Like so many other Wii games, distribution for this game stinks. I've checked two stores since launch and haven't seen a copy yet. Hopefully this at least means that they're selling what they ship, instead of the alternative.

I'm sure I'll find a copy eventually.

I wholeheartedly agree with this post!

As for LKS: It's on the top of my list of games to buy if I ever get through all the games I already own.

i will pick it up eventually but dont have cash for it now.

Wow, this is the epitome of 'fanboy'.  Trying to state that a game is the best in its genre simply because you think its your personal favorite game 'of all time no question!'

Also, Age of Empires II, Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes.  All because they had more options and expanded on the RTS genre in terms of gameplay WAY more than Starcraft did.  Starcraft had balance, thanks to its 3 class system and rock/paper/scissors style counter gameplay.  But it wasn't without its own issues, such as Terran being clearly overpowered and certain units being favored over others (siege tanks anyone?).

Also, Starcraft is just a 10+ year old game.  Its only natural tht another RTS would have come out to surpass it by now.  Yes, Starcraft is still the most 'popular', but that doesn't make it the best game in its genre.  Its sequel will probably bring more to the table, but frankly its still going to be sticking to the 3 class system and rock/paper/scissors gameplay, which in itself means its going to be vastly limited compared to many other RTS games out there.  In essence, all its going to be doing is either adding more units, or adding new ways to interact with the existing units (the environment/story).  All which we've seen in the previews for the upcoming game.  And this is nothing really groundbreaking for the RTS genre.

Lack of IR pointer is an issue. The controls could have been better, and lacking the controls the game seems a bit redundant.

I bought it, and it wasn't what I thought it would be (I'm not referring to the controls which I understood when I bought the game). The slow start of the game killed the excitement somewhat, and as I got deeper in I realized it wasn't so much a strategy game as an rpg.

I'm not sure if you're just that misinformed, or if you're just trolling the game. Either way, don't quit your day job.

 You're definitely right. My fear though is that an ad campaign will cost more than it brings in (which I think is likely), hence making the game even more of a bomb and thus guaranteeing that a sequel never happens, and increasing the odds that Marvelous leaves the consoles behind for a long while.

 That's more fair, and hard to quibble with (being a subjective taste and all). All I can say to that is "rent it first": I have absolute confidence that once you try the game you'll be converted.

Let me put it this way. It's been out in Europe for months, and in North America for a week. Of the many people I've talked to about the game (who represent very divergent tastes), one and only one person has not really liked the game. (Edit: okay, make that two. Nice timing, Demotruck...) I'm having trouble thinking of any other game that's had that high of a good-response rate.

Long story short: do yourself a huge favor and try the game. You'll be hooked.

Marvelous actually posted about this: retailers order based on pre-orders, so since the game wasn't pre-ordered much few copies were shipped, hence the hard-to-find status. In fact, most big box places don't carry it at all (Fry's is the only exception I know of, and I don't think they're in your area). Realistically, online's your best bet.

The game bombed. Retailers barely ordered any copies.

Definitely.  And that's why I think they're opting not to do a commercial based ad campaign and hoping more for internet word of mouth popularity.  Which is essentially free.  But its also risky, as the internet and word of mouth fans are also the most finicky and critical of all the fans out there, as well as opt to picking the 'popular' games over the 'niche' games.  For every game like 'Disgaea' that gets popular through this method, there's 100 that bombs because one game like GTA4 comes out near it.

Starcraft is not the best in it's genre because I like it more. It's the best because it is the best.

Also, you comment about units favoured in Starcraft and that it's gameplay is Rock Paper Scissors I as a die hard RTS player find very ignorant. In starcraft there are no units that completely obliterates other units. Armor and pathing play a role to give units certain advantages over others, but no unit will completely mow down other units (except air vs melee). As for units being favoured I can think of none, Siege tanks are used almost always as the main attack unit in TvP and TvT, but have you ever seen a TvZ? There the stimmed marine is the main attack unit, and almost all other units serves their purposes. Also if we talk about units being favoured, how about the Paladin in AoE2? Also, Terran being overpowered? Are you seriously saying a race in Starcraft is overpowered? Every race have at some point dominated korean gaming tournaments, and that's because of the players not what race they played.

With that out of the way. The things starcraft absolutely pwns any "Age of" game is pacing and mechanics. In starcraft every unit plays in a completely different way, and thus must be microed in a completely different way. In Aoe there are melee units and ranged units. They play very similar all of them when compared to the diversity found in Starcraft. The difference in mutalisk micro and tank micro is much more significant than say paladin micro and archer micro. Also, the difference in mutalisk mechanics and lurker mechanics is greater than any unit differences in all the games you mentioned.

I fail to see how a game like age of empires can have more options than Starcraft since all the races in AoE basicaly play the same exept for some tweaks here and there. There are games that may be broader, but no game is deeper than Starcraft. Another thing about the AoE games is that the automatic formations mess up Micromangement. AoE is a series that strive to achieve immersion with it's be-the-god-and-rule-a-civilization setting, and sure, Starcraft isn't as immersive (unless you are playing a long game on Iccup and gather all of your concentration to win) but in terms of actual Gameplay, Starcraft wins.

I can't speak for company of heroes, but it sure does not have the same E-sport status that Starcraft has, so it's gameplay can't be superior. If the gameplay was exciting and diverse and skill-based on a Starcraft level, Korea would have adopted it.

I'm shocked that you didn't include WC3 in your list of games that you think is better, because that is the only game that has come close to Starcraft. But WC3 still falls flat in comparison because of it's hard-to-kill units and dumbed down macromangament.

"Also, Starcraft is just a 10+ year old game.  Its only natural tht another RTS would have come out to surpass it by now." I know, it's pretty sad that no game maker has been succesful in making a better game yet.

If this is going to be a long discussion, then maybe we should make our own thread?

Because the name and art style bring out the ZOMGKIDDY trolls, mostly. They're just afraid that playing it will somehow make them less Manly(tm).

It's a shame that this is not a proper Wii game -kinesophobia isn't really something the dev team is known for, either, so it's unclear as to why- but it does look like a very good game nonetheless. I've got it, but it's on my backlog.

thats false...the game looks unappealing to many, who will then not play the game because they dont want to play a game that they dont think looks nice.

YOU are a troll for making those comments and insults.