I've always found better download speeds with private trackers. If it works for you, then great. If not, I say go with a private tracker that won't have you waiting 7 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
Printable View
I've always found better download speeds with private trackers. If it works for you, then great. If not, I say go with a private tracker that won't have you waiting 7 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
Sounds like Click fest 2.0. Which is really want the fan base wants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
The single player story looks very well done.
I hadn't checked this thread in a while, and I'm amazed you picked this one up after all the comments you made. I hope you enjoy it because it really is a great game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
I bought it for the story, I don't see myself playing much multiplayer unless a lot of my friends pick it up as I still think the gameplay is archaic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmunkel98
What about it do you find archaic? The base building and the lack of automated mechanics? I have found that there are many levels to the depth on this game, depending on your skills. The campaign is not going to be where you see this though. It is all on the competitive ladder matches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazie
I'll definitely be skipping this as I didn't like the first game beyond the Human campaign and absolutely HATE online RTS's.
I think the kotaku review Kama posted does a great job of explaining how the game can be viewed as "archaic" by many.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmunkel98
The RTS genre has evolved dramatically since starcraft and features like cover, strategic points, flanking, and etc. Its a game still rooted in the 1990s where its less about strategy and more about resource management and base building.
Personally, I don;t think thats a bad thing, but many RTS players who have moved beyond that are going to have a hard time moving back.
Flanking, strategic points, and cover are all in the game to a certain degree. Flanking is always an option when attacking via choosing where to attack or splitting your forces to surround the enemy. You do not get more damage for attacking a unit "from behind" though. There are terrain advantages in the game, however. The resources are an important strategic point, as are the towers they have the in the game that allow you a greater view through the fog of war when you occupy them. There are also various choke points, destroyable obstacles, and other important areas on the maps. As far as cover goes, there are line of sight features on the map in addition to the whole stealth mechanic.Quote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
I have played both DoW2 and Supreme Commander, and I can honestly say that this game has just as much(if not more) depth to gameplay as those titles when it comes to multiplayer.
I just played some of the campaign and am definitely going to buy it. Looks to be a good 30 hours long with a great story and the production values are through the roof. Going to get me a legit key right now. I doubt I will play much multiplayer but with the mod community, I think this game will be a lot of fun.
Oh and did anyone else get a little sense of Firefly on the bridge of the ship with the music and all?
I can agree a bit. Sometimes the more simple the gameplay, the more options it opens up for strategy. I kind of miss the days of resource management. IMO DoW1 was by far the best RTS style out there. I did not care for DoW2's action oriented style.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmunkel98
But yet most of what you have described was already found in Starcraft. Destructible terrain is different but aside form that, not much else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmunkel98
I 'm not arguing whether Starcraft RTS style is good or bad, or depth of gamplay. Just that it's mechanics are established and thats what a lot of people want. Its base building and resource management at its core. Thats not good or bad, it just is what it is. However, I think others have moved on and find it hard going back to that.
Personally, I think Starcraft does a great job with balance and an easy to learn but hard to master RTS system. IMHO, it still blows the pants out of most RTS game mechanics and it's one i plan to play once the price goes down.
I doubt the price will go down much Taggart. Popular games don't seem to go on sale much. The game is just plain fun. I really don't know how to get that through to most of you. You can nitpick all you want but the game has strategy. It is certainly not get giant army first and push out. You will loose if you do that. However, good economy is a big part of the game.
OMG SC2 is a clickfest! I hope they hurry up with Diablo 3 <- think about that one
I dunno. I think it all depends on what happens with the later SC2 releases.Quote:
Originally Posted by senorgotti
I'm in no rush to play anyways so i don't mind.
