Starcraft 2 Critique

[Soviet Heavy]

I am thinking of getting Starcraft 2. However, before I buy a game, I research it as much as possible to see if I will enjoy it, and how to set my expectations. I decided to wait for the hype train to die down on this one first, and ask owners if there are any parts of the game that might detract from the experience.

Now that it has been out for nearly a month or so, are there any issues with the game that could have been implemented better? Any bugs or problems?

Any feedback will be greatly appreciated on this matter.

 

[Agayek]

Aside from the predictable multiplayer imbalances, I'd have to say there's no real problems with the game, at least in my experience.

At the moment, Terran are stupid OP. It's a bit ridiculous. They should be fixing it in the near future (or maybe they have already, I haven't touched MP SC2 in about 2 weeks), but until that happens MP is rather aggravating.

 

[XXintercepterXX]

I'd say get it, theres a couple problems but they aren't that major and the terrrans aren't op in my thoughts its just that people have alot of practice with them since the campaign is almost solo terran

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I just like to wait out the hypestorms and see if any genuine problems arise.

 

[GammaZord]

Bugs or problems--haven't noticed any. There is the graphics card melting issue. I'd check that out (google search will do) but it hasn't happened to me or anyone I know.

As far as the game goes, I love it. Not sure if you've played the first one but the sequel is similar. All the races are interesting and varied and if you let yourself get into the multiplayer I think you'll be playing it for a LONG time.

I can't remember the last time I've wanted to get better at a game as much as I do with SC2. I'm constantly reading up on strats and watching replays to become more adaptive--it's certainly addicting plus the community is massive and very competitive.

The campaign is certainly fun (and robust) but the story is a bit cliched. Still worth playing to get comfy plus the universe is pretty cool IMO.

Anyway, as you proabably guessed, I can't reccomend this game enough.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Bugs or problems--haven't noticed any. There is the graphics card melting issue. I'd check that out (google search will do) but it hasn't happened to me or anyone I know.

As far as the game goes, I love it. Not sure if you've played the first one but the sequel is similar. All the races are interesting and varied and if you let yourself get into the multiplayer I think you'll be playing it for a LONG time.

I can't remember the last time I've wanted to get better at a game as much as I do with SC2. I'm constantly reading up on strats and watching replays to become more adaptive--it's certainly addicting plus the community is massive and very competitive.

The campaign is certainly fun (and robust) but the story is a bit cliched. Still worth playing to get comfy plus the universe is pretty cool IMO.

Anyway, as you proabably guessed, I can't reccomend this game enough.

I have played the first one, always great fun. I've just moved onto less conventional RTS games in the past years. Dawn of War 2 and the Total War Games mostly. I am feeling sort of hesitant to try out a traditional RTS game after these two, but I am willing to try new stuff.

 

[GammaZord]

Bugs or problems--haven't noticed any. There is the graphics card melting issue. I'd check that out (google search will do) but it hasn't happened to me or anyone I know.

As far as the game goes, I love it. Not sure if you've played the first one but the sequel is similar. All the races are interesting and varied and if you let yourself get into the multiplayer I think you'll be playing it for a LONG time.

I can't remember the last time I've wanted to get better at a game as much as I do with SC2. I'm constantly reading up on strats and watching replays to become more adaptive--it's certainly addicting plus the community is massive and very competitive.

The campaign is certainly fun (and robust) but the story is a bit cliched. Still worth playing to get comfy plus the universe is pretty cool IMO.

Anyway, as you proabably guessed, I can't reccomend this game enough.

I have played the first one, always great fun. I've just moved onto less conventional RTS games in the past years. Dawn of War 2 and the Total War Games mostly. I am feeling sort of hesitant to try out a traditional RTS game after these two, but I am willing to try new stuff.

I hear ya...you know what you're getting if you played the original.
Anyway, if you're not dying to play it then it's prolly a good idea to wait it out to see how it stands up to some of the rts' that have come out since the original.

 

[PurpleSky]

Don't buy it, is what I say, not YET at least. I'd wait for the boxset, anyway good custom maps will have bugs until then.


DotA on SC2 engine is coming, I'm sure of it and cannot wait.

 

[Winfrid]

There already is an early DOTA map out, Storm of the Something something or Shrine of the Storms or i dont know, I can't remember
Not very balanced, but still fun

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Aside from the predictable multiplayer imbalances, I'd have to say there's no real problems with the game, at least in my experience.

At the moment, Terran are stupid OP. It's a bit ridiculous. They should be fixing it in the near future (or maybe they have already, I haven't touched MP SC2 in about 2 weeks), but until that happens MP is rather aggravating.

The general consensus is that the success people have with Terrans is largely based on the fact that your average player will have had more than a dozen hours experience with them before they even start online. There may be some slight imbalance, but given that the higher ranking ladders see people being successful as something besides Terran implies that the problems are anything but insurmountable.

That said, the game itself is worth playing I suppose but far from the must buy title that many suggest it is. The campaign is interesting enough but the online component just feels so very antiquated when compared to a more modern RTS entry. The games take far to long for my tastes (though, it would appear that the high level matches are often quite brief) and I spend a lot of time waiting for stuff to build. The focus of the game is most certainly on the higher level strategy of build orders and the like, and while the tactical element exists, the basic game still consists of blobbing around and choking rivers with corpses. I played through my placement matches, ended up in silver and tried around a dozen games before I decided it really wasn't for me and went back to Dawn of War 2.

 

[Reep]

I reckon terran are OP since their basic barracks units have so much versatility, chuck in stim and if you can protect any medivacs, you're all set to take out any threat.

Although, this is a tiny issue to stop you getting a great game. Its got a very solid campaign and the multiplayer is so dynamic, often the terran issue is void.

 

[Jandau]

Overall, no major problems with the game itself. A few achievements have trouble registering progress, but it's a minor issue. However, the multiplayer balance is a bit off. Terrans are the top dog and the Zerg are the bottom of the barrel, if for no other reason than because Terrans are insanely easy to play and Zerg are a micromanagement nightmare.

I'd say, buy the game for the single player or wait until the first major balance patch if you're looking for a multiplayer experience.

 

[Wayneguard]

This isn't really a problem but it seems like it's easier to see what's going on when you turn the graphics settings down to low. It makes it look like WC3 but it's easier to make sense of everything and it's easier to click on individual units imo.

 

[Reveras]

If u played the first one, you will find the campaign to be a bit annoying because Jim Raynor spills enough catch phrases to be a mascot and u can guess how 3/4 of the stuff will play out.

 

[Talvrae]

It's a good game... but there is some annoyance with it... Mostelly the stupid thing with the only one profile by cd-key, so you plan to be many to play it, only one can play online

 

[MercurySteam]

I seriously suggest that you don't ask about the bad parts of a game that you consider getting. I can help with questions on the campaign, however.

If you suck at RTS's (like so many of us do) then don't sweat it no matter how bad you are SCII has a difficulty setting for you. The campaign will keep you coming back again and again, so don't worry about it getting repetitive. I can help you with the positive, but I honestly can't see many flaws with SCII.

I sure hope you've seen this:

EDIT: I've given it some thought, so here's so critique for you.

There have been a few issues with BattleNET and there are some unbalances with multiplayer some races, so I suggest starting out with 3v3 matches. I don't do much online stuff with SCII so I can't help you a lot there.

 

[konor77]

i don't really think that theres any major balance problems with the game, zerg are just too micro-relliant.
OT: the game is awesome-tactic and something nobody seems to bring up is that co-op vs ai is really fun