Lukewarm: SC2 - $49.99 w/FS

D

DDigital

Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
574
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Ehhhhh.... Think I need to wait for another $10 to come off the price. Looks like a good game that I'll enjoy, but it really does just look like Starcraft, but updated. Not quite worth $50.
 
Wow, what a weird comment.

"looks like starcraft"

Well hello? It is Starcraft but Starcraft 2! Do you want it to be a car racing game, for it to be different? :eek:

If you have played it, its worth the money! Game play is extremely more intense with many more things to do, let alone the graphics. Campaign is awesome as well.!
 
ins- said:
Wow, what a weird comment.

"looks like starcraft"

Well hello? It is Starcraft but Starcraft 2! Do you want it to be a car racing game, for it to be different? :eek:

If you have played it, its worth the money! Game play is extremely more intense with many more things to do, let alone the graphics. Campaign is awesome as well.!
Click to expand...

I think it's a valid comment, considering a lot of people would agree it's almost exactly like starcraft with better graphics... we're not expecting a racing game but most sequels change far more drastically. i did not think the graphics were much different (not 12 years worth) and the only real difference i noticed when i played the trial was that when someone was attacking me they would move there players back and forth to hit and run, hit and run, like little girls, made the game extremely frustrating for me. i'm sure if you have tons of time to invest into this game and be competitive online it could be fun... but i'm curious, does anyone know if the huge competitive (mostly korean, i think) fanbase of starcraft is making the change?
 
So because you couldn't figure out a decent counter-strategy, the game's no good? I think it would be a fairly common complaint if the biggest RTS in 10 years consisted of nothing more than units that can outrun other units.

Activision doesn't follow suit when it comes to its big games and pricing. So yes, if you're interested in the game, this would obviously be worthwhile.
 
If you are serious about competitive RTS, SC2 is second to none.

At first, I was a little butt hurt about the limited campaign, but after a while it becomes an afterthought at most compared to the "real" online aspect.

It is indeed mostly just a remake of SC1, but the detail implemented into balance and gameplay is where it shines so brightly. Give it a try for a bit and you'll understand ;)
 
hardware_failure said:
At first, I was a little butt hurt about the limited campaign,;)
Click to expand...
In all seriousness, you're getting what? 28 missions? The original SC had around 30 (10 per race). Personally I'd say the quality of the sp missions is substantially better than the original. Also, I feel that the 3 part campaign scheme will be better if the expansions are reasonably priced. We'll be looking at ~90 campaign missions total when the trilogy is done. And it's hard to ignore the fact that the multiplayer component is the best of any rts game right now.

And in regards to "omg screw Activision games!", Blizzard has stated multiple times through the development of SC2 that Activision execs. do not influence the game as much as people think.
 
Crispy002 said:
In all seriousness, you're getting what? 28 missions? The original SC had around 30 (10 per race). Personally I'd say the quality of the sp missions is substantially better than the original. Also, I feel that the 3 part campaign scheme will be better if the expansions are reasonably priced. We'll be looking at ~90 campaign missions total when the trilogy is done. And it's hard to ignore the fact that the multiplayer component is the best of any rts game right now.

And in regards to "omg screw Activision games!", Blizzard has stated multiple times through the development of SC2 that Activision execs. do not influence the game as much as people think.
Click to expand...

And how many of those 28 missions have ANYTHING to do with the ultimate advancement of the story? Maybe 12, tops. If I could go back I would probably wait till it hit 30-40 dollars before buying it.
 
K-Mart did a $39.99 deal about 1 week after launch. I jumped on that but anything higher and I would have waited.
 
Darth Millennial said:
K-Mart did a $39.99 deal about 1 week after launch. I jumped on that but anything higher and I would have waited.
Click to expand...

More like a over month later. :p

Not a great deal as I wish this is what it retailed for when it launched, but I would recommend this game if you have not picked it up yet. However, if you're waiting on deals, you might see some better deals down the road since Kmart already had a $39.99 sale.
 
who doesn't have this game by now?

for some of the shit people pay $50 for, this is well worth it.
 
YamahaAlex37 said:
I think it's a valid comment, considering a lot of people would agree it's almost exactly like starcraft with better graphics... we're not expecting a racing game but most sequels change far more drastically. i did not think the graphics were much different (not 12 years worth) and the only real difference i noticed when i played the trial was that when someone was attacking me they would move there players back and forth to hit and run, hit and run, like little girls, made the game extremely frustrating for me. i'm sure if you have tons of time to invest into this game and be competitive online it could be fun... but i'm curious, does anyone know if the huge competitive (mostly korean, i think) fanbase of starcraft is making the change?
Click to expand...

Only people who are not very experienced with sc / sc2 would think that.
The games look very similar but they play very different IMHO.

Higher up on the ladder sc and sc2 has never been a game of just build massive armies and smash into each other head on. Army micro has always been important.

As far as competitive base i don't know about Korea but in the US you don't see many original SC or SC BW events .
 
Last edited:
if you can't micro and macro
don't blame the game you just suck at it

that happens to anything in life
some people have times to invest in something they enjoy
if you actually play the game online/ ladder
it is not exactly like starcraft with better graphics
the graphics not much different? trying running it on ultra mode instead of low settings

the game is frustrating for people is because they are bad at it and just make excuses for themselves

the game is huge in korea, u.s, europe
 
I wish I had uber micro.
I have 2 unopened boxes of the SC2 Collectors Edition that I havent opened. I suck at RTS games, but I do enjoy playing them solo.
 
Dark12 said:
I wish I had uber micro.
I have 2 unopened boxes of the SC2 Collectors Edition that I havent opened. I suck at RTS games, but I do enjoy playing them solo.
Click to expand...

Uh, were they gifts or something, or are you just stock piling for Armageddon? :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top