Why do people like SC2

[PurplePoot]

Not if blizzard are smart, redmarine.

Anyways, Grade_A_Kill, another way to counter zealot rush is to build two marines, then hide them behind your SCVs. Problem solved.

They just list one way of countering it...

Another way: wall your base cliff entrance if there is one, then put marines behind it. (Use the barracks as part of the wall so that you can lift it off to get out)

Etc, etc.

 

[LordDz]

why the hell can you just walk by defenses? are they useless?
Do any of you think D-Day was just walk past the bunkers?!?
it is an unrealistic imitation of strategy.

Wasn't that what happened on D-day? an entire army rushed over a whole beach, straight into machine gun fire.

But, if they should go for your beloved strategy, they should have called Hitler, waited for him to come there with his tanks, then they could start to bombard each other for atleast a few days, then hopefully.. Someone of them would be dead.

And if you hate this game so much, why do you even write about it? It's like screaming on F.E.A.R. cause they got no tanks.. ITS NOT REALISTIC! THEY NEED TO USE TANKS TO KILL THE TERRORISTS!

It's a fuckin game. (sorry for cursing).

 

[Denu]

This is a mod site. Why are people here excited about SC2? Cause they wanna mod it. Thats my reason at least.

 

[TheSandWraith]

I didn't much read into this thread, just about the first 3 posts.
You say you can do all these "cheap/amazing" strategies to piss people off and easily win. Well theres one simple solution to this. If you have to power and resources to do these things, then most likely the other person will have the resources to stop you or defend against them, unless they are noob. The game isn't just a horse-load of crap. Effort is put into the game.
For example. You said something about dropping turrets at harvesters with the Nomad. Well I am pretty sure the Nomad costs minerals and gas. So do the turrets. You will need to build them and buy them. People also don't leave their harvesters vulnerable so if you have the cash to get Nomads, they have to cash to defend against them. Think about it.

 

[Grade A Kill]

i also think that the fighting doesn't vary, you can seriusly do math with it, 1 dead zealot= 2 dead marines, im gonna do a math problem, 5 zealots find 9 marines out in the open, 1 zealot is left after the encounter. i can probebly see 5 cealots against my marines and run because no matter what my marines wont make it, i think it kind of odd that its like that, even that strategy lisst on blizzard says depending on how many marines are in the bunker you will need twice the number of zealots thatn there are marines. its just wierd that is so...that best word i can find is "setup", its all set up like that and the fighting never varies. if you have 10 Zealots you will defeat 20 marines no matter what, unless they are on higher ground which they would need to see you coming a while berfore you attacked
i also think starcraft needs a larger unit variety. in Sudden Strike 2 RWM(real warfare mod) set in WW II, there are 120 different infantry variants devided among U.S. Brittain, German, Italy(though less), Franch(though less), Japan, and the soviet union, 130 tanks again divided. 45 different artillery and AT cannons, and quite a few different planes. and the fighting varies in the game, a T-34 Soviet tank can even defeat a tiger and vise versa, many things affect the fight, armor, accuracy, and side penetration, a T-34 can hot a tank on the side where its armor is weaker and blow it up easily. that is tacics right there, thats how Shermans delt with tiger tanks in WW II, if this were command and conquer, 5 Shermans beats 1 tiger, in reality, you go Command and conquer style on that tank it will kill you, what they did in realife, was 1 Sherman distracted that tiger while the others he was with snuck around it and attack it from behind.
that makes a flank too, what if you atack a comlem of marines with Zerglins from 2 angles with exactly 1 less Zergling you need to kill them (my math example) you will lose no matter what, in it was more real (imagine if the game was completly remade) the Zerglings would come up behind them and tackle em or something, check out the star craft ghost intro cinematic on youtube, plus imagine if that was what the fighting was like.

now instead of making a siege tank inflict 30 damage points, make it cause damage depending on where it hits the target, make it more realistic, realism goes very well with strategy games, if you play RWM you would fully understand how great it is. But i will get stratcraft ONLY for the editing, + to give startcraft its chance, i may not think much of it but i will give it its chance.

