Quote:Original post by Trapper Zoid I've never got too involved in playing RTS games online and Warcraft 3 just didn't captivate me in the way Warcraft 2 and Starcraft did, so I'm going to sit on the fence for a while regarding Starcraft 2. The single player options for an RTS is important to me, so having only one playable race campaign in the box causes me to pause. But I understand that this game is probably not aimed for my tastes. I'll probably wait until all three campaigns are in one box and consider buying it then.
Sounds like a good plan to me. I think I'll steal it.
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.
After playing the hell out of the beta I'm excited for the game somewhat. It's a great 1v1 game and it's extremely polished, but the team aspect is seriously lacking, IMO. There are some glaring balance issues, and being killed 2v1 before your teammate can come to your rescue can be frustrating. I've heard a lot of good things about the map editor, but I'm just not that interested.
All in all, this is probably the least excited I've ever been about a Blizzard game. I think I lost a lot of faith in the company after what I feel was a decline in WoW's quality (and 10 years between any Diablo/Starcraft game).
Quote:Original post by Trapper Zoid I've never got too involved in playing RTS games online and Warcraft 3 just didn't captivate me in the way Warcraft 2 and Starcraft did, so I'm going to sit on the fence for a while regarding Starcraft 2. The single player options for an RTS is important to me, so having only one playable race campaign in the box causes me to pause. But I understand that this game is probably not aimed for my tastes. I'll probably wait until all three campaigns are in one box and consider buying it then.
It's definitely reasonable to go with the wait and see approach.. but I will say this game is much more SC1 or WC2 than it is WC3. It does NOT have heroes and that changes the way you manage armies at a core level.
I agree with you that WC3 was my least favorite of the Blizz RTS games and I'm thrilled to see that SC2 is not continuing in that vein.
Quote:Original post by Trapper Zoid I've never got too involved in playing RTS games online and Warcraft 3 just didn't captivate me in the way Warcraft 2 and Starcraft did, so I'm going to sit on the fence for a while regarding Starcraft 2. The single player options for an RTS is important to me, so having only one playable race campaign in the box causes me to pause. But I understand that this game is probably not aimed for my tastes. I'll probably wait until all three campaigns are in one box and consider buying it then.
It's definitely reasonable to go with the wait and see approach.. but I will say this game is much more SC1 or WC2 than it is WC3. It does NOT have heroes and that changes the way you manage armies at a core level.
I agree with you that WC3 was my least favorite of the Blizz RTS games and I'm thrilled to see that SC2 is not continuing in that vein.
I liked WC3, even the heroes. Also, it was the game that created the Tower Defense genre.
As for SC2, I'm not buying it because the one race per game sounds like another Activision cash-in, like Modern Warfare 2.
29 missions!, it even has some protoss specific missions if I remember correctly. It's not like they're sitting on the next 60 missions waiting to release them.
They're doing like with broodwar, releasing expansions, except this time they're going to do a second expansion instead of just a broodwar.
Next to the money reasoning, that they're doing the campaign on just one race to keep people want more for their favorite race, is that the campaign is centered around a big rpg-like experience where you gain money and buy technology for units that aren't even in multiplayer while getting in-engine cutscenes between missions that are lightyears beyond the quality of the pre-rendered ones from starcraft 1.
basicly, starcraft 2 contains 29 missions, production costs are way above those of starcraft 1, while I understand that someone might miss the other races in a campaign, they'll still coming within the next years as expansions, and if that's not enough, you can still skirmish against the AI, or play any of the shit-ton of playermade missions.
And besides, galaxy editor, will spawn ">some way more varied stuff compared to the stuff that was born out of warcraft3.
Actiblizzard has told us what we're getting in wings of liberty, it's not just a 10 mission long terran campaign without the 20 next missions, it's a full game-long campaign built around a new kind of metagame style.
Now I feel retarded for defending a big company like blizzard, but with so much crap being shoveled into the games market, they deserve some cred for what they're doing.
Quote:Original post by Demosthenes I liked WC3, even the heroes. Also, it was the game that created the Tower Defense genre.
I believe it is during Starcraft that Tower Defense was created. I still remember playing the map. Team matchup, two sides, left and right, and creeps spawn for each side and move to reach the target goal. For each creep you kill, a new creep is spawned for the other team. The only tower you can make is the Terran turret, and you can also make goliaths and marines in case creeps get stuck or pass your turret defense line. So, basically whoever can kill creeps the fastest would overcrowd the other team and win the game.
Then after that 9-11 happened, and people start making different variations.
Quote:Original post by eld 29 missions!, it even has some protoss specific missions if I remember correctly. It's not like they're sitting on the next 60 missions waiting to release them.
They're doing like with broodwar, releasing expansions, except this time they're going to do a second expansion instead of just a broodwar.
It's interesting that it makes a difference, but to me it does. But that's mainly because I'm not nearly as much into RTS games as I was a decade ago.
If Starcraft II had a repeat of the ten missions per race, three race based campaigns, then there's part of me that would be tempted to buy the vanilla box just for nostalgia's sake, even knowing there's going to be expansion sets down the line. I know I'd be getting a repeat of a "complete" Starcraft experience in that theoretical sequel.
But this way, it's presented as the first slice of a story - buy the expansion later if you want to play the Zerg's part. That deflates the nostalgia argument for me; the game just doesn't sound "complete". Since I don't have a burning desire to play online the day it's released, I'm prepared to wait another two years to experience the "full" version.
