Printable View
It's not 1/3 of the game. The single player of Starcraft 2 is just as long as all 3 campaigns of Starcraft 1 combined...so they both have the same length. Think of it more as the first part of a trilogy (staring with the number 2 :)).Quote:
Originally Posted by BoaConstrictor
...aaand 4 hours later only 75% oh my GOD!
I hope they don't add more mp units with each expansion. I'm only interested in the mp, the single player stuff looks boring. Going to pick up my copy tomorrow and I will be off for 4 days. Should be awesomeQuote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
If 4 hours is 75%, then it's only 1/3 of a game.
They won't. Because:Quote:
Originally Posted by senorgotti
1) That would fragment the gaming community.
2) Giving player A more units than player B is impossibly hard to balance.
1) If you want to catch up with Starcraft storyline, look here:http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/07/26/st...three-minutes/Quote:
Originally Posted by rimmerchant
2) They never announced pricing for the other campaigns. You are assuming they are going to charge $60 for each campaign... and when you assume....
3) It's not the case. You're assuming.
Your math is awesome, and yeah, Blizzard confirmed it way back, this game is Terran campaign only.Quote:
Originally Posted by rimmerchant
Math aside - The problem is that he's assuming that every other campaign will also call $60, based on the fact that the Terran campaign is $60.
There is a Protoss level in the campaign. I doubt it's a long one though. Tech tree for Terran in the campaign is different than multiplayer btw.
kent, the bw expansion for sc1 did change the multiplayer. Not sure if players with the bw expansion played the people without it though. I only played SC pre BW, so I have no idea.
So I'm a consumer whore and bought it because of that epic Kerrigan vid. So far I'm still not enjoying it, but I'm going to complete the campaign, dammit!
Hahahaha....you fool!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
Thats what you assume and I don't agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by kent1146
It would stand to reason that Blizzard would offer unit upgrades (similar to an expansion set) to convince owners of the Terran campaign to purchase the the next campaign.
If the mp versions between different campaign versions are the same, then you give little reason for SC2 players to purchase more then one game. With Mp being viewed as one of the main focuses, I seriously doubt Blizzard will offer no unit expansions in subsequent releases.
No your wrong. Blizzard announced a long time ago that each campaign would be $60. That may still change, but the pricing structure was announced.Quote:
Originally Posted by kent1146
Ha you should have just watched the vids on youtube. Not sure if I'm going to bother with single player. It's all about the mp ladder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
Ugh, the Blizzard downloader is terribly slow for me tonight, I've been downloading for about 5 hours now and I'm only at 35% complete :(
Just use a torrent site. Its the same file and works as long as you have a valid serial/logon account for battle net.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gar
Seriously do people not know this?
7 and a half hours later Im in, but still installing updates and patches at ~0-100kb/s. So fun.
And no Taggart, I do not??
Then FYI, Blizzards auto downloader is crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakespy
Your better off grabbing the game off a torrent site and then just using your serial/logon with it. It's legit and its faster.
Kind of pointless to try a torrent now, last time I checked PB there were 9000 leeches with 800 seeders. Also, it looks like they already cracked the campaign lol.
Blizzard's downloader is already a BT client, I seriously doubt dubious torrents would be faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
I downloaded the whole game from Blizzard in 60 minutes, so ymmv. :X
Get any play time in? Is the campaign worth the money or is it same ole stuff?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
Played past the first chapter in the single player and I stopped when things started getting crazy, so I can't speak to the quality of that just yet. I did spend about 3 hours doing other things like 2v2 bot stomps, 1v1 and challenge missions. I also found a really basic Tower Defense game that I spent a while playing! I hope we get some quality custom games out of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timman_24
Would you say it is worth the 60 bucks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
The single player is amazing. There's some RPG stuff between missions...hiring mercenaries, upgrading abilities/tech/buildings. You get choose what mission you want to take sometimes (not sure how much of the game is like that I'm only a few hours in). There are A LOT of cinematics and they're awesome, just like the production values of everything.
I predict many 10/10 reviews.
Coming from someone who doesn't really like RTS'es, and someone who is so cheap that I usually only buy games when they are on sale through Steam, I can say a definitive: Yes. Worth $60. I am having a blast with this game, both single player and online 2v2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timman_24
Kotaku's impressions: http://kotaku.com/5598410/starcraft-...er-impressions
Quote:
Slogging through Starcraft II's singleplayer campaign is like stepping back in time. To the days before World in Conflict, before Dawn of War, before Company of Heroes, when real-time strategy games weren't about flanking the enemy, or laying down suppressive fire. It's a time when they were about frantically clicking a mouse to dig stuff out of the ground before sending bobbly little men to their deaths.
It's a primitive game, in that respect. Your marines can't take cover, the maps lack any real sense of depth, and there's still no scope for genuine tactics. To succeed in Starcraft II you need to do what you did in Starcraft: namely, mine fast enough to build enough units to beat the waves of bad guys that are being thrown at you.