 

[PurplePoot]

The formulae only work if you ignore micro, terrain, etc, completely.

Additionally, flanking in StarCraft has its uses: to prevent inferior armies from (at least partially) escaping and regrouping.

As for so much variation, units which overlap in roles would get kinda boring after a while (especially with 400+ types!), so... bleh. The idea of StarCraft was to have each unit fulfil a unique role (Which generally worked, but not universally, or at least some of the roles were rather useless).

As for realism, next time you see a flying bat (in space, too) which spits venemous spinning wyrms at me, please tell me. Or a giant laser-sword wielding giant, etc, etc. Not everything is perfectly realistic. Not everything is meant to be. In many situations, it works nicely so.

It's fine to have your own opinions on certain game mechanics (like effectiveness of accuracy, flanking, etc), but that does not mean you are more right than anyone else, and definitely not that that is the only way to go. There are games which are meant to be realistic, and StarCraft isn't.

 

[Grade A Kill]

i dont think startcraft has to be realistic, i just think realistic games are the way to go, there are things in RWM that would normally be overpowred in games like this, but the realism balanced it out, i am refuring to the sturmtiger, see picture of it at wikipedia. and the math does work i'd say
8 )

 

[redmarine]

i dont think startcraft has to be realistic, i just think realistic games are the way to go, there are things in RWM that would normally be overpowred in games like this, but the realism balanced it out, i am refuring to the sturmtiger, see picture of it at wikipedia. and the math does work i'd say
8 )

I know what you mean but see this:
If it was gone after your head then there would be no zerg.
They can not breath in space.
They can't evolve that fast.
Terrans medics would not be able to sting a huge needle into the marines suits.
Siege tanks gets a bit damaged and it can't change to siege mode. Or get stuck in Siege mode.
The zerg would die of 1-3 hit.
Siege tanks would be able to drive over units
The mothership would not be able to cast a timebomb
1 hit and marines would fall down and die because of the hazardous envirements.
Terrans would need to be payed.
You wouldn't have unlimited supply of units.
And etc.
Realistic isn't good for this game...
Thoguh you might mod Starcraft II to make it more realistic.

Your math won't always work.
It depends on units health, where your units are located, how far there is between your units, how the marines are formated etc.

 

[Massive_attack]

I find it hilarious that the only person supporting grade a kill in this arguement.... is himself. (Hakeem seems to have stopped a little while back)

Edit: Oh, and by the way, sherman tanks um didnt really score so many kills against tiger tanks. Tactics or not. indeed, shermans were quite crappy in that war, especcially against the vastly superior german armor.

Another thing, the system you suggest would easily add years upon years of development time to the game. It would make it retarded too. if i want to play a realistic game ill go play blitzkrieg 2 or something, This is star craft, a game where fighters can float midair, where aliens can live out in space with little to no effect, a game where a massive battle cruiser is the size of two tanks side by side, a game where a nuclear strike provides no fallout whatsoever, a game where bullets are made of plastic based on the damage they do, a game where... you know what forget it ill make this fucking simple for you:

STARCRAFT AND STARCRAFT TWO
ARE.
NOT.
REALISTIC.

AND NEVER WILL BE. ACCEPT IT. MOVE ON. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT DON'T PLAY THE GAME. THE GAME HAS STRATEGY, THATS WHAT EVERYONE ON THE PAST FOUR PAGES HAS BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU. LISTEN !

 

[LordDz]

Tell me a game which is 100% realistic and FUN in battle scenarious and unit statistics and I'll give you a cake. Seriously.


Why are we playing games? To feel something different, if Sims 2 for example, would be the most realistic game in the world, I don't think anyone would like to play it..

And you whine about how 1 Zealot can defeat 2 marines and such. Well, balancing dude, if they aren't supposed to be able to kill one, as one ZEALOT cost 100 minerals, and 2 Marines cost 50, how would protoss be able to score a win?

