vlad321 said:
zarx said:
vlad321 said:
zarx said:
vlad321 said:
zarx said:
SC1 had it's share of copy and past pointless content...
I got my copy at a hefty discount so the price doesn't really bother me that much
Plus this way they can make the Protoss campaign the most epic thing ever... In 2016...
|
Yes SC1 did. However SC1 is 12 years old amd was awesoome for the games for its time. Compare newer RTS to SC2. Compare Frozen Throne to SC2. It managed to get all races in there, one way or another.
|
What new RTS's? Every other recent RTS game are more real time tactics or in Dawn of War 2's case a RTT multiplayer with a bad real time SRPG campaign. SC2 is the only competent traditional RTS in years and I would say it's the best RTS since TFT which had it's own flaws.
|
As I said, compare it to Blizzar'ds own TFT and WC3. THe single-player capiagn managed to tell the story without adding filler shit like the colonials and specters.
|
WC3 had it's own filler and while I agree that WC3 and TFT told better stories and had the best custom map system the game were not without their flaws things like matchmaking were a joke balance was off for years no widescreen etc. As a complete package SC2 at launch was better than WC3 was at launch and like all Blizzard games continues to be polished up with years woth of patching.
I suspect you were probably one of the people that blasted WC3 for it's flaws and new direction at the time as well, you just seem to hate new stuff.
|
Funny because I was one of the first people to push for WC3 and the hero system. I jsut hate new things that have shit in them. NO lan, shit single-player, shit Bnet (WC3 had a better Bnet) and $60. That's what it is at the end of the day.
|
Someone should have gotten the Collector's Edition. totally worth the 40 extra bucks. Hell of a deal. Why not just wait 10 years for StarCraft II Battle Chest to release with all three games in one?
