By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Will you purchase Starcraft 2?

 

Will you purchase Starcraft 2?

Yes (when?) 113 71.97%
 
No (why?) 44 28.03%
 
Total:157

Yes, week 1 purchase !



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Around the Network

some new trailers are out people , cant wait omg i love starcraft even though im not the best online by a long shot lol i just think its such a masterpiece i love blizzard so much



aragod said:
Mazty said:


Clearly you've never played Sum Com. SC2 looks far more cartoony then Sup Com and is hardly pushing any graphical boundaries:

http://www.2404.org/downloads/Supreme%20Commander:%20Forged%20Alliance/11842168782.jpg
http://www.2404.org/downloads/Supreme%20Commander:%20Forged%20Alliance/11842168826.jpg

No, both games are base building RTS' with a tech tree etc. This isn't like comparing Sup Com to Dawn of War II.

Sorry, Starcraft is far better game in every aspect than Supreme Commander. SupCom2 is worse than the first SupCom, the community backlashed at the developer short after release, sitting on meta of 77 with user rating 61 and community quickly dying off. On the other hand, Starcraft II while still in beta has already running tournaments, have joined the e-sports community with great honors and has more people playing beta than other RTS games from the last decade. And that beta is still closed. There is no point in arguing here, SCII while not even released is the better, prettier, more balanced and more entertaining game. It's community will be the largest upon it's release, while other games will die off. Like it happend with SC1. Deal with it.

 

Sup Com 2 is a load of ass, hence why I'm talking about the first....Love how you state how it's inferior to SC2. Oh wait, you haven't at all...

Actually look in the SC2 beta forums. Many of the pro players are complaining about a lot of the units having no role to play & how it's horribly unbalanced e.g. Zerg sucking.
Nice to see your entire argument is as chilish as it gets. "It's good because I say so and other people say so". Well it's sad to see that the mindless masses still exist. Until you can state why it's such a good game other than sheer nostalgia, oh dear.



Mazty said:
aragod said:
Mazty said:


Clearly you've never played Sum Com. SC2 looks far more cartoony then Sup Com and is hardly pushing any graphical boundaries:

http://www.2404.org/downloads/Supreme%20Commander:%20Forged%20Alliance/11842168782.jpg
http://www.2404.org/downloads/Supreme%20Commander:%20Forged%20Alliance/11842168826.jpg

No, both games are base building RTS' with a tech tree etc. This isn't like comparing Sup Com to Dawn of War II.

Sorry, Starcraft is far better game in every aspect than Supreme Commander. SupCom2 is worse than the first SupCom, the community backlashed at the developer short after release, sitting on meta of 77 with user rating 61 and community quickly dying off. On the other hand, Starcraft II while still in beta has already running tournaments, have joined the e-sports community with great honors and has more people playing beta than other RTS games from the last decade. And that beta is still closed. There is no point in arguing here, SCII while not even released is the better, prettier, more balanced and more entertaining game. It's community will be the largest upon it's release, while other games will die off. Like it happend with SC1. Deal with it.

 

Sup Com 2 is a load of ass, hence why I'm talking about the first....Love how you state how it's inferior to SC2. Oh wait, you haven't at all...

Actually look in the SC2 beta forums. Many of the pro players are complaining about a lot of the units having no role to play & how it's horribly unbalanced e.g. Zerg sucking.
Nice to see your entire argument is as chilish as it gets. "It's good because I say so and other people say so". Well it's sad to see that the mindless masses still exist. Until you can state why it's such a good game other than sheer nostalgia, oh dear.

Well this is where you fail, no serious and good player visits SC2 beta forums for anything else than technical support thread for when BNet is down. All you can see on beta forums are WoW noobs crying because they are getting their ass handed to them. E.G. Zerg is the strongest race in Korea and that's where it matters, profi players are playing tournaments and don't whine, from their replays most of the high level balancing is beeing made.

I'm not going down to some silly beatdown with facts and while masses can be clueless, there is enough of depth in SC community to make up for it. If you've ever tryied SCII you would understand that Blizzard managed to replicate the feeling from SCI. With it's gameplay, style, charms and all that makes legendary games. Give it a try, you won't look back on SupCom ever again.



MY HYPE LIST: 1) Gran Turismo 5; 2) Civilization V; 3) Starcraft II; 4) The Last Guardian; 5) Metal Gear Solid: Rising

aragod said:

Well this is where you fail, no serious and good player visits SC2 beta forums for anything else than technical support thread for when BNet is down. All you can see on beta forums are WoW noobs crying because they are getting their ass handed to them. E.G. Zerg is the strongest race in Korea and that's where it matters, profi players are playing tournaments and don't whine, from their replays most of the high level balancing is beeing made.

I'm not going down to some silly beatdown with facts and while masses can be clueless, there is enough of depth in SC community to make up for it. If you've ever tryied SCII you would understand that Blizzard managed to replicate the feeling from SCI. With it's gameplay, style, charms and all that makes legendary games. Give it a try, you won't look back on SupCom ever again.

And so why is Starcraft II so much better than Sup Com...?

Charms = nostalgia, so don't try to sugar coat it as if charm is a good thing. And which part of "I HAVE PLAYED THE BETA" did you not understand? I was an avid player of Starcraft I and Brood War but RTS' has evolved far beyond the first, with the likes of Total Annihilation (Sup Com the sequel in everything but name), Dawn of War, Company of Heroes etc.

If Starcraft II is so good, then why does everyone play it on the fastest setting? Little broken that, and it's still painfully slow when compared to the last decade of RTS innovation. Not to mention the utter sheer lack of tactics, which is either spam men, or speed tech to the best unit and spam that. Think those tactics should have died in Red Alert with Mammoth Tanks, no?