I know I sound a little like a .. Patrioism (Or how ya spell it), but, it's one of my favorite games. And a hell lot of more people, so something must be good about it huh? If so many people like it?

 

[Massive_attack]

Spelling errors aside, LordDz makes a respectable point, millions like the game the way it is, why would blizzard change something that was working for them ?

Edit: oh and uh... Dz, Blitzkreig 2 was a fun realistic game... but i see where you were going with that, most of the time realisim does make games boring.

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Realism in games sucks, and going for that route is a stupid design choice.

Realism restricts design, adds rules. I want to see ridiculous stunts that defy gravity, play games that try to be fun and not slowed down by realism. Real life in games is frustrating, and if you want realism, then go out in real life.

That's why games like Warcraft 3, Starcraft, Halo, etc... are popular. Because they're FUN. Nobody cares if someone would die from blood loss from a shot to the arm near the artery, you just want to enjoy yourself.

Also, this conversation is pointless. It's everyone vs Grade a Kill, and he has no hope of winning. You don't like starcraft? Fine. But don't bother us with your strawman arguments.

EDIT: By realism, I mean extreme realism. Going for photorealism or trying to get physics right in a game is just fine.

 

[LordDz]

Also, this conversation is pointless. It's everyone vs Grade a Kill, and he has no hope of winning. You don't like starcraft? Fine. But don't bother us with your strawman arguments.
.

But it's so FUN to argue about it.. xD

And Massive Attack, is my grammar THAT bad?

 

[SantaBla]

I'm disappointed with Sc2 too. Why? NO UPKEEP. I hate it. Sc2 will just encourage you to mass units and then send them to battle. Not really my type of game.

 

[redmarine]

I'm disappointed with Sc2 too. Why? NO UPKEEP. I hate it. Sc2 will just encourage you to mass units and then send them to battle. Not really my type of game.

Those are 2 different games dude. The terran's units are criminals and aren't really payed. They got some chips inside their head which means they have to follow your orders. Try clicking on the marines multiple times and you'll see.

Huge armies vs huge armies belong to the Starcraft universe.
Small armies vs small armies belong to the Warcraft universe.

 

[Grade A Kill]

You actually want upkeep? People have to sometimes kill there own units just to keep getting resources at a normal rate. what does a strategy game come to when you have yo kill your own units? no upkeep in SC2 is good!
the rushing, rockpaperscissors strategies, and the fact that starcraft 2 is basicly 75% like SC1 is bad.

 

[dumai]

So I'm a little confused...is your beef with Starcraft 2, Starcraft, Warcraft 3, Blizzard or all of the above?

You've refused to listen to even 1 of the counter arguments to yours even when they made perfect sense and keep on saying the same things over and over. This thread is becoming highly redundant and should be closed.

And in response to your latest post, even though I've already stated that Starcraft 2 is to Starcraft as Warcraft 3 is to Warcraft 2 (in fact entirely different, not 75% the same) I think you'll find that most sequels of any genre, bear a remarkable resemblance to their forebears.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Now, I'm not one to wade through pages of bullshit, but it was such a nice day outside, and I was feeling nice.

So I didn't.

guys normally im not one to be such such a jerk, but what do people Honestly see in SC2, i used to like it but now i cant stand even watching it, people like that game and i dont understand why.

I think you should get your Asperger's treated.

if you asking why i hate it it is because the game is going to be 75% like SC1, just with better graphics and a few new units. and the game is going to be very very very fustrating, dont think so?

Did you ever play warcraft 2? Didn't think so. You obviously have no clue as to what "gameplay" is.

when i give that game its chance im gonna make 4 BCs and yamato your CPs ass off, and you wont have enough resources to build another one, and even if you saved enough resources, i'll blow it up when your halfway through building that one, and your gonna be realy pissed.

