I'm disappointed StarCraft 2 wasn't anything new

[ripponesan]

Well story was fine, very juicy and i liked it, but well i was shocked when single player was over after my terran campaign....

Anyway. SC2 has LOT of things changed you wont notice on first or second sight.
E.G. units can be resized, and i dont mean all hydras, but ONE special hydra. Eg: you can have 10 hydras in 10 sizes.
Every unit now can have armor of 5 digits (up to 99999), a unit has kills now and can scale with them and so on.

There are very much of this smaller changes that lets you customize your own maps really the way you want them. You got soooo much more possibilities to create something than in sc1.
And well what the heck do you think they should change? Replace every unit with another but still following the same story?

anyway i´m quite satisfied that my SC looks better nowadays

[Pozz]

The campaign was extremely short. When i finished it i was all like, "FINALLY TIME TO PLAY ZERG CAMPAIGN". Then i was like, "WTF WHERE IS ZERG CAMPAIGN FUUUUUUUUUU".

And the information about the game only containing the terran campaign were never revealed !!!! *cough*

I was really looking forward to SC2 but both the multiplayer and singleplayer part of the game was to me a bit disappointing. I'm still getting the expansions, because it is by no means a bad game, could just have been better imo =)

[Simca]

My main criticism was more aimed at it being a clone of SC1 than anything new, revolutionizing the RTS genre, or even furthering it, like SC1 did :P

then again i'm not into the competitive ladders either which IMO Blizzard focuses way too hard on in most of their games.

Yeah, they had to keep a lot of it the same for competitive reasons, and honestly, they aren't going to change up the entire game in the sequel. Quite a large bit of units have changed a lot from SC1 - definitely a reasonable amount of changes for a sequel.

[cFortyfive]

Multiplayer seems decent - not as good yet though as the predecessor and I am not really fond of some base mechanics like the new armor/damage/counter system but there is still more time I guess and with the growth of the leagues we'll have more coming on that front.
Was definitely disappointed on the single player part though - I don't know everything story wise was so obvious from the first mission while the sc1&bw storyline for me appeared a lot darker and better thought out especially considering that they are going to charge me for the other campaigns as well.
I don't think though that they did something terribly wrong by not adding a revolutionary new thing into the product.

then again i'm not into the competitive ladders either which IMO Blizzard focuses way too hard on in most of their games

Don't really understand that point. I don't see what would have changed if they'd make starcraft 2 without having the competitive aspect in their mind which surely didn't have any impact on the singleplayer. And at the end of the day every big blizzard game had at least some competitive elements in it which contributed to their overall success.

[MagusUnion]

SC2 was good in terms of story for the campaign... just enough unanswered questions for us to wonder about what's going to happen in the next games... lol

It does look like a really graphically revamped version of SC1 at parts, but you do have to understand that Starcraft is 12 years old, and Blizzard can't/shouldn't go with the assumption that ALL of the players who played SC1 will pick up this game, and start fresh where they left off... (even thought that's exactly what happened, but that's beside the point... lol)

Point is, they wanted Starcraft to be a bit episodic, similar to Half Life 2 now, and stretch the story a bit so they can 'tell' more details about the adventures of the main protagonists... Which I think is alot better than stacking a huge chuck of story into 4 disks of space, and then expecting me to play thru the whole thing in one go *coughFFcough*... The spacing of story is nice, and it helps buy me time to refine my skills to where they are multilayer worthy before the next expansion...

[Deleted]

Starcraft 2 is much more a game for players who like the challenge and wants to play a game which is tactically and challenging to no end. There are so many good players out there you can play against. It was meant to be an esport title and it is by far the best at the moment.
Starcraft 2 kinda rolled over any other esport game at the moment. There are many, many many many tournaments for Sc2 and this is the real challenge of Sc2.

I can understand that people hoped for more, but blizzard games are all about playing online with/against other player rather than playing alone.

[Monsieur Sploosh]

I'd have to say the best part about SC2 is the increased resolution of the game space.

Overall, I really enjoyed the campaign and look forward to more. It's a story we've seen before, but after thousands of years of human civilization, what story hasn't been told? It's the telling that should be engaging, and I really feel that Blizzard's performance was phenomenal.

As for the actual game, I think they did right by the players. It's Starcraft with more polish and a few changes to units and their automated intelligence. The game is pretty tightly tuned without evoking the rock-paper-scissors card obsessively. It's definitely a game that's easy to learn but hard to master, which is essential, because it lets the bar be set by the perfection of the players rather than the limitations of the game.

All in all, it's not Broodwar because it's not Broodwar. You can always go back and play Broodwar if that's what you want.

