Heroes in how modern rts games should look.

[Taisenki]

Originally Posted by Kiev

it is sad that they want for retro RTS look. These companies should take some example from Company of Heroes in how modern rts games should look.

Company of heroes looks great =)

I have one big issue online though. Its quite boring because of the 'anal' tactic factor. Storming in with a big group of engineers with flamethrowers just looks ... crap.

Rushing is kinda boring and a big killer. Getting your static defences down in enemy terrortory just makes a game like a big sleep. A game that should look really appealing with its explosions and tactical with its positioning of infantry and tanks quickly becomes a zerging static defence artillery mish mash.

Single player <3

[Branwulf]

I think it's pretty well balanced, defence isn't much of an option though, you just want to park a dozen tanks outside the enemy based until the battlecruisers are ready to roll in a laser everything.

[Reinholt]

Starcraft definately aint for everyone.

[StJudas]

SC II will hopefully bring some more E-sport to the table. I already watched a few good livestream matches from the EG team. It is abit glossy for my taste but its not something that will stop me from watching tournaments.

[Traceur]

i liked the first SC so much that i paid for it (very uncommon in the Israeli 90's) but this episodic cowmilking will make sure i won't do the same with SC2.

[Sabbathius]

Originally Posted by Taisenki

I won't buy this game as it offers nothing new that any other strategy game delivers. Its just different.

Yes and no. One simple but effective thing about SC2 for example is how some units can traverse some terrain and other units can't. Some units fly, and many don't, but those that don't can sometimes walk over objects that other units can't.

And the game was delayed so many times because in 2005 most of the team was pulled in to work on WoW when it became apparent that the game will only grow if they feed it enough content. So SC2 development all but stopped.

it is sad that they want for retro RTS look. These companies should take some example from Company of Heroes in how modern rts games should look.

Eh, I'd rate it comparable to CoH, to be honest. CoH had some nice cover and terrain deformation and building destruction elements, but only because the units were so limited. Nothing flies in CoH, for one. Nothing burrows or travels along Nydus Canals. There's no Arbiters cloaking entire fleets. You don't have High Templars phase-shifting to avoid all damage, coming into your base and Psionic Storming your gatherers down. You don't get a bunch of Stalkers blinking past an obstruction. It is deceptively complex compared to CoH. It doesn't look it, but it is.

In many respects, SC2 is the continuation of the E-Sport approach Blizz started in WoW. People often whine how easy WoW PvP is, but when I ask them what their arena rating was, they fall silent, or proudly say 1600. At which point I just nod and say "uhhuh" and put them on a mental or physical ignore list. Well, SC2 will feature much the same thing. Right now, with massive influx of new people into the beta, the tactics are rather simple, such as zerging the hell out of another guy. Much like in early days of SC1 where zergling rush was one of the valid tactics (drown the enemy with waves of zerglings (weakest unit in the game, fastest to produce) seconds into the match start when the other guy is just finishing building his gatherers). But pretty soon it'll evolve as people get deeper understanding and hone their skills.

I've seen the same thing in the month I've been in Bad Company 2 beta. In the beginning of PC beta, it was standard fare - two teams killing each other. Then over the course of a week or two it dawned on people that assault can't win against the defenders by simply killing them, as defenders have unlimited lives and assault lives are finite. So they began going after objectives after a week. Then, as people gradually learned the map and leveled up their chars, unlocking new and better weapons, close combat got more interesting, and fights at objectives more common. But then, more recently, a winning tactic appeared: take a small 2-man all-terrain vehicle, have everyone stick C4 on it, one guy drives it and parks it at the objective and the others blow it to kingdom come, destroying the objective the easy way. Cheap? Yes. Unbalanced? Yes. But that's what beta is for. And they're patching it out at release.

Also, the "retro" look is a long tradition at Blizzard. People said WoW graphics sucked, without realizing that Blizzard used graphics very similar to the ones from Warcraft 3. What for? To create CONTINUITY. WC1: Orcs and Humans was 2D isometric at 320x200 resolution, because it was early 90s. WC2 moved to 800x600. But WC3 was full 3D. Go and load up the ice map of WC2, and then go to Borean Tundra in WoW. You will see a lot that is very familiar to you. Similarly, much out of WC3 made an appearance in WoW, practically unchanged. And that is partially why WoW succeeded when so many failed. It wasn't just a new game, it was the old game you played and loved (the RTS game), and then you were given a chance to play AS one of the units from within the game world. WC3 had hero units you could "level", and that's what WoW did. It took WC3 and turned it into an MMO where you take direct control of one unit, and battlegrounds are nothing more than WC3 match maps.