Great. Now try playing it without cheats.

im gonna make 1 marine and rush him 60 seconds into the game to your resources gatherers, you will send them at me then i run, you go back to working and i come back and shoot you, you show any sign of retaliation i run then come back when you lose interest until all your workers are dead. or i can rush you 30 seconds into the game with my workers and kill your workers if your too distracted on my profound move to retaliate.

Personal experience?

that is basicly what the gameplay is gonna be like. again, i dont normally be a jerk like this, but knowing this can you still like the game knowing that you can do so many cheap ass moves that make the gameplay fustrating and enraging? that atleast is how i see the game, im not sure about you, but again, what do you see in the game, i dont remember what i saw in the game. and i can tell you 2 strategy games that are much better in my opinion if you wanna new game. and my idea for a strategy game is located in off topic if you want to see a REAL strategy game.

It just sounds like you're pissed because you utterly suck at this game.

im so confused as to why people like it that i had to make this post.

Okay, thanks for clearing things up.

Let's finish this post with a relaxing song.

 

[PurgeandFire]

ZERGZ OMGXZORZ.

Yeah, mainly to mod. xP But I probably will play the game a bit first. =P

 

[SantaBla]

Those are 2 different games dude. The terran's units are criminals and aren't really payed. They got some chips inside their head which means they have to follow your orders. Try clicking on the marines multiple times and you'll see.

Huge armies vs huge armies belong to the Starcraft universe.
Small armies vs small armies belong to the Warcraft universe.

That's why I said IT'S NOT MY TYPE OF GAME. I hate massing units. It's like CnC. I hate CnC.

You actually want upkeep? People have to sometimes kill there own units just to keep getting resources at a normal rate. what does a strategy game come to when you have yo kill your own units? no upkeep in SC2 is good!
the rushing, rockpaperscissors strategies, and the fact that starcraft 2 is basicly 75% like SC1 is bad.

Wc3 did fine with upkeep. What's so bad about killing your own units? It encourages you to play with smaller army and still win.
And I have to agree with you on the 75% thing. Wc3 was a huge change from Wc2. But as for Sc1/Sc2, I don't see that a massive change and that's all because of the frigging koreans.

 

[LordDz]

You actually want upkeep? People have to sometimes kill there own units just to keep getting resources at a normal rate. what does a strategy game come to when you have yo kill your own units? no upkeep in SC2 is good!
.

First time I agree on you on this thread

the rushing, rockpaperscissors strategies, and the fact that starcraft 2 is basicly 75% like SC1 is bad.

Until you said that.

 

[redmarine]

There is like 10 years between Starcraft and Starcraft II and Starcraft II isn't an expansion of Starcraft. So there is room for changes.

 

[Massive_attack]

Wc3 did fine with upkeep. What's so bad about killing your own units? It encourages you to play with smaller army and still win.
And I have to agree with you on the 75% thing. Wc3 was a huge change from Wc2. But as for Sc1/Sc2, I don't see that a massive change and that's all because of the frigging koreans.

What the hell is wrong with you ? Remind me not to join your army if humanity is ever unfortunate enough to have you as a general.

But executing your own units aside, Upkeep was really retarded -imo- but how about you make your own thread to complain about it in, so we can all abandon this one, as its time to be trashed has come and past.

 

[SantaBla]

I think something is wrong with you. even gamespot review of wc3 agrees with upkeep. why don't you go play wc2 then if you hate upkeep so much?
and it's a game for fuck sake, there's no fucking need to relate it to other humanitarian bullshit.

 

[Tyranid]

I think something is wrong with you. even gamespot review of wc3 agrees with upkeep. why don't you go play wc2 then if you hate upkeep so much?
and it's a game for fuck sake, there's no fucking need to relate it to other humanitarian bullshit.

LOL WUT!? I think he is going to go play SC 1 rather than WC 2 ._.

 

[LordDz]

I think something is wrong with you. even gamespot review of wc3 agrees with upkeep. why don't you go play wc2 then if you hate upkeep so much?
and it's a game for fuck sake, there's no fucking need to relate it to other humanitarian bullshit.

