Whats the big deal about starcraft?

sikcle

Distinguished
Aug 1, 2010
14
0
18,520


cuz it's frikken awesome

i got a new pc just to play this game! (well not just for sc2 but it helped in my decision, plus it was time to ditch this "best"buy machine anywayz)

-core i5-760
-geforce gtx 460 1gb
-8GB gskill ddr3 @ 1600


hell ... it's about time!
 

Sparksparks

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2010
20
0
18,520
Personally, I love Starcraft 2 for the custom games. People are using the map editor to make stuff like RPGs, third-person shooters, and shoot-em-ups like galaga (which is also in the campaign).
 

fizzy con carne

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2009
64
0
18,630
Ive only started playing since scII but its so addictive, so balanced and has an amazing community. If you want to improve your game you just ask. Just as Sikcle put it its frikken awesome LOL
 

xaero1ne

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2010
127
0
18,680
starcraft 2 is amazing because it has 3 totally diverse races, completely balanced,
with so many strategic possibilities that it's mind boggling. it's got tons of content and replayabilty. and the fit and finish is superb as always expected from blizzard.
this is a game that we will be playing for many years.
 
The first SC was a giant step forward for RTS gaming. At that time, all other RTS games were slow and plodding (just look at C&C:TS, released just a year later), and ideas like upgradable units, units with their own abilities, three sperate factions that all play differently (Creep was a BRILLIANT idea that really changed things up as far as base construction went) really made the first SC stand out.

The first SC was a revolutionary FPS. SC2 basically refines the forumula, although in this day and age, its nothing special. A solid FPS, but nothing more, but given the community behind the first SC even a decade after release, its no shock SC2 is getting such attention.
 

BroHamBone

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2009
354
0
18,810




FPS? First person shooter or Frames per second or..... you meant something else? :sol:
 


It's OK, stuff happens.. :)

Just to add to the discussion, I'm finding that the lack of LAN play is less of a pain than I thought it would be. Battle.net really works well; I've had some games with friends/family where everyone was in a different city, and had no problems whatsoever. If we decide to have a game, 5 minutes later we're playing. No setup required. Of course online play has its drawbacks, but I'm really impressed with the ease and simplicity with which it works.
 

jgiron

Distinguished
Nov 11, 2008
561
0
19,010
"I got your Zerg right here", my favorite line from the original game cut scene.

Starcraft is a great RTS and better for me than an FPS because i don't FF as much (i have aiming issues).

Battlecruises are good but I prefer the base units.

besides Kerrigan is hot (well before they made her the Zerg Queen)
 

dalta centauri

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2010
885
0
19,010

It's funny when you see people in multiplayer spend a whole match to try and mass produce battlecruisers.
 

dalta centauri

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2010
885
0
19,010

Ive seen three in one match.
The thing is it was 4vs4 and he was positioned behind two other players.
 
It's rare to see them in 1v1 games, simply because the game won't last that long, at least not long enough to collect the resources to build one while playing against a skilled player.

I agree that it's more of a balancing issue than a cost vs benefit problem. The attention span of gamers has decreased to the point where designers try to balance the game on a knife edge; any match that lasts longer than 20 minutes is "boring". I come from an RTS era where a decent game lasted 3 hours and ended in a draw because everyone ran out of cash and got hungry. :D
 
I agree that it's more of a balancing issue than a cost vs benefit problem. The attention span of gamers has decreased to the point where designers try to balance the game on a knife edge; any match that lasts longer than 20 minutes is "boring". I come from an RTS era where a decent game lasted 3 hours and ended in a draw because everyone ran out of cash and got hungry.

Amen. I miss the days where matches involved strategy instead of macro, and would actually take some time to complete. Thats one reason I never got into starcraft much.
 


Well, a SC1 match between a few evenly-matched players on a large map has the potential to last a good while, especially if one guy decides to turtle big time and builds base defence three layers deep..
 

dalta centauri

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2010
885
0
19,010
If u want strategy, there's company of heroes..... really like the game, u cant really go for unit rushes like in starcraft, rather it's mostly about strategy and managing ur units
You got it to work properly?

SC2 has some good features, although I do dislike when Terran transport tanks on cliffs.
Ive seen matches where 6 Reapers can tear through a whole base without a single one being killed.
 
If u want strategy, there's company of heroes..... really like the game, u cant really go for unit rushes like in starcraft, rather it's mostly about strategy and managing ur units

Way ahead of you on that one; anything made by Relic these days is gold. Right now though, Sins of a Solar empire is probably the best all around RTS I've played, with CoH/DoW a close second.