Around the Network

The first one was alot of fun. I enjoy the multiplayer aspect of Starcraft with friends alot. So yes, I will pick this one up.



Nope, not until they patch in LAN or it is added through a hack.


btw: 100th post!!!



updated: 14.01.2012

playing right now: Xenoblade Chronicles

Hype-o-meter, from least to most hyped:  the Last Story, Twisted Metal, Mass Effect 3, Final Fantasy XIII-2, Final Fantasy Versus XIII, Playstation ViTA

bet with Mordred11 that Rage will look better on Xbox 360.

Mazty said:
aragod said:

Well this is where you fail, no serious and good player visits SC2 beta forums for anything else than technical support thread for when BNet is down. All you can see on beta forums are WoW noobs crying because they are getting their ass handed to them. E.G. Zerg is the strongest race in Korea and that's where it matters, profi players are playing tournaments and don't whine, from their replays most of the high level balancing is beeing made.

I'm not going down to some silly beatdown with facts and while masses can be clueless, there is enough of depth in SC community to make up for it. If you've ever tryied SCII you would understand that Blizzard managed to replicate the feeling from SCI. With it's gameplay, style, charms and all that makes legendary games. Give it a try, you won't look back on SupCom ever again.

And so why is Starcraft II so much better than Sup Com...?

Charms = nostalgia, so don't try to sugar coat it as if charm is a good thing. And which part of "I HAVE PLAYED THE BETA" did you not understand? I was an avid player of Starcraft I and Brood War but RTS' has evolved far beyond the first, with the likes of Total Annihilation (Sup Com the sequel in everything but name), Dawn of War, Company of Heroes etc.

If Starcraft II is so good, then why does everyone play it on the fastest setting? Little broken that, and it's still painfully slow when compared to the last decade of RTS innovation. Not to mention the utter sheer lack of tactics, which is either spam men, or speed tech to the best unit and spam that. Think those tactics should have died in Red Alert with Mammoth Tanks, no?

Starcraft was always played on the fastest settings, the other speeds are there for players still learning the game.



Signature goes here!

Mazty said:
aragod said:

Well this is where you fail, no serious and good player visits SC2 beta forums for anything else than technical support thread for when BNet is down. All you can see on beta forums are WoW noobs crying because they are getting their ass handed to them. E.G. Zerg is the strongest race in Korea and that's where it matters, profi players are playing tournaments and don't whine, from their replays most of the high level balancing is beeing made.

I'm not going down to some silly beatdown with facts and while masses can be clueless, there is enough of depth in SC community to make up for it. If you've ever tryied SCII you would understand that Blizzard managed to replicate the feeling from SCI. With it's gameplay, style, charms and all that makes legendary games. Give it a try, you won't look back on SupCom ever again.

And so why is Starcraft II so much better than Sup Com...?

Charms = nostalgia, so don't try to sugar coat it as if charm is a good thing. And which part of "I HAVE PLAYED THE BETA" did you not understand? I was an avid player of Starcraft I and Brood War but RTS' has evolved far beyond the first, with the likes of Total Annihilation (Sup Com the sequel in everything but name), Dawn of War, Company of Heroes etc.

If Starcraft II is so good, then why does everyone play it on the fastest setting? Little broken that, and it's still painfully slow when compared to the last decade of RTS innovation. Not to mention the utter sheer lack of tactics, which is either spam men, or speed tech to the best unit and spam that. Think those tactics should have died in Red Alert with Mammoth Tanks, no?

You are so clueless it hurts, with your so called tactic you might get raped even in copper league. With that comment you are just a troll, saying that SCII is lacking tactics is utter bullshit and proof of your lack of knowledge. If you still have the beta, I'll gladly school you like a little girl with the same race with dozens of different tactics. The beta is out for just a little, yet people have already come out with some really great and impressive tactics, not including "cheese".

SCII is beeing played on fastest setting, because that's the way SC works, and you for sure know that since you were so avid player of SC and BW. The point of SC and SCII is in general fast multitasking in macro and micro management, while trying to adapt to the conditions that were given to you. It's like playing chess with 10 seconds per move. It's super hard, it's super challanging and it's super fun. I can't think of better example why something is better than something else rather than pointing to the fact that it's both criticaly acclaimed and alive and well. Which games are legendary? Those that have either changed the way you look given genre or those that are extremly popular even years after their release. SC got both, SupCom have none.



MY HYPE LIST: 1) Gran Turismo 5; 2) Civilization V; 3) Starcraft II; 4) The Last Guardian; 5) Metal Gear Solid: Rising

aragod said:

You are so clueless it hurts, with your so called tactic you might get raped even in copper league. With that comment you are just a troll, saying that SCII is lacking tactics is utter bullshit and proof of your lack of knowledge. If you still have the beta, I'll gladly school you like a little girl with the same race with dozens of different tactics. The beta is out for just a little, yet people have already come out with some really great and impressive tactics, not including "cheese".

SCII is beeing played on fastest setting, because that's the way SC works, and you for sure know that since you were so avid player of SC and BW. The point of SC and SCII is in general fast multitasking in macro and micro management, while trying to adapt to the conditions that were given to you. It's like playing chess with 10 seconds per move. It's super hard, it's super challanging and it's super fun. I can't think of better example why something is better than something else rather than pointing to the fact that it's both criticaly acclaimed and alive and well. Which games are legendary? Those that have either changed the way you look given genre or those that are extremly popular even years after their release. SC got both, SupCom have none.

Clearly you never have played Sup Com if you think Starcraft is micro management....Don't talk about games you've never played, it only shows your ignorance.

Untill you've actually played more RTS', I don't think you can comment on a game's quality as you really can't compare it to what else is on the market.