Dude, you need to chill.

He was saying IMO, you know what that means? In My Opinion. That doesn't mean that he clearly states that it IS RETARTED FOR EVERYONE.

And ye, I can say I didn't like upkeep, it just went to fast up for me.

First to flame me gets a cookie!

 

[SantaBla]

Warcraft was the FIRST RTS by Blizzard which doesn't have upkeep.

Muwahaha, it's obvious but I'm right at the same time.

 

[Massive_attack]

It was a joke. Christ, i mean i don't expect you to share my sense of humor but i did hope you would pick that up.

...god damn "SERIOUS BUSINESS" people around here.

Oh PS: this thread is getting really fucking off topic. Lock plz ?

Edit: Oh and Gamespot sucks balls.

 

[SantaBla]

so which video game review site is better in your opinion?

 

[dadestor]

Man Just to say I enjoyed reading this thread and all of it's 6 pages.Now
STARCRAFT DOESN'T SUCK!!!And it'way better than warcraft 3(no hard feelings pls)And upkeep sucks.And starcraft 2 will rock,can't wait to play it..I mean just look at the campaigns,you will affect the story beetween the missins and play 3rd person while you are on teh ship.And new units rock,and new graphics and evrerything man!!!!

 

[LordDz]

Man Just to say I enjoyed reading this thread and all of it's 6 pages.Now
STARCRAFT DOESN'T SUCK!!!And it'way better than warcraft 3(no hard feelings pls)And upkeep sucks.And starcraft 2 will rock,can't wait to play it..I mean just look at the campaigns,you will affect the story beetween the missins and play 3rd person while you are on teh ship.And new units rock,and new graphics and evrerything man!!!!

How much did Blizzard pay you?

 

[redmarine]

$100.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000

 

[Grade A Kill]

Realism in games sucks, and going for that route is a stupid design choice.

Realism restricts design, adds rules. I want to see ridiculous stunts that defy gravity, play games that try to be fun and not slowed down by realism. Real life in games is frustrating, and if you want realism, then go out in real life.

That was uncalled for, you have never played a realistic game, Sudden Strike 2 RWM (real warfare mod) is the greatest RTS ever, not in looks but gameplay, it goes so deep starcraft would drown in it. that game is very real, not as in every soldiers eats or something, i dont know what you meant by extreme. But tanks can miss, even if they hit the target tank may be destroyed in one hit or maybe its armor keeps any damage from it, attacking a tank from the side inflicts more damage so now flanking the enemy has tactical vaule unlike in you cheap assed unrealistic games.

Real life games can be frustrating, thats why RWM isn't as real as it can get, the most real it gets is every unit has ammo, tanks can have 60 shells, a rifleman may have 120 rounds and you gotta keep them well supplied, not that its hard or anything but again it adds a bit more strategy and tactics into the game. So before you insult realitic games why don't you play them first.

 

[Grade A Kill]

Wc3 did fine with upkeep. What's so bad about killing your own units? It encourages you to play with smaller army and still win.

WTF?!?!?!?! what the hell do you mean whats wrong with killing your own units?

 

[redmarine]

That is totally insane...

 

[Mechanical Man]

About the realism. In strategy games you can get only to certain degree of realism as strategies are more about large scale, so a lot of details are negligible and unecessary. Instead of making to miss targets, is better to estimate the probability of the hit and after each attack the unit makes a proportional damage to other unit, so the luck factor is minimized as much as possible (that's why is starcraft so great). About the ammunition, you can arrange that with slower rate of fire of ammo hungry units or have their purchasing price increased.

Sudden strike was a good game, simple, not too complicated like Blitzkrieg. But still there were some annoying things, like tanks should steer WAY more smoothly, the artillery in the missions was annoying as hell and I also despised that you had to play only with units which were at your disposal, no way to call reinforcements.

WILLTHEALMIGHTY, maybe you like ridiculous stunts, but some people like more realistic combat, so realism does not necessarily remove the fun.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

How much did Blizzard pay you?

