Starcraft II vs other RTS games? - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Gaming > PC Gaming
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-30-2010, 12:17 PM   #1 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27
Default Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

My friend bought the game and I watch him play from mission 1 to 23 (total of 26 mission in total and with that here my question, what so good about Starcraft 2 anyway?

The game seem like a copy of Warhammer 40K games, granted the original Starcraft came out way before Warhammer 40K dawn of war and its expansion but Warcraft borrow from Warhammer and Starcraft borrow from Warhammer 40k.

Well I'll list the negative first...
1. Why is the unit not scale to size? You have a drop ship that is a little bigger than your viking yet can carry a couple of them?
2. It too similar to the original Starcraft, is that a good thing?
3. Building design aren't very unique, and little things like units and vehicles don't come out but just automatically appear, which is outdated for today RTS games.
4. Shooting just look fake, bullet don't fly everywhere like in Warhammer 40K.
5. Can't hide in building, don't have a cover system like Warhammer 40K, little things that are missing from other RTS games, and the list can go on and on.

And here are the positive...

1. Campaign is long enough, it is to be expected from Blizzard since it only focus on one campaign.
2. Story keep you interested, cut scene are nicely done, and the whole cantina/bar/outdoor area is a first for RTS.
3. Campaign does a good job of introducing a new unit every mission, which is the best I seen from any other RTS games. Usually some games introduce 2 or 3 at a time.
4. The characters/heroes are very interesting and add life to the story.
5. Superb voice acting/great sound effect, etc...

So tell me is it that much better or worst than Warhammer 40K and what makes this the best RTS games of all time?
__________________

unsung is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 05:20 PM   #2 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Druid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,065
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

I only have dawn of war 2, but this is better. Dawn of war 2 is really hard and almost entirely lacks the economic aspect of rts. More casual players can play this. In dow2, until you get the hang of it, you will continually lose. And in dow2, with the way the game is set up, you can't have fun if you're losing whatsoever. Worst of all, you may never really get the hang of it, and its just not as good as this. I wish blizzard would have used up to date graphics though. I mean, the people that work on all the graphics are not the same people working on the gameplay. And since the gameplay is the same, all they had to work on in that area was balancing. Its not like the minimum requirements for this game are any lower than other games that come out, 6600GT.
__________________

__________________
CPU: Intel Core i7 920
GPU: ASUS STRIX GTX 970
Ram: 12GB 1600 Mhz DDR3
Mobo: ASUS P6T
PSU: 750W PC Power & Cooling
Druid is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 06:23 PM   #3 (permalink)
-Deactivated-
 
Oreo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: England
Posts: 5,723
Send a message via MSN to Oreo
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

They deliberately do not make the graphics very high so people with lesser computers can play it.
__________________
-Deactivated-
Oreo is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 06:42 PM   #4 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
aaronkupen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,848
Send a message via AIM to aaronkupen Send a message via Yahoo to aaronkupen
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

Uh, Starcraft was great for its time, but the second one is extremely overrated, and with a $60 price tag to boot, count me out. I'm not that big of an RTS nut, but a free RTS that I have been playing called Balanced Annihilation (a freeware game bassed off of the classic total annihilation) seems to provide a deeper experience, has more variety, and much more map selection -- not to mention more functionality.

People complaining about the graphics of starcraft 2 though really need to get a reality check. Since when does high polygon counts count more than superb art direction? Does it really matter that much, or is it because this game isn't actively justifying the purchase of a $400 gpu?
__________________
Desktop - Antec Sonata III
Intel Core i3 540
4 GB DDR3-1600 memory
ATI Radeon HD 5670
Windows Vista Business x64
aaronkupen is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 08:57 PM   #5 (permalink)
Imperial Space Womble
 
Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,903
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

Quote:
Originally Posted by unsung View Post
Well I'll list the negative first...
1. Why is the unit not scale to size? You have a drop ship that is a little bigger than your viking yet can carry a couple of them?
2. It too similar to the original Starcraft, is that a good thing?
3. Building design aren't very unique, and little things like units and vehicles don't come out but just automatically appear, which is outdated for today RTS games.
4. Shooting just look fake, bullet don't fly everywhere like in Warhammer 40K.
5. Can't hide in building, don't have a cover system like Warhammer 40K, little things that are missing from other RTS games, and the list can go on and on.
6. Battle.net and no LAN only play.
__________________

