StarCraft II: How Is It So Far?

[cdvolbers]

So, StarCraft II has been out in North America for just over 11 hours now [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102374-StarCraft-II-Midnight-Launch-Detected] - and for longer in other parts of the globe. Now that more than just a select few gamers have had a chance to sit down with the game and its long-awaited campaign, the big question remains: How is it?

Shouldn't you at least wait until fanboy nostalgia has relaxed a little before asking how it is?

We already knew that the multiplayer was superb, of course. I've sunk maybe three hours into the campaign thus far through five or so missions, and it's been a blast thus far. The gameplay is still StarCraft at its core, but I'm really liking how they gradually introduce elements mission-on-mission, with each new unit or structure specifically suited for the task at hand.

Really? Because from every gameplay trailer I have seen, it has more of a Red Alert 3 feel to it, read: Too Much Shit Going On, And Its All In Unnecessary 3-D feel. Also, the whole "introduce elements gradually" things has been around since the original C&C, so did you mean to say SCII has done it so well as to out shine every other strategy game in existence, or that you simply enjoy the mechanic?

One thing that came as a pleasant surprise was the little clickable objects in the various hubs between missions. Click on a photo on the wall, and a short cutscene ensues, whether it's a hilariously propagandist news report or Jim Raynor telling Marine buddy Tychus Findlay about a photograph of a local Zerg hunt. They're just tiny little extras, but they're fun and help flesh out the people on screen, and it's a neat little touch to the between-mission areas that gives them more character.

Also, the Lost Viking arcade cabinet in the Hyperion's cantina is a strangely addictive shmup. I found the loading screen warning absolutely hilarious, but it was three in the morning, so make of that what you will. Terra-Tron does not like you.

Always be wary of a game that attempts to distract you from its core gameplay with neat little extras.

So, yeah - I've been having a great time with it thus far, but I expected that.

Try and answer this one honestly... if the game happened to be at or below mediocre, would you have even noticed, or cared? Sorry if this post seems pessimistic, I seem to be in the minority of gamers who feel this sequel too far detached from the original, which happens to be one of the best games I've ever played.

I kinda agree with you. So far, I'm just 4 missions in and I don't want to judge the game now, but my almost three years lasting euphoria for a friggin' new StarCraft game coming out seems to have set my expectations too high. Gameplay is fine, and the reason I'm just 4 missions in is because I hunted achievements for the first three missions. Anyway, the rts core is great and play's exactly like the first one. And I think this is my problem; I hope I'll come along some surprises. I don't know if it's the right word, but... I think I'm a bit underwhelmed.

Besides, I got a huge problem with the dubbing. I got the german version, well, because I'm living in Germany, and I think they got the same voice actor for Raynor like in the first one. The problem here is, I always felt that his german voice doesn't quite fit the character, but I think, this is just nitpicking. I'll go back playing and hope for some really cool stuff to happen during the campaign this night.

 

[the_maestro_sartori]

What makes me laugh is how the only comments have been "I don't know, I haven't got it". It's like everyone who has it on the escapist has vanished...

huh? what?
Sorry, been busy playing a certain RTS game for the last 4 hours straight >.>

 

[Keava]

After several hours in campaign... i must say i got what i expected. The game didn't struck me as amazing in terms of singleplayer experience so far. It's nice, has some nice features like the Lab/Merc/Armory progress, but it also seems thrown in a little chaotically so far.

I must say im quite disappointed in the voice overs, it's been complain since beta, that unit voices aren't exactly top notch, but the campaign takes it even further, i had a feeling that many of the in mission npc actors were just plainly bad. The game lacks a little polish in that regard. But Blizzard never really shined in that department, WoW had plenty of terrible VOs.

SC2 so far looks like typical Blizzard game. It's polished where it counts, but not much above that. Seems to be lacking soul, from lack of better word, just like WoW. Good, but not exceptional.

 

[John Funk]

So, StarCraft II has been out in North America for just over 11 hours now [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102374-StarCraft-II-Midnight-Launch-Detected] - and for longer in other parts of the globe. Now that more than just a select few gamers have had a chance to sit down with the game and its long-awaited campaign, the big question remains: How is it?

Shouldn't you at least wait until fanboy nostalgia has relaxed a little before asking how it is?