Blizzard wouldn't pay him to say wc3 sucked.

so which video game review site is better in your opinion?

In my opinion, if you want to preview a game, you should just look at the screenshots and gameplay videos and judge for your fucking self. Or, you can ask someone whose opinions you really do give a shit about, like a friend's. Or better yet, you can stop being a cheapskate and, if you really want to know how a game is like, rent it. Game review sites are for brain dead sheep.

 

[smackhack]

Ok, here's the end of the thread. I'm going to list many things that Blizzard fixed to Grade A Kill's likings.
(Terran)
1:Nomads take long time to make, and the turrets cost resources, they aren't free.
2:Command Centers now have turrets!111 (yay)
3:You can make sensor towers, to detect goddamn units.
4:You can make turrets, sheesh.
4.5:You can make anti-air forces.
5:They can't just rush, you'd obviously expect them to though.
(Protoss)
1:Build-Anywhere-You-Want-At-Any-Time much?
2:I wouldn't expect Protoss to be susceptible to air, since they ARE air anyways...
3:Shields.
(Zerg)
1:... I don't really know anything about Zerg yet, so lets just say this. BUILD ANTI-AIR FORCES

thank you, the end (any mod gunna close this piece of sh!t?)

 

[dadestor]

How much did Blizzard pay you?

They gave me the game which entertined me for soo long..and i didn't mean warcraft3 suck.I still like the mods for it,xD

 

[LordDz]

Blizzard wouldn't pay him to say wc3 sucked.

In my opinion, if you want to preview a game, you should just look at the screenshots and gameplay videos and judge for your fucking self. Or, you can ask someone whose opinions you really do give a shit about, like a friend's. Or better yet, you can stop being a cheapskate and, if you really want to know how a game is like, rent it. Game review sites are for brain dead sheep.

Dude. Did you even look at what he said?
The ONLY thing he said about Wc3 was that upkeep sucked, besides that, I was ironic. I thought it was really clear.

And reviews are good, otherwise, could you use all your time to play ALL the games on this site?: http://www.mobygames.com/home Just to see if they we're good. Imagine to spend 10 hours of your life to test http://www.mobygames.com/game/omni-play-horse-racing to see if it's good. (I just took it, I have nothing against horses, I actually horse ride once a week).

And why do we play games? To be happy. Why should we spend time to play crappy games to see if they're good?

(Zerg)
1:... I don't really know anything about Zerg yet, so lets just say this. BUILD ANTI-AIR FORCES

http://www.starcraft2.com/

 

[Grade A Kill]

Ok, here's the end of the thread. I'm going to list many things that Blizzard fixed to Grade A Kill's likings.
(Terran)
1:Nomads take long time to make, and the turrets cost resources, they aren't free.
2:Command Centers now have turrets!111 (yay)
3:You can make sensor towers, to detect goddamn units.
4:You can make turrets, sheesh.
4.5:You can make anti-air forces.
5:They can't just rush, you'd obviously expect them to though.
(Protoss)
1:Build-Anywhere-You-Want-At-Any-Time much?
2:I wouldn't expect Protoss to be susceptible to air, since they ARE air anyways...
3:Shields.
(Zerg)
1:... I don't really know anything about Zerg yet, so lets just say this. BUILD ANTI-AIR FORCES

thank you, the end (any mod gunna close this piece of sh!t?)

The thread continues:
Terrans
1.) Nomads may take resources for turrets, but they can still lay them instantly down.
2.) it should take 2 seconds for reapers to jump up a cliff to you, drop a buncha det-packs then run, you probebly killed 6 outa maybe 10-20, and your command center blows up 5 seconds later.
3.) Invisability is retarded n' cheap, if i was being shot at by an invisibly guy i can atleast fire back at where i think they are.
4.) you can run past turrets sheesh...all thanks to the style of movment of the game.
5.) they can just rush, in some games i was rushes 30 seconds in the damn game.
Protoss:
1.) what does that fix?
2.) what are you trying to contradict me on again?
3.) what are you trying to contradict me on again?
Zerg:
1.) they are gonna be just as cheap ass.