Ha ha you seem to have posted in this thread allot. Are you sure?Quote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
Duh Starcraft 2 not original game. Hey who else is going to preorder CoD Black ops and Medal of Honor? SC2 is soo like unoriginal lets go play MW and then later some Bad Company. (sorry had to do it. thought it was a funny troll attempt though)
I don't see a need to buy the game right now. All games go down in price and this will be no exception. I'm not sure why you have a problem with that or why you think that makes me a troll. I'm not even sure what your last paragraph is trying to get at.Quote:
Originally Posted by senorgotti
I've even said I think the game looks great and I plan to play it,..just not now. I think at this point your just raging at anyone who doesn't proclaim this as the second coming of Christ or just lumping anyone who has a different opinion of the game then you into "OH MAH GOD THIS GAME SUCKS" category when thats clearly not the case.
Oh didn't think I was raging. Sorry did not mean to look like that guy. It was an attempt to be funny while pointing out the amount of redundant shooters that are out or is coming out. Also figured Diablo 3 will be more of a clickfest than StarCraft will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
No prob. I just want people to realize that a lot of us are not bad mouthing game, just saying its a bit of a blast from the past.Quote:
Originally Posted by senorgotti
I don't really except D3 to be anything more then a clickfest, but then again I don't think we've seen much change in that genre of games or know exactly what blizzard is planning. I'm curious like every one else to see how it comes along, and like SC2 I'll more then likely play it for the single player campaign. It's a just a question of what the early builds look/play like.
Well, I'm a few hours into the campaign and this is definitely worth a buy. The gameplay is some-what basic, but that allows the player to focus on other things instead of micromanaging cover, squad weapons, etc. The single player is simply fantastic with great cut scenes and between mission options such as upgrading troops, researching, and hiring mercs for money made through the missions.
This is the most fun I've had in a RTS since DoW came out. Really top notch stuff here and I wasn't hyped about it.
Oh yeah and Tag, don't expect a price drop any time soon. I bet it will be a year or more before its down to 50 dollars. You may get a sale though, so keep your eyes open.
I have a backlog of 25+ games so no rush for me. besides, I might have another 12 years before the next installment is launched. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Timman_24
Ok this is pretty dumb. You have to create a parental controls account to disable real ID. Real ID will show your real name to the people you have added as friends. It's enabled by default, so you have to sign up for parental controls to disable it.
Price drop? On a blizzard game? Have you seen what they are selling Warcraft III, the original starcraft, and Diablo II for these days? That's like asking for a price drop from Nintendo on their Mario games...never going to happen.
They do price drops, like a price drop on World of Warcraft. It took them 2 years to do it, but there was a price drop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Astros Fan
I guess some people are willing to wait. And if they're REALLY willing to wait, they might just wait until the "Battle Chest" version of Starcraft 2 comes out, with all 3 campaigns in it.
I thought about this, and I think you are correct. In World of Warcraft, they require you to have the latest expansion pack in order to play Arena, their high-end PvP competitive game mode. Anyone who is serious about PvP always gets the latest expansion packs, so they can participate.Quote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
Since Starcraft 2 does not have a recurring monthly fee, and with Blizzard being owned by Activision, I can see the greedy suits trying to see how they can milk every last penny out of the people that are hopelessly addicted to Starcraft 2. And if I was a greedy suit that worked for Activision, I'd try and find a way to compel people to buy expansions.
I don't remember seeing that. Do you happen to have a link to where you saw that? (I'm not being a **** - I am honestly curious, and would like to know).Quote:
Originally Posted by taggart6
The only people I've heard this $60 thing is from these forums, so I am watching that closely. I'm pretty sure the "box set" with Diablo, Diablo 2 and LoD, went down in price last year to $30. 9 years after release. So, good luck with getting SC2 on a half price deal in the next year or two. Blizzard is a business, which aims to make money, and happens to do so. Anyways: if you liked Starcraft, you will like Starcraft 2. Period. Dot. The End. For all you naysayers I understand that you don't like that style. But I do. Different people like different things and that's the fun of it.
It was in a 2009 or 2008 post. I'll have to search to see if i can't find it. I want to say in Blizzcon 2008 but I'm not sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by kent1146