So in SC2 they're doing the same thing. They don't want a culture shock for people who played SC, to have them start up SC2 and not recognize a single bloody thing. Go get Command and Conquer: Tiberian Sun, and then go and look at the latest one, Tiberian Twilight. How many things they got in common? Not many. Camera angle is all wrong, the UI is totally different, the palette is way off, etc. Too much has changed. But between SC and SC2, this culture shock will be minimal. The camera angle is still almost identical (although the game does let you zoom in like WC3 did) to the original, the color palette is the same, as is the art style. The UI has been almost unmodified, and is still in the spirit of the original. Same icons. There's no culture shock. You played SC 12 years ago, you can pick up SC2 and continue playing. It's actually quite brilliant.

Anyway, I remain hopeful for this game. Looks like it's heading in the right direction.

[Diaclo]

I Playing it.. and trust me..

There is some bugs and gameplay isn't revolutionary how Warcraft 3...
But STARCRAFT 2, worth and it's really great.

Really good balanced.
Really Fun.
Really Good Battle.net, matchmaking.
Really Good Grafic.

There isn't many aspects, because it's a beta.. (there isn't Galaxy editor.. an editor in game make the difference, Dota PoP Up Warcraft 3 FOR MANY AND MANY YEARS)

That Game will become one of most success of blizzard (after wow).
The Online is really good.

Company of Heroes?
Haha, i hope blizzard don't follow his way.

Company of Heroes isn't famous for torneaument.. or maps.. or something..

Wc3 made all, Sc will made same thing.

[Reinholt]

CoH is good yeah but definately not E-sport material.

[Kamisama]

I was at first skeptical towards SCII (like above posters saying blah blah the same blah blah)

But now i happen to be testing it, truth is , everything is so polished so smooth, etc. gfx are simple yet amazing (very very good textures and awesome maps), when you first launch the game the music blow you away, the new battle.net looks very cool (even though most features are locked for now).

From a gameplay point of view, it takes you back to 1998, but finally it's kinda good, there no sophisticated features like in DOWII for instances but there is so much units that are all very different and ACTS differently, as sabbathius said (sabbathius not trolling, really ? ), allow much more combinations and possibilities ...
Finally i realized that there's no real need for new ground breaking features sometimes, doing the same thing that worked before is good too.


Think a little bit of that : imagine revamped UO wich was launched around 1998 but with new gfx, (and i don't mean MO which is still far from UO atm ^^) or revamped Baldur's gate with new gfx etc.
That would be awesome, but no devs always think there must be something new, that old things can't work. That's not true, and i think SCII is a good proof.

[Reinholt]

Originally Posted by Kamisama

I was at first skeptical towards SCII (like above posters saying blah blah the same blah blah)

But now i happen to be testing it, truth is , everything is so polished so smooth, etc. gfx are simple yet amazing (very very good textures and awesome maps), when you first launch the game the music blow you away, the new battle.net looks very cool (even though most features are locked for now).

From a gameplay point of view, it takes you back to 1998, but finally it's kinda good, there no sophisticated features like in DOWII for instances but there is so much units that are all very different and ACTS differently, as sabbathius said (sabbathius not trolling, really ? ), allow much more combinations and possibilities ...
Finally i realized that there's no real need for new ground breaking features sometimes, doing the same thing that worked before is good too.


Think a little bit of that : imagine revamped UO wich was launched around 1998 but with new gfx, (and i don't mean MO which is still far from UO atm ^^) or revamped Baldur's gate with new gfx etc.
That would be awesome, but no devs always think there must be something new, that old things can't work. That's not true, and i think SCII is a good proof.

How is the new Battlenet? I heard its very polished with neat features.

[Taisenki]

Originally Posted by Sabbathius

Eh, I'd rate it comparable to CoH, to be honest. CoH had some nice cover and terrain deformation and building destruction elements, but only because the units were so limited. Nothing flies in CoH, for one. Nothing burrows or travels along Nydus Canals. There's no Arbiters cloaking entire fleets. You don't have High Templars phase-shifting to avoid all damage, coming into your base and Psionic Storming your gatherers down. You don't get a bunch of Stalkers blinking past an obstruction. It is deceptively complex compared to CoH. It doesn't look it, but it is.