The thread continues.

 

[Grade A Kill]

Sudden strike was a good game, simple, not too complicated like Blitzkrieg. But still there were some annoying things, like tanks should steer WAY more smoothly, the artillery in the missions was annoying as hell and I also despised that you had to play only with units which were at your disposal, no way to call reinforcements.

WILLTHEALMIGHTY, maybe you like ridiculous stunts, but some people like more realistic combat, so realism does not necessarily remove the fun.

You played sudden strike you say? did you Play RWM? you can download it at a link on youtube, RWM Theater 2007. if you haven't played RWM you have to, it is the BEST strategy game in the world, you gotta play it.

And Yeah WILLTHEALMIGHTY realism doesn't make a game suck, infact, cheap ass rediculous stunts make a game suck, at least in a strategy game.

 

[redmarine]

In Starcraft Universe ballance is the first priority and realizm is secondary.

 

[Grade A Kill]

Realism is secondary? tell me one thing blizzard is doing to make SC2 realistic.
Realism is something only Supreme commander and Sudden Strike 2 RWM have ever acheived (maybe a few others). Thing is with all these RTS games, its all too fast paced, if i could click as fast as a pro gamer i could beat anyone who has any sense of tactics. Another thing is RTS games involve no tactics other than abilities like a plasma barrage from a BC. its cheap assed as well.

Another thing, you know why theres such a thing as pro gamers? Because they click and multi-task better than everyone else!!! they are not Strategiests or tacticians, their only skill is clicking and multi-tasking, and rushing.

RWM due to its slower pace, clicking 10X faster than your enemy gives only a small advantage if any, and the realism puts tactincs and strategy into the game as well, you gotta adapt your strategies to the current situation and by what you got. my example is too long to type down.

 

[dadestor]

Man you outta of your mind??You call sumpreme commander realistic??That's like calling halo reailctic.And yea starcraft isn't meant to be realistic at all!It's meant to be balanced and fun.Now GTFO you started to get onto my nerves

 

[SantaBla]

Blizzard wouldn't pay him to say wc3 sucked.

In my opinion, if you want to preview a game, you should just look at the screenshots and gameplay videos and judge for your fucking self. Or, you can ask someone whose opinions you really do give a shit about, like a friend's. Or better yet, you can stop being a cheapskate and, if you really want to know how a game is like, rent it. Game review sites are for brain dead sheep.

you can't rent a game from where i live. there's no such thing. that's why i rely on reviews, and then decide for myself.

dadestor: then there's no need to respond to his thread.

 

[redmarine]

In all Blizzard games realism has been secondary. Blizzard games do not really need extreme realism. That is why you don't see much realism in their games. Balance and fun is the first priority which Blizzard always archive.
Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo have been one of the most successful games that have been created.
Starcraft dominates the E-Sport.
Warcraft III dominates with the revolutionary(for us) editor.
World of Warcraft dominates the MMORPG and is one of the most sold games in the world.(Halo III is most sold I think)
Diablo II is one on the top 20 most sold game sin the world.
If it was after your mind then Starcraft II would not be played by many.

 

[LordDz]

Grade a kill, it looks like you hate this game, not cause of it's features, but because that you've been rushed to many times, am I right?

And if you REALLY want some good games, play them with your friends

And this ''I hate that gaem it sux cuz I know this one is batter!''

It's personal taste. Let people live with their tase.

 

[redmarine]

And please don't just say "I hate this game because I'm getting rushed!" You can do soemthing about it by learning how to counter rushes!

 

[LordDz]

Sorry if I flame now Grade a Kill, but, I just saw you've made another post about a strategy game, from my point of view, it look quite much like Company of Heroes, but if you would like to, we could make something of in Wc3..

Besides, do you REALLY hate SC1 that much?
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53156&page=2