Long-awaited Starcraft II in stores July 27

[mikesx4911]

What are your system specs mikesx4911? As the game has some BEAUTIFUL graphics for an RTS, but it takes some serious hardware to max the game out it seems.... Atleast newer than the Nvidia 8xxx series, and the ATI Radeon 3xxx series, and a lot of ram.

Anyways, over all, the game autodetects your hardware and sets the graphical settings, on minimal settings, it is HIGHLY disapointing, but, max it out with physics and everything else, it's beautiful.

And to note on the story, I have a feeling it will be where you can just start with sc2 and no background of the original, as there was really, nothing in the original that would point to a new story AFAIK.

my system specs are amd phenom 2 x4 3.4ghz 6gb of ddr2 800 6400 ram, and ati radeon 4770hd 512mb ddr5 1.5tb hd 5400 rpm i need to put this in my sig lol. yea graphics was maxed on mine i still think some other RTS have better graphics, these had a cartoon feel to me

 

[Harper]

Is Blizzard still putting out that BS where there is no LAN mode?

I never played the first game, the only RTS from that sort of period for me was TA, sooo demanding.

Star Craft is easy compaired to some other RTS that I have playied over the years. The only thing you need to worry about in Star Craft is Minerials and Gas.
It's not like Star Wars Galactic Battle ground where you have 3 resources to mine. Or some thing like Masters Of Orion, Sins Of A Solar Empire or Hegemonia: Legions of Iron where you need to run world economies and trade routes too while fending off enemies.

 

[C0RR0SIVE]

my system specs are amd phenom 2 x4 3.4ghz 6gb of ddr2 800 6400 ram, and ati radeon 4770hd 512mb ddr5 1.5tb hd 5400 rpm i need to put this in my sig lol. yea graphics was maxed on mine i still think some other RTS have better graphics, these had a cartoon feel to me

Interesting, check your settings and make sure everything is set to maximum, you should easily be able to max the game out, my puny laptop can't even come close to medium, it hardly plays it on the lowest settings


And Harper, yes, they are still pushing the no lan b/s, they have even taken down and killed nearly every Lan/Battle.net 2.0 emulation project out there... Only a few exist, and even the members of the few that do exist know don't know it exists it seems...

I would like to see someone come up with Battle.net 2.0 Emulation that will work on the LAN side easily... Would make lan parties, actualy, EXIST

 

[Joeyboy]

Eww playing the beta and not liking the art style/graphics, feel like RA 2.5 graphics wise, could have come out in 04 or 05 I swear. I guess their going for a retro feel?

Also that big Terran mech looks totally out of place, ugly and the fact it goes through terrain and flips round instantly when told to go the other way doesn't help the lack of realism. I guess I'm too used to games like Supreme Commander, Universe at War and the Dawn of war 40k series and Total Annihilation..which was released in 1998...

 

[Druid]

Blizzard thinks they are too good to make nice graphics and don't spend the resources on it. While gameplay is most important, there is no excuse for not having top notch graphics as well. The people working on the gameplay are not the same people working on the graphics. They should just expand the graphics team.

 

[iFargle]

It is far from ready, and a total failure. I looked back on when they first started to release game play footage, the super units, basically being mothership, battle cruisers, and I don't remember the zerg one, have all been nerfed like crazy for no reason.

StarCraft was never known for super units. That's what WarCraft does

I am sorry, but the mother ship, is the BIGGEST disappointing thing, no planet cracker, no black hole, no big time bubble, makes it useless, only good abilities it has, is recall, which can be useful to get forces around fast, but it's such a slow ship that it could never escape battle if needed. This was supposed to be a unit that was FEARED, yet, people laugh at it, and a carrier or two wipes it out. OR a badly damaged battle cruiser wipes it out.

It cloaks whatever's around it, both buildings and units. And it's near impossible to see (Remember on SC1 when they had a mass of units, it was like a giant invisible wave looking thing? This one makes it much harder to see) It also has that black hole that sucks up the units, allowing you to concentrate fire on something else or position your units better.

That and a HUGE glitch was found the last 24 hours. When an ally leaves, your supposed to be able to control them, like you do your self. Here is the issue, you can't BUILD with them, nor can you see the resources of them.

You can build with them. I've done it plenty of times. Just did it today, in fact You can't see their resources, which kinda sucks, though.

That, I find sad, I wonder how many other glitches/bugs there are that won't be found because of there PITIFUL beta testing selection.

I wouldn't consider 10k+ players nightly on only my server to be pitiful. It's supposed to be exclusive, not a free handout like they did with BFBC2 or MW1.


That said, I can't see why people complain about the absence LAN gaming. I like being connected all the time. I can see this for people who play without Internet, but, in all honesty, what percentage of the population does that?

And about graphics: It has amazing graphics. And again, when has Blizzard really been up to snuff graphically? They want the widest player base they can possibly carry, and most people don't have custom built computers and whatnot.


StarCraft II will be in the spotlight for some time. I can see this being the game of the year, easily. It's possibly the most anticipated RTS I've ever seen. I can't really think of any truly highly talked about RTS game in the last couple of years..

BTW, Hefemeister, did you get two more email invites? I got two more a few days ago, about to get on with a few friends

 

[Hefemeister]

Yep.

 

[Joeyboy]

And about graphics: It has amazing graphics. And again, when has Blizzard really been up to snuff graphically? They want the widest player base they can possibly carry, and most people don't have custom built computers and whatnot.

)

Hmmm...if you haven't played an RTS for the last few years then yeah it's half decent, but otherwise **** no. RA3 is far superior and they go for a cartoon style intentionally, Universe at War was pretty good, Supreme Commander not bad considering the scale, Dawn of War 40k obviously blows them all out of the water. But to me the lighting in this isn't great, explosion effects and related animations look old school, Terran especially looks poor. Terrain textures aren't amazing either(the ground especially). I have max settings by the way, I'd have expected a game to look like this in 2005-2007 but not now. I imagine though this game is more designed for extreme competitive play, not to be pretty.

I suppose your right about graphics, but then I would always say make them look good for those who can play it maxed out, and give the option for lowest, low, med etc.

Your right about popularity. The only other RTS with any real discussion in recent times was Supreme Commander(didn't disappoint) and Command and Conquer 4: Tiberium Twilight, WHICH SUCKED! MY GOD DID IT FAIL TO THE EXTREME. Seriously one of the worst buys I've ever had, couldn't even bother to play 3 missions of the campaign, though I hear the "epic" ending sucked too.

 

[iFargle]

I actually liked CnC4... My only gripe was the multiplayer leveling system.. Something like that just doesn't work in an RTS. Starcraft 2 has something like this, but it doesn't effect gameplay at all. It's only achievements, avatars, and emblems. I wish just let you upload your own avatar, but i can see that easily getting out of hand

Also, off topic....
I got zergling rushed the other day by a player named Big Jay. After the game, he and three of his friends proceeded to spam me, constantly yelling "U SUCK I AM BETTER THAN U I AM THE PINNACLE OF MAN!"
People like that make the game so much less enjoyable...

 

[Druid]

You are correct, but I'd be willing to bet you said something to provoke him like his tactic being lame if he was willing to go far enough to get three other people to spam you.