We already knew that the multiplayer was superb, of course. I've sunk maybe three hours into the campaign thus far through five or so missions, and it's been a blast thus far. The gameplay is still StarCraft at its core, but I'm really liking how they gradually introduce elements mission-on-mission, with each new unit or structure specifically suited for the task at hand.

Really? Because from every gameplay trailer I have seen, it has more of a Red Alert 3 feel to it, read: Too Much Shit Going On, And Its All In Unnecessary 3-D feel. Also, the whole "introduce elements gradually" things has been around since the original C&C, so did you mean to say SCII has done it so well as to out shine every other strategy game in existence, or that you simply enjoy the mechanic?

One thing that came as a pleasant surprise was the little clickable objects in the various hubs between missions. Click on a photo on the wall, and a short cutscene ensues, whether it's a hilariously propagandist news report or Jim Raynor telling Marine buddy Tychus Findlay about a photograph of a local Zerg hunt. They're just tiny little extras, but they're fun and help flesh out the people on screen, and it's a neat little touch to the between-mission areas that gives them more character.

Also, the Lost Viking arcade cabinet in the Hyperion's cantina is a strangely addictive shmup. I found the loading screen warning absolutely hilarious, but it was three in the morning, so make of that what you will. Terra-Tron does not like you.

Always be wary of a game that attempts to distract you from its core gameplay with neat little extras.

So, yeah - I've been having a great time with it thus far, but I expected that.

Try and answer this one honestly... if the game happened to be at or below mediocre, would you have even noticed, or cared? Sorry if this post seems pessimistic, I seem to be in the minority of gamers who feel this sequel too far detached from the original, which happens to be one of the best games I've ever played.

Yes, actually, I would have noticed and cared. Sorry to bring your hopes down

There is nothing distracting from the core gameplay. The core gameplay is as great as it ever was. These are cool little extras. There is nothing wrong with that.

But to address your other point - where I think SC2's piecemeal introduction of units and elements works well is that... it isn't just "Here's a new mission, here's a new unit and building" like it was in SC1/most RTS games. With every mission, it displays beforehand what new unit you'll be getting access to - and those units are critical to the success of that mission. For example, you get bunkers in a base defense mission, firebats in a mission where you need to escort a convoy from lots of zergling, marauders in the first mission you encounter armored units (Stalkers and Roaches).

Because each unit is tailored to have certain uses, and each mission is designed to at least incorporate some of those uses into the objective (of course with leeway, so you don't JUST have to use Firebats/Marauders/etc), it lets you learn all of the units and how to best utilize them instead of just adding them willy-nilly one at a time.

 

[Desworks]

I'm about 10 hours in, I'm due in work in 4 hours, I've had no sleep and i'm loving it so far. It's good to be back in the Koprulu Sector.

 

[Alon Shechter]

What makes me laugh is how the only comments have been "I don't know, I haven't got it". It's like everyone who has it on the escapist has vanished...

I'm betting those few Escapists are playing the game right now.

 

[Tiamat666]

I've only played through the tutorial and the first 3 missions so far (have to take a break to keep the organism alive) but the experience is as expected from Blizzard. Polished to the core.

After playing through the tutorial at first I was slightly disappointed that it all felt just -too much- like plain old StarCraft, only in 3D. The units the same, the buildings the same, the look the same... that really got me worried that I was going to play vanilla StarCraft with improved 3D graphics.

But well, then I got the campaign going and all of my worries just went "floosh" out the window. The presentation style with the interactive cutscenes is excellent. Reminds me of two other excellent games: Strike Commander and Wing Commander. Then there's all the new elements like cash, tech upgrades, research points.

I was also worried that the German version could see draconian censorship applied, as the laws here are rather strict about violence levels and the game has a "12 and up" rating here. But after seeing the first marines drop dead in pools of gushing blood that also doesn't seem to have materialized. Maybe the game also knows I'm over 18 from my BNet account and "unlocks" violence mode. I don't know.

Anyway very pleased with my "investment" so far. I don't usually buy games right on release date (or even months after that). I tend to play games with a delay of a year or more so that I can get them a little cheaper. But I had to make an exception for StarCraft 2 of course... and so far it seems like it was well deserved.

 

[HarmanSmith]

Just got off after 5 hours straight, am going right back after eating.

