Starcraft 2 This Year?

[exfileme]

Yesterday Activision Blizzard held a pre-E3 conference call, detailing a few goodies that unfortunately will not be making an appearance at this year's E3 tradeshow.

Starcraft 2 This Year? : Read more

 

[Guest]

too many time, i lost my interest in this game.

 

[matt87_50]

I should F***ING HOPE SO! Be heading into DNF territory otherwise (as the first post suggests) not that blizzard would ever run out of money.

 

[haze4peace]

I can't wait!!! Starcraft is my all time favorite game.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

so another game in episodes .... guess I'll not buy that until I can have a 'complete' package with the full game.

 

[canceltwc4fios]

It had better:

1) be LAN multiplayer capabable
2) not contain (evil) desktop raping DRM
3) run on XP Pro
4) be nVidia CUDA friendly

announcing plans? "there is no try"

 

[doopydoo22]

It had better:

1) be LAN multiplayer capabable
2) not contain (evil) desktop raping DRM
3) run on XP Pro
4) be nVidia CUDA friendly

announcing plans? "there is no try"

1) It's Starcraft
2) It's Blizzard
3) It's Blizzard
4) Seriously?

 

[apmyhr]

I don't mind paying for games to reward the company. But I don't think I'm willing to pay for a massivley delayed strategy game with graphics outdated by at least 4 years.

 

[ssddx]

[citation][nom]Neo Phoenix[/nom]too many time, i lost my interest in this game.[/citation]
Great games take time to develop. Quite a few people still play the orginal fyi.

[citation][nom]haze4peace[/nom]I can't wait!!! Starcraft is my all time favorite game.[/citation]
Amen to that. I loved the ablility to create custom maps with triggers
[citation][nom]neiroatopelcc[/nom]so another game in episodes .... guess I'll not buy that until I can have a 'complete' package with the full game.[/citation]
I would say this is more like the orgininal Starcraft compared with the add-on pack Brood Wars. I highly doubt you will not get your money's worth.

[citation][nom]doopydoo22[/nom] 1) It's Starcraft2) It's Blizzard3) It's Blizzard4) Seriously?[/citation]
Exactly.

[citation][nom]apmyhr[/nom]I don't mind paying for games to reward the company. But I don't think I'm willing to pay for a massivley delayed strategy game with graphics outdated by at least 4 years.[/citation]
Have you taken a look at some of the screenshots lately? In any case, it was the playability that let the original starcraft realize sucess not breathtaking graphics. The new game seems to have more warcraftesque graphics. Also keep this in mind: with a massive amount of units/creatures/buildings/effects on screen, hyper-realistic graphics could bog-down computers. The other thing to remember, The slighty cartoony graphics seem to match the overall starcraft game. Anything else would be strange.

I will admit that I haven't thought about playing Starcraft in quite a long time; The development went on for a little more than I would have liked. However, I would rather wait a longer period of time then to be disapointed with EA-standard crap.

 

[hillarymakesmecry]

As long as gameply is fun I couldn't care less about graphics.

Game that are in development for so long do end up outdated by release date.

I'm pretty sure Blizzard will sell millions of copies without a problem.

 

[seboj]

Zerg and Protoss are expected to hit the market later, perhaps even appearing years apart.

Ughhh.

 

[Guest]

Supreme Commander ruined me for RTS games. No tactical zoom? No want.

 

[Guest]

Lol... maybe I'm a geek... It's 'Artanis' not 'Antanis' :3

I play the original with my friends a couple times out of the week. He's poor, his computer can run it, and it's fairly easy to understand. I can't wait for SC2 if just for the updated graphics and AI... I'm getting tired of looking at 256 colors, and I want to have more lulzy strategies :-\

 

[shadowmaster625]

I think SC's diehard fans are all dead by now...

 

[FlayerSlayer]

As Miyamoto once said: A game that is released late is still eventually released, but a game that is released bad, will be bad forever.

But truly, a solid decade for this? I got excited, then forgot about it, then hyped again, then frustrated, then eager again, and now I simply cannot muster the interest to care again. Maybe I'll care when it comes out, or maybe I'll be too busy raising grandkids by then.

 

[FlayerSlayer]

[citation][nom]Spewn[/nom]Supreme Commander ruined me for RTS games. No tactical zoom? No want.[/citation]I know!! But even without full map zoom (and independant minimap scaling and zoom), even without building queues for construction units, even without the larger number of units... I'm just glad we'll be able to select more than 12 friggen units at a time.

 

[hillarymakesmecry]

Supreme Commander is pretty much the only computer game I play anymore. Essentially all my other gametime is Forza 2.

 

[seboj]

SC2 isn't for us. It's for those damned Koreans who still play 90+ hours a week.

 

[ssddx]

It was stated that development began in 2003. Since we are into 2009 that would make it 6 +/- years. Not a decade. Do keep in mind that they have other high priority projects which most likely had much of the staff dedicated to sc2 stolen away for a time. I highly doubt it was 6 years of full-speed-ahead devo work.

Supreme Commander was the biggest disapointment in a sequel that I have ever seen. The great thing about the original, total annihilation, was diversity. Both sides had units & structures which were different enough to warrant different strategies. I will admit that the "super units" in SupCom are interesting, and I like the upgrade to the commander unit. However, everything else seemed to me like they stamped out cookie-cutter like units/turrets to make balancing the game easier. Some features were nice, but as a whole it was a disapointment. Well, at least imho.

Yes, koreans & foreign countries do play more than we do in the us. We tend to go through games pretty quick over here. (minus mmorpg-addicted people)

 

[gm0n3y]

I think I hear the distant sound of 1 million Koreans fapping.