Sounds like command and conquer...

I wouldn't say these types of games fly. Its more like a speed essence and alot of anal-tactics such as attacking then running away. lureing the enemy out.

This really is just another standard RTS! Which is fine I guess. But it means that this game impacts on other future games. Which is sad =(

[Reinholt]

Turtling is for noobs anyway. =P

[Traceur]

Originally Posted by Sabbathius

Yes and no. One simple but effective thing about SC2 for example is how some units can traverse some terrain and other units can't. Some units fly, and many don't, but those that don't can sometimes walk over objects that other units can't.

And the game was delayed so many times because in 2005 most of the team was pulled in to work on WoW when it became apparent that the game will only grow if they feed it enough content. So SC2 development all but stopped.



Eh, I'd rate it comparable to CoH, to be honest. CoH had some nice cover and terrain deformation and building destruction elements, but only because the units were so limited. Nothing flies in CoH, for one. Nothing burrows or travels along Nydus Canals. There's no Arbiters cloaking entire fleets. You don't have High Templars phase-shifting to avoid all damage, coming into your base and Psionic Storming your gatherers down. You don't get a bunch of Stalkers blinking past an obstruction. It is deceptively complex compared to CoH. It doesn't look it, but it is.

In many respects, SC2 is the continuation of the E-Sport approach Blizz started in WoW. People often whine how easy WoW PvP is, but when I ask them what their arena rating was, they fall silent, or proudly say 1600. At which point I just nod and say "uhhuh" and put them on a mental or physical ignore list. Well, SC2 will feature much the same thing. Right now, with massive influx of new people into the beta, the tactics are rather simple, such as zerging the hell out of another guy. Much like in early days of SC1 where zergling rush was one of the valid tactics (drown the enemy with waves of zerglings (weakest unit in the game, fastest to produce) seconds into the match start when the other guy is just finishing building his gatherers). But pretty soon it'll evolve as people get deeper understanding and hone their skills.

I've seen the same thing in the month I've been in Bad Company 2 beta. In the beginning of PC beta, it was standard fare - two teams killing each other. Then over the course of a week or two it dawned on people that assault can't win against the defenders by simply killing them, as defenders have unlimited lives and assault lives are finite. So they began going after objectives after a week. Then, as people gradually learned the map and leveled up their chars, unlocking new and better weapons, close combat got more interesting, and fights at objectives more common. But then, more recently, a winning tactic appeared: take a small 2-man all-terrain vehicle, have everyone stick C4 on it, one guy drives it and parks it at the objective and the others blow it to kingdom come, destroying the objective the easy way. Cheap? Yes. Unbalanced? Yes. But that's what beta is for. And they're patching it out at release.

Also, the "retro" look is a long tradition at Blizzard. People said WoW graphics sucked, without realizing that Blizzard used graphics very similar to the ones from Warcraft 3. What for? To create CONTINUITY. WC1: Orcs and Humans was 2D isometric at 320x200 resolution, because it was early 90s. WC2 moved to 800x600. But WC3 was full 3D. Go and load up the ice map of WC2, and then go to Borean Tundra in WoW. You will see a lot that is very familiar to you. Similarly, much out of WC3 made an appearance in WoW, practically unchanged. And that is partially why WoW succeeded when so many failed. It wasn't just a new game, it was the old game you played and loved (the RTS game), and then you were given a chance to play AS one of the units from within the game world. WC3 had hero units you could "level", and that's what WoW did. It took WC3 and turned it into an MMO where you take direct control of one unit, and battlegrounds are nothing more than WC3 match maps.

So in SC2 they're doing the same thing. They don't want a culture shock for people who played SC, to have them start up SC2 and not recognize a single bloody thing. Go get Command and Conquer: Tiberian Sun, and then go and look at the latest one, Tiberian Twilight. How many things they got in common? Not many. Camera angle is all wrong, the UI is totally different, the palette is way off, etc. Too much has changed. But between SC and SC2, this culture shock will be minimal. The camera angle is still almost identical (although the game does let you zoom in like WC3 did) to the original, the color palette is the same, as is the art style. The UI has been almost unmodified, and is still in the spirit of the original. Same icons. There's no culture shock. You played SC 12 years ago, you can pick up SC2 and continue playing. It's actually quite brilliant.

