Topic: The Starcraft mega thread - Rising from the ashes.

[Stratos]

This is the first RTS I've gotten that I recall does not have a fold-out unit/build/tech tree card.

[Shaymin]

Since you need internet access to play the game online, maybe they figure you'll just go to GameFAQs? *shrug*

[broodwars]

Since you need internet access to play the game online, maybe they figure you'll just go to GameFAQs? *shrug*

It's probably more likely that since they made this game for die-hard StarCraft nuts who would complain and whine if anything significant changed with the gameplay, they assumed the players would just know all the shortcut keys and everything already from their time playing StarCraft 1.  It's lazy and sloppy, but it makes sense and it saves Activision money printing extra manual pages I guess.

[TJ Spyke]

Considering they are charging the $10 tax HD games have, you think they could spend the $0.006 per page to include stuff like hotkeys. Adding in that and other important info would cost about $0.06 for every 10 pages (slightly more if they do color instead of black and white). Eve

[gbuell]

All that stuff is included in the game itself, probably because they counted on a lot of people buying the digital download instead of a boxed copy.

[Sundoulos]

Yes, otherwise it wouldn't really make sense for them to make the digital download version $60 as well.   I used to think those books were nice and all, but I found over the years that I rarely referenced them.   The original Starcraft always did a good job of teaching you the basics of how to use each unit;  I suspect that this game works the same way.

I think the price tag is a bit steep, too, but I suppose it's not technically overpriced if people are still willing to pay for it.  I am still curious about what they'll do with the next two installments, and how much it will cost.

As it stands, I probably won't get to play until Christmas; as my wife and are planning to wait until then to get a newer computer.

[Shorty McNostril]

Does anyone remember how much the SC 1 cost compared to the BroodWar expansion?  I imagine something similar will happen here.  They will be expansions.

[SixthAngel]

 I hope for expansions but now I expect a Half Life episode thing to happen.  They are very late with each expansion and by the third title stop pretending they are releasing it episodically.  I read somewhere that they are making different multiplayer ladders for each game which makes me think they are going to take a long time instead of just making the single player missions I'm hoping for.

[KnowsNothing]

Oh hey guys.  Starcraft 2 is basically the most fun game that's ever made me want to give up gaming forever.  So if you want to rape me with your god damn cannon rushes you can just add me to your friends list.  Here's everything you need to know:

OccamsRazer (319)
Bronze League (lol)
US Region
Protoss mainly...er, always.

Shorty- I lost the trial card thing but I swear when I find it I'll give you the key.  I AM A MAN OF MY WORD DAMMIT.

[Stratos]

I love playing the tower defense games... I play online custom games more than the single player and real multiplayer combined. LOL

[gbuell]

I played a bunch of games of Income Wars recently - lots of fun even though it lags my computer down to about 1 frame per second!

[Barrett]

i was watching starcraft 2's trailer and assume that it was iron man . . . lol

[broodwars]

I might as well revive this old topic now that I have the game.

Well, after almost 6 years with my trusty old Inspiron 9300 Dell laptop, it was finally time to get a new one and I did on Christmas.  As a fan of...most...of the original StarCraft, I finally picked up StarCraft 2 now that I have the PC specs to play it.

I'm not well-versed in interpreting PC specs (according to DxDiag), so how good is this machine for gaming, anyway? It's apparently better than what my old Alma Mater currently requires for Digital Media students, anyway:

Toshiba Satellite P775D Laptop

Processor: AMD A8-3500M APU with Radeon HD Graphics (4 CPUs), ~1.5 GHz
Memory: 6144 MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 11
Display Device: AMD Radeon HD 6620G
Approx. Total Memory: 3043 MB
Screen Resolution: 1600 x 900 (this is the one aspect where my old laptop was superior, but it's apparently rare to see higher resolution laptop screens)

When I first started up the game, I left the game at its default settings and it frankly looked terrible.  It was like looking at a PS2 game.  Blizzard tends to be extremely conservative in their recommended settings, though, so I bumped everything up 1 level and it looks fairly decent now (though nowhere near as good as in footage like that seen on Gametrailers.  I don't know if I can push the system up another level, since I'm not sure just how good these specs are.

As for the game itself, I'm 4 missions in and it's pretty fun so far.  The new narrative and persistent upgrade systems are nice new additions, if extremely basic.  The in-mission gameplay, though, kind of disappoints me.  Whereas WarCraft III (a game I really enjoyed) took WarCraft 2 to a whole new level, this just feels like more or less the same game as the original StarCraft (but with larger unit counts).  It's ok I guess, just not particularly impressive.  I'm still very early, though.

[Ceric]

I enjoyed Warcraft III but it was no where near as good as Warcraft II.  Looking back Warcraft II is Baby WoW.  Having played through SC2 I really think they learned from the Mistakes of War3.  Seperating the Mulitplayer from the Singleplayer is a great idea and allowed them to make some interesting mission.  Being more of Starcraft isn't a bad thing with how long its been since we got a new single player campaign. 

On the graphics, yeah the lower setting looking liker you playing StarCraft.  The higher settings on the other hand look great.  Fun factiod the game even supports 7.1 sound.

[Caliban]

I don't know if I can push the system up another level, since I'm not sure just how good these specs are.

Man, you've been playing console games too much. There's nothing wrong with that. You're just a bit rusty, or something.

Just crank it up already. I usually leave the anti-aliasing, and anisotropic filtering at a basic level because they usually chew into the framerate, and as long as it looks pretty and plays smoothly it's fine by me. I do have a 1920x1080 screen on my laptop though.

[Ceric]

I tend to Crank everything up myself and step down to where its acceptable.  I've learned to live without shadows because they are normally the most taxing thing.

Though for some reason my box can't run SWTOR off the most basic settings.  I really wish I had a bigger box.

[gbuell]

I don't know if I can push the system up another level, since I'm not sure just how good these specs are.

Uh, why not give it a try?

this just feels like more or less the same game as the original StarCraft (but with larger unit counts).

I think the unit counts are the same as the original, actually.

I really liked StarCraft II a lot. I think the upgrades and occasional branching mission paths, which determine what units you get access to in the game, are really great additions.

[Morari]

I've learned to live without shadows because they are normally the most taxing thing.

I don't know how you could live without that. I've been playing LA Noire the past few days and the lighting in that game is absolutely horrible looking. The shadows are all jaggy, whilst everything else looks overblown and flat. Thankfully I can still switch back over to Rage and Skyrim to look at something nice.

That said, I'd kill the anti-aliasing before anything else. It isn't really all that necessary with the huge resolutions we're all running nowadays.