If you're on the fence because you aren't good at RTS games, don't worry; there's an easy mode and the units are introduced one at a time (reapers are awesome!). Between missions, the research mechanic is inspired, if not a bit tacked-on feeling, and the arcade game is almost as addictive as the regular game.

Overall, it offers a challenge for players on any level and is VERY good at easing newcomers in. It is awesome, you must buy it, I am going back to play it right now.

 

[Thedutchjelle]

I played about 4 matches multiplayer and did the first mission single player. I'm very very dissapointed by the cinematics, I thought it would be pre-rendered, but it's not. It's about Half-life 1.5 quality for me :'(

Multiplayering is awesome tho, against people who didnt do the beta vs a team who did. I used nukes against a turtling guy while my ally was making some bigass Toss army - it was hilarious.

 

[dandahammer]

The presentation style with the interactive cutscenes is excellent. Reminds me of two other excellent games: Strike Commander and Wing Commander. Then there's all the new elements like cash, tech upgrades, research points.

This.

The first time you finish a mission and can view news, jukebox an whatnot,,, instant nostalgia for Wing Commander 2.

 

[Killerbunny001]

The Campaign is awesome this far (about 6 hours in). I`m loving every little bit of it.
There are also some Challenges for which you get medals but I haven`t tried them yet.
We all now of the multiplayer so I won`t go there.

 

[Nick Holmgren]

I'm really conflicted on this one. I've never been successful at RTSes, how accessible is it for someone like me? That collector's edition is very shiny, and relatively cheap. Everything appeals to me but the gameplay.

I might be a bit biased but from what I can tell it is very accessible.I jumped headlong into SC1 a few years back and it was my first RTS and boy did it not care about that. SC2 has a tutorial for just about everything in the game but good luck getting the collectors edition. I have heard the normal version is sold out a lot of places.

 

[tendo82]

I'm enjoying the game so far. This is also the first time I've played any Starcraft game. It's a bit of a re-adjustment going from Relic's squad and cover mechanics that their RTS's developed during the Starcraft gap to SC's style. In that sense SC actually feels kind of dated, based on my very limited knowledge of RTS's. Not that the gameplay is in anyway broken or doesn't stand the test of time, but just that it feels like it's from a different era - like C&C or Warcraft II.

Also interesting to me:

I wasn't expecting to see the in game engine doing full size people in the interstitials between missions. Is this what WoW models might look like in another three to five years?

In any case, I'm enjoying the game and look forward to attempting some multiplayer once I've finished the campaign.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Two words.

Spoiler

Zombie Mission.

That is all.

 

[Grey_Focks]

Installing now, forgot to update my drivers, so I'm also doing that now. Must say, the anticipation is killing me. Sadly, I have to go to work in 5 hours, so I won't REALLY be able to get into it until tomorrow...or maybe I just won't sleep tonight. Both are good options.

 

[Timbydude]

snip

I have a friend who's been playing nonstop since launch and just now finished the campaign; it took him 18 hours without breaks, which is a pretty impressive size if you ask me.

I do have a question though: should I play the original Starcraft campaigns before I give SCII a try? I could just read a Wikipedia plot summary, but I'd rather play through the originals instead.

Basically, my question: Is the story (of both the original and the sequel) any good?

 

[Mr.Petey]

Hope this is alright to ask and slightly off topic but does it accept Windows XP and play well on said OS? (I've heard it'll need the latest service pack 3 which isn't an issue)
I've seen on the official website that it'll prefer Vista and Windows 7 but just seeing if it plays well within the XP operating system

 

[Tiamat666]

snip

I do have a question though: should I play the original Starcraft campaigns before I give SCII a try? I could just read a Wikipedia plot summary, but I'd rather play through the originals instead.

Basically, my question: Is the story (of both the original and the sequel) any good?

The story of the original StarCraft is very good. Comparable with Warcraft 3 in overall quality, except you get cooler, prerendered cinematic sequences instead of the "in world" storytelling.
You will probably miss out on a few references, the urgency of the whole thing, who all these people like Kerrigan and Mensk are, if you didn't play the original. But StarCraft 2 makes an attempt to update you on the background during game installation.

The real question is whether you can/want/have the patience to wait for 30+ hours of gametime playing through the original StarCraft and the Brood War expansion before touching SC2. The games are good and have aged quite well in my opinion, but some of the later missions can be tough.