Anyway, I remain hopeful for this game. Looks like it's heading in the right direction.

interesting thoughts... but here's the thing: when i played SC1 it was revolutionary for me. before that i've played AoE, WC, dune2... but before SC i never played an RTS that had truly different sides on a tactical level: for me it was a cultural shock and a very good one.
so to an extent when i'll pick up SC2 part of the pleasure i want to relive is the experience of a positive cultural shock... and it doesn't sound like i'm going to get it.

but i think part of the disappointment stems of cultural shocks gained along the way that have evolved into expectations. when people imagine a future SC after they played let's say total war or supreme commander, to an extent you where thinking of SC2 as a supreme commander with SC units and tactical diversity. you have developed expectations that grow with the RTS genre, and SC2 isn't delivering on them.

[Reinholt]

Wonder if the game still have ghosts. They were important part of my overall strategy... Lockdown + marine spam ftw. Against zergs i prefered the siege tank frog jump.

[Kamisama]

How is the new Battlenet? I heard its very polished with neat features.

Well it's very polished with new neat features, it's kinda hard to describe as most is locked for now but i can see there's a league system for the ladder, achievements, etc. but i don't really now how everything works. Only thing i found weird is the new custom games list which list all the maps available but doesn't allow you to put a title for your party (like "2v2 NOOBS ONLY, DL = KICK" etc. as in old battle.net) and you can't see who created the party etc.

Originally Posted by Reinholt

Wonder if the game still have ghosts. They were important part of my overall strategy... Lockdown + marine spam ftw. Against zergs i prefered the siege tank frog jump.

It still have ghost, not really tried them though (they go last in my current build order for SC2, and i always win/lose before i can make some)


And no Taisenki, SCII is not your typical RTS game because it has this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJUCR...layer_embedded


No RTS ever had moonwalking marines ! Take that bitches !

anyway

I'm dling SupCom 2 demo to see which is best ^^

[Reinholt]

Originally Posted by Kamisama

It still have ghost, not really tried them though (they go last in my current build order for SC2, and i always win/lose before i can make some)


And no Taisenki, SCII is not your typical RTS game because it has this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJUCR...layer_embedded


No RTS ever had moonwalking marines ! Take that bitches !

anyway

I'm dling SupCom 2 demo to see which is best ^^

You cant really compare the 2. Other is real time tactics while the other is what i´d really call an strategy game. And holy shit that video is awesome.

[Kamisama]

It seems the Gfx are put very low on that video though, it looks crappy compared to how i play

[Sabbathius]

Originally Posted by Kamisama

And no Taisenki, SCII is not your typical RTS game because it has this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJUCR...layer_embedded


No RTS ever had moonwalking marines ! Take that bitches !

I believe Emperor: Battle for Dune (2001), aka Dune 3 had units dancing and cheering. It's nothing new, unfortunately. Nice touch, but not new.

[Kamisama]

Originally Posted by Sabbathius

I believe Emperor: Battle for Dune (2001), aka Dune 3 had units dancing and cheering. It's nothing new, unfortunately. Nice touch, but not new.

But moonwalking marines

[Reinholt]

Originally Posted by Kamisama

But moonwalking marines

The best thing since sliced bread.

[Kamisama]

About new battle.net :

http://www.starcraft2.com/features/misc/battlenet.xml

Only thing that worries me is that i don't see the good old Chatrooms we had in old battle.net (i don't see how to meet and chill with people while on battle.net without those, and they were quite useful for clans ...), but the community is pushing to get them back !

[Amarll]

sounds liek crap to melol

[LightsabeR]

Is there any good SCII Korean pro gaming footage out there? I know there's that old sAviOr vid from like over a year ago and also a match between two completely unknown pro gamers called WhO and Shy, but is there anything else, possibly with better quality?

[Azrael STX]

Originally Posted by Branwulf

I didn't play the first one as i'm not Korean

What world do you live in where only Koreans have ever played StarCraft? You do realize there are US East, US West, and Europe servers, which have all been consistently active since the game's release, right? The best players are generally Korean, since it's most popular as an e-sport there, but that's about it.