"I FEEL SO GOOD I FEEL SO NUMB, YEAH!!!" -- Rob Zombie
Main Rig - AMD FX-8350x8 4.0Ghz CPU, 4x 8Gb (32Gb) DDR3 Ram, Gigabyte GA-970A-D3, GeForce GT 970 4Gb, 1x 256Gb SSD\8Tb (3+2+2+1) SATA HDD, DVDRW, SB X-Fi, Win 10 (64-bit)
Asus N61JV-JX231V - Intel Core i5 3437u (1.9 - 2.4 GHz), 12GB, 640GB, 16" Display, nVidia 325M 1Gb, DVD-RW, Win 10 (64-bit)
Mobile Phone : Samsung Galaxy 5 Note SM-N920IConsole : Play Station 4
Harper is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 09:57 PM   #6 (permalink)
Camera junky
 
Poizen22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ottawa ontario canada.
Posts: 6,278
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

the only resemblense i see from war hammer and star craft is the marines other then that the yare bot hdiferent. if you wana play the borrow game then most of everything coems from dungeons and dragons. the war hammer games themselves are made to compete against star craft, star craft came out first, so as far as the video games themselves go some might say warmahammer took some things from star craft but that is besides the point. star craft is an awsome game that gives you a fun experience, and the ability to play so much user made content. there is a reason star craft 2 for the last 11/12 years has had more players then all of war hammer ever has had wether its the table top or video game. anything mideaval with fantasy like creatures t osome degree stems originaly from dungeons and dragons. and most scifi- space universes come from star treck and star wars at some degree. the first rts ever was comand and conquer. so you cant sit there and say this took that from this and so on because at some level there is always going to be some area in any game or universe where things where inspired from a diferent franchise.

my final point is this, i have played warhammer 40k table top and the video game and i have played star craft 1 and 2. star craft 2 is much much more fun, and more of a classic rts feel to what games used to be like back then. much like wow this is an easy game to play but hard to master, and that is what makes any game simply fun.

also i play sc2 on a dell laptop with a c2d t6500 and a intel gma 4500. i run the game on the lowest settings and it is tolerable, doesnt lagg at all, and i am still having so so much fun with this game. to adress the high settings graphics issue some people may be having. most rts games use 1 game engine, and when they want to do in game cut scenes they use the same engine. the rts you are usualy quite high up in the sky so when your right on down there, the fact that the game still has a considerably good level of detail is quite suprising. where the 400$ gpu is justified is when you have 100 high detailed units on screen from up in the sky. yea sure when you are down low for the cut scenes you might not say its justified but there is no need for it as there is only usualy a few units. i dare anyone with a gtx 480 or higher to play a game with 200 units per side and then go head to head and tell me it doesnt look awsome, itl proly bring your gpu to its knee's at that.
__________________

http://www.flickr.com/photos/poizen22/
intel Core I7 4770k@ 4.0ghz-Nvidia GTX980-MSI Z87G45 mobo-8gb ddr3 Corsair Vengeance Blue-ADATA SX900 128gb ssd 2x in raid 0 500gb hdd and 1tb network drive- EVGA 750w bronze-NZXT RAZER H440 LE-55 inch samsung 8000 series LEd-BENQ XL2411Z-Logitech z906 THX 5.1, Microsoft sculpt KB Razer NAGA 2014
Poizen22 is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 10:36 PM   #7 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Druid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,065
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmanmx View Post
They deliberately do not make the graphics very high so people with lesser computers can play it.
The minimum for this game is no lower than other games as I have already said. Idk why they can't scale it better.
__________________
CPU: Intel Core i7 920
GPU: ASUS STRIX GTX 970
Ram: 12GB 1600 Mhz DDR3
Mobo: ASUS P6T
PSU: 750W PC Power & Cooling
Druid is offline  
Old 07-30-2010, 11:54 PM   #8 (permalink)
 
farinha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Portugal
Posts: 866
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

Actually Warcraft was released before Command and Conquer. Good times I spent playing them when I was 12.
I don't game much specially rts, when I game I usually play FPS games or PES/FIFA, so I can't compare Starcraft 2 to other RTS but I'm liking the game so far. Haven't bought it, I'm playing with a friend's account because he don't have the time to play right now, lucky me!
__________________