[Talorh]

Were you sleeping while playing the campaign or something? SC2 had one of the greatest storylines of any video game, not just RTS's. Blizzard once again showed why they are the best: their storytelling ability tops everyone else. True SC fans are waiting on the edge of their seat for the next chapter.

No, I was wide awake. And while the story had some really good parts in it... the Zeratul missions were brilliant... end missions were pretty good but apart from that? This was all because many missions were non linear and optional. So the storytelling suffered.

@bolded part So much fanboyism detected. Trying being more objective.

lol I hope your joking. The storyline was so cliche and cheesy it was borderline cringe worthy.

It wasn't that bad but neither was it as good as even Terran campaign in SC1.

[georgevonfranken]

Singleplayer - Was allright not bad just not good
Multiplayer - I didnt like how custom games were handled, Limiting size of maps and amount a person can have is never a good idea should of just let people host there maps like in warcraft 3. Also wish they left the custom game selection screen same has WC3 instead of sorting by popularity.

Some of these problems could of been fixed idk i haven't played since release

[Ulfric Trumpcloak]

its all about $$$, wow is in decline and still instead of renewing it they release a crappy xpac and after this xpac they are planning to release two more. With Starcraft why didnt they release all the 3 campaigns in the same game? no they want to make it 3 different games, its all about money...

[chaossammy]

its all about $$$, wow is in decline and still instead of renewing it they release a crappy xpac and after this xpac they are planning to release two more. With Starcraft why didnt they release all the 3 campaigns in the same game? no they want to make it 3 different games, its all about money...

no shit?
i dont get why ppl get pissed at blizz when they go for the financially smart choices every game company does
oh and btw your opinion are not facts if you don't like cata it doesnt mean its bad

[Ulfric Trumpcloak]

no shit?
i dont get why ppl get pissed at blizz when they go for the financially smart choices every game company does
oh and btw your opinion are not facts if you don't like cata it doesnt mean its bad

well i dont like it for me its bullsht, im not forcing you to think the same way i do, neither you can make me think your way, for me they are releasing shitty games and thats it, all because of the money.

[Arrowstormen]

the campaign is good in my eyes, and the multiplayer is nice enough, but i just dont like that the game is about being really super fast, probaly because im used to Age of Empires. but its not bad at all, ofcourse some people dont like it, we cant all love the same kind of games, and some can get dissappointed, but dont ever go and say that its bad as a fact, some doesnt likes Cata, who cares? all the other people likes it, if you leave, fine, i dont care, nobody cares, you leave, bye.

[micho]

well i dont like it for me its bullsht, im not forcing you to think the same way i do, neither you can make me think your way, for me they are releasing shitty games and thats it, all because of the money.

again like he said you opinions are not facts so they are not bullshit you dont like them

[Arrowstormen]

well i dont like it for me its bullsht, im not forcing you to think the same way i do, neither you can make me think your way, for me they are releasing shitty games and thats it, all because of the money.

hahahahahahah...
why do you play their games then? why do you got a monthly subscription? nobody holds you back, if you think that their worldwide known games, which also is the biggest games in the world is bad, then just leave, what holds you back?
i cant see how you can make a good answer to this, you hate their games, think they shitty, think they just think about money, even when they do it mainly because they love what they do. so they say in their little movie they released, and always when they talk about why they make games. and you still pay them?

[Atomisk]

the competiveness of blizzard games is the only reason i play blizzard games, lol. They are genius at it and it keeps me off every other game that isnt by blizzard. Go play something else.

[General Vezax]

They could not add revolutionary new mechanics due to the risk of failure. Everyone who knows about the RTS genre knows that SC1 is a pretty huge deal. If Blizzard changed the formula too much, it might of turned into another C&C4(as in complete failure).

[Monsieur Sploosh]

They could not add revolutionary new mechanics due to the risk of failure. Everyone who knows about the RTS genre knows that SC1 is a pretty huge deal. If Blizzard changed the formula too much, it might of turned into another C&C4(as in complete failure).

Agreed.

I really think for a Starcraft sequel all they really should do is bring the graphics up to date, play with the armies a bit to allow for some variety while staying true to each race's aesthetic, and improve unit control so that skill as a factor can become even more significant.

To do anything extreme to the game would make it something other than Starcraft.

[Ulfric Trumpcloak]

hahahahahahah...
why do you play their games then? why do you got a monthly subscription? nobody holds you back, if you think that their worldwide known games, which also is the biggest games in the world is bad, then just leave, what holds you back?
i cant see how you can make a good answer to this, you hate their games, think they shitty, think they just think about money, even when they do it mainly because they love what they do. so they say in their little movie they released, and always when they talk about why they make games. and you still pay them?

fail here, i have never played starcraft 2, not an idea how diablo looks, and i havent play wow in live since jan 28, ive been playing lastly in the ptr, but ptr is nothing serious its for free so...........