At any rate, I will absolutely be buying StarCraft 2 on the day it releases, I've had it preordered since they let you preorder it at GameStop, which has been over a year. The first StarCraft is my favorite game of all time, no question. I can't wait to play with the new map editor, it's going to be ridiculously powerful, much more so than the WC3 editor. I'm pretty excited about it.

[Reinholt]

Originally Posted by Azrael STX

What world do you live in where only Koreans have ever played StarCraft? You do realize there are US East, US West, and Europe servers, which have all been consistently active since the game's release, right? The best players are generally Korean, since it's most popular as an e-sport there, but that's about it.

At any rate, I will absolutely be buying StarCraft 2 on the day it releases, I've had it preordered since they let you preorder it at GameStop, which has been over a year. The first StarCraft is my favorite game of all time, no question. I can't wait to play with the new map editor, it's going to be ridiculously powerful, much more so than the WC3 editor. I'm pretty excited about it.

Yeah im getting it too. I wasnt even average in starcraft. I obviously dominated people who didnt know how to counter the simple 4pool rush. But yeah, even average starcraft player knows how to counter it. I´m still getting the game even if i aint very good at it. The singleplayer campaign is going to be good and the editor... I love playing around with them.

[Zealot]

Can anyone guess my favorite unit?

Spoiler for Ownage:

<3 Zerglings

Zerg>Terran>Protoss

[Reinholt]

If ghosts wouldnt be in the game that would be my favorite unit, as i owned nubcakes with that very creature.

[Azrael STX]

Originally Posted by Reinholt

Yeah im getting it too. I wasnt even average in starcraft. I obviously dominated people who didnt know how to counter the simple 4pool rush.

Haha yeah, it's definitely a fun tactic, although when I did it I went 5-pool (their times are very similar, I just like having the extra in case the rush doesn't work out).

Originally Posted by Reinholt

But yeah, even average starcraft player knows how to counter it.

And even great SC players can get caught off guard by it sometimes I know I've seen a professional game where they won with just that, the opponent wasn't prepared because it's not a tactic you see in the pro world. Pretty funny stuff.

Originally Posted by Reinholt

I´m still getting the game even if i aint very good at it. The singleplayer campaign is going to be good and the editor... I love playing around with them.

Yeah, I'm not the best either, but I still have a lot of fun with it and am really looking forward to the editor. I made some really popular UMS maps in the original game, a few of which a lot of people were playing regularly for six months after I released them, and one which I still sometimes see people playing now, although not nearly as frequently these days.

The best thing about StarCraft is the diversity of tactics. You can literally just come up with so many amazing ways to kill someone and have it work, and when you pull off something really epic, you will never forget it.

I won one time by making an army of DAs and mind-controlling the entire enemy fleet of BCs. I've won by filling 40 overlords with zerglings and dropping them all simultaneously into their base. I won by rushing them with a drone and building a hatchery in their base followed by sunkens so the creep would prevent them from building in their own base. I've even won while BSing 6 other people in a 7v1 comp stomp.

Speaking of that, you might wonder how you can possibly BS 6 other people, and the answer is the other thing which makes StarCraft so awesome: diplomacy. I can't tell you how many games have their outcome decided because of good diplomacy, getting someone to ally with you against someone else while you plan out how to defend against them if they BS you and at the same time plot to BS them regardless. What an amazing game, it just doesn't get any better.

Originally Posted by Zealot

Can anyone guess my favorite unit?

Spoiler for Ownage:

<3 Zerglings

Zerg>Terran>Protoss

Zerglings are my favorite too, followed by Dark Archon, so I have to go Zerg>Protoss>Terran.

[Kamisama]

Omfg i just thought thanks to your post of an awesome tactic i need to try asap !

[Kiev]

I tried it offline with AI....not really sure why people are so excited by this game..is it because its Blizzard? is it because people were obsessed with the first SC?

if so, then why? I mean there were many epic RTS games over the years: Dune games, C&C games (many variants, particularly Red Alert 2), Supreme Commander, Company of Heroes, which moved RTS games into a new level all together. Then you have Star Craft 2, which is not revolutionary at all and feels just like any other rts from the 90's...so why? I am currious

[Gixer]

i think it'd be more fun playing against a real person.