ASUS P5P77D :: INTEL i5 750@3.6 GHz :: Asus HD4890 :: 4GB Gskill Ripjaw 1600MHz CL7 :: WD Black 1TB :: SSD OCZ Vertex2 60GB :: Corsair 750TX :: LG L204WT :: Windows 7 x64

<<<<<<<<<< If you think I've been helpful in anyway rep me :p
farinha is offline  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:50 AM   #9 (permalink)
-Deactivated-
 
Oreo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: England
Posts: 5,723
Send a message via MSN to Oreo
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poizen22 View Post
the only resemblense i see from war hammer and star craft is the marines other then that the yare bot hdiferent. if you wana play the borrow game then most of everything coems from dungeons and dragons. the war hammer games themselves are made to compete against star craft, star craft came out first, so as far as the video games themselves go some might say warmahammer took some things from star craft but that is besides the point. star craft is an awsome game that gives you a fun experience, and the ability to play so much user made content. there is a reason star craft 2 for the last 11/12 years has had more players then all of war hammer ever has had wether its the table top or video game. anything mideaval with fantasy like creatures t osome degree stems originaly from dungeons and dragons. and most scifi- space universes come from star treck and star wars at some degree. the first rts ever was comand and conquer. so you cant sit there and say this took that from this and so on because at some level there is always going to be some area in any game or universe where things where inspired from a diferent franchise.

my final point is this, i have played warhammer 40k table top and the video game and i have played star craft 1 and 2. star craft 2 is much much more fun, and more of a classic rts feel to what games used to be like back then. much like wow this is an easy game to play but hard to master, and that is what makes any game simply fun.

also i play sc2 on a dell laptop with a c2d t6500 and a intel gma 4500. i run the game on the lowest settings and it is tolerable, doesnt lagg at all, and i am still having so so much fun with this game. to adress the high settings graphics issue some people may be having. most rts games use 1 game engine, and when they want to do in game cut scenes they use the same engine. the rts you are usualy quite high up in the sky so when your right on down there, the fact that the game still has a considerably good level of detail is quite suprising. where the 400$ gpu is justified is when you have 100 high detailed units on screen from up in the sky. yea sure when you are down low for the cut scenes you might not say its justified but there is no need for it as there is only usualy a few units. i dare anyone with a gtx 480 or higher to play a game with 200 units per side and then go head to head and tell me it doesnt look awsome, itl proly bring your gpu to its knee's at that.
It doesn't bring my GTX 470 to it's knees It drops a lot of frames, down to 25 to 30. Still highly playable. And anyway i am thinking that is more my CPU.

Harper, i had my doubts about no LAN and Battle.net, but just yesterday my friend came round with his PC to play BFBC2, but he installed SC2 from my disc and used one of two 7 hour guest passes that came with the game. He doesn't usually like RTS games, but he was blown away by starcraft as was i (we never got round to play bad company 2). After he finished the tutorials we went onto Battle.net coop vs Very Hard AI (we held up for 40 minutes but eventually lost) and the whole process was absolutely flawless. We added each other as friends, which worked instantly, the chat worked in the menu's very nicely even though we were right next to each other so just talked anyway. In game, if someone told me it was LAN i would have been in no doubt. There were no connection errors and NAT problems like with numerous other games, and there seemed to be very low latency so low you could not tell. It never lagged or nothing. And the whole partying up and creating a game process was the smoothest in any game i have seen.

I really love the ability to control your teammates units if he lets you, and to trade resources. Its very useful indeed. And it was without doubt the most fun we had ever had on a game. The strategy that goes into SC2 is phenomenal, i have only been playing SC2 for 6 or 7 hours and this was his first time, so to go against a very hard enemy was, well, hard. I've never had to concentrate so much on a game before, if you are against a hard enemy then you have to be constantly micro managing. I genuinely think if i relaxed for just 20 seconds and did nothing, i'd be screwed in that game against very hard AI.
__________________
-Deactivated-
Oreo is offline  
Old 08-01-2010, 02:01 AM   #10 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: asdf
Posts: 8,867
Default Re: Starcraft II vs other RTS games?

Now, try to play with 30+ people on that same connection, instant IP ban
__________________

c0rr0sive is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Backdoor in top iPhone games stole user data Osiris Phones, Tablets, and other Handheld Devices 1 11-25-2009 09:17 PM
Games for Windows aeroplane22 Microsoft Windows and Software 3 08-29-2009 05:23 PM
Computer Games Community Garena Osiris PC Gaming 3 08-18-2009 12:30 PM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.