Considering how there has been little known about the SP, I want to see something that supports your argument. Supposedly, "we've been given so far" some stuff - please post that. But if you mean only the cute trailer Blizzard made, that's hardly any argument for what you just said - good FMVs don't make or break a game, they just enhance it.
Also, we've not been shown anything at all about the SP in this. All we have are the FMVs. And my, they sure do show alot of revolutionary gameplay, right?
The beta has shown nothing revolutionary whatsoever. At most it only seems like a ressurection of a decent rts.
The fanboys' latest favorite excuse has been that Blizzard won't bring anything new to the table ("they don't revolutionize, they make best of what is available" and bla bla bla like this), but the SP will be AMAZING. Well, let's wait and see. But calling it best thing from a few FMVs, that's ridiculous.
But let me predict what will happen if the campaign doesn't live to the expectations. Their excuse then will be "Starcraft has never been for SP but for solid MP experience".
Also, we've not been shown anything at all about the SP in this. All we have are the FMVs. And my, they sure do show alot of revolutionary gameplay, right?
dow2 campaign was boring as fuck imo. tho ive enjoyed few first missions i eventually didnt bother to finish it. im sure that sc2 missions will provide more variety and gameplay styles, devs often said that they tried to do something new in every single mission.
Also, we've not been shown anything at all about the SP in this. All we have are the FMVs. And my, they sure do show alot of revolutionary gameplay, right?
The beta has shown nothing revolutionary whatsoever. At most it only seems like a ressurection of a decent rts.
The fanboys' latest favorite excuse has been that Blizzard won't bring anything new to the table ("they don't revolutionize, they make best of what is available" and bla bla bla like this), but the SP will be AMAZING. Well, let's wait and see. But calling it best thing from a few FMVs, that's ridiculous.
But let me predict what will happen if the campaign doesn't live to the expectations. Their excuse then will be "Starcraft has never been for SP but for solid MP experience".
Well no matter what the product will be, the Blizzard Crowd will still yield extreme profit, kinda makes you think of Apple.
And yes, I am aware I might be getting over the top here, but I am going to reserve apologies() for after the release.
Seriously Remy, I know you said "IMO" and all... but the DoW2 campaign blew me away! I'm not much for RTS titles anyway (Empire Earth/Red Alert/World in Conflict not withstanding) but the SP campaign in DoW2 was incredible! Great story, tons of "loot" and some marvellous squad-based gameplay. Hell, it was more RPG than vanilla RTS.
Also, we've not been shown anything at all about the SP in this. All we have are the FMVs. And my, they sure do show alot of revolutionary gameplay, right?
This is 3 years old (and things has changed since it was shown) but you get the idea from watching this:
Seriously Remy, I know you said "IMO" and all... but the DoW2 campaign blew me away! I'm not much for RTS titles anyway (Empire Earth/Red Alert/World in Conflict not withstanding) but the SP campaign in DoW2 was incredible! Great story, tons of "loot" and some marvellous squad-based gameplay. Hell, it was more RPG than vanilla RTS.
Well, for me it was 7/10 at most, but I guess I just wasn't starved by the lack of similarly decent RTS's.
Also, we've not been shown anything at all about the SP in this. All we have are the FMVs. And my, they sure do show alot of revolutionary gameplay, right?
Considering how there has been little known about the SP, I want to see something that supports your argument. Supposedly, "we've been given so far" some stuff - please post that. But if you mean only the cute trailer Blizzard made, that's hardly any argument for what you just said - good FMVs don't make or break a game, they just enhance it.
There's been quite a lot of information about the singleplayer part, at the very least more than the recently released trailer.
There's the Hyperion as have been mentioned on the official site here they also showed this on Blizzcon so you can get a little feel for it, of course it's 3 years old so it will probably have changed somewhat since then.
Also the singleplayer campaign is not just basically a skirmish match with few or no other objectives that cannot fall under the "eliminate all enemy units and buildings", there's some examples of that
Also included in that is that the campaign is one single big campaign, unlike other RTS' where you waste like 33% of your story on training maps, this allows them to get all the training maps out of the way in the beginning easily making it only 10% or even less of the story maps being "training maps".
FMV's won't make a bad game good, you are right about that, but FMV's will make a good game great, you cannot deny that C&C didn't get as popular as it did with no credit to the FMV's.
Likewise Starcraft 2, the singleplayer experience will definitely be something that reviewers will be talking about and praising, atleast if they've managed to keep the same setting as they've shown, throughout the game, this is what is going to make Starcraft 2 a great game, instead of just a good game.
@FISKER_Q
Alright then, we should wait and see. Not long until release.
dr-nix wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNrQLDrdvLw <- part 2 of 2
This looks as ridiculous as my GIF, units going into each other at 4:40 and on. This is a 2010 game, for crying out loud! I haven't seen this kind of unit behavior in years!
Also, we've not been shown anything at all about the SP in this. All we have are the FMVs. And my, they sure do show alot of revolutionary gameplay, right?
dow2 campaign was boring as fuck imo.
It was boring, repetive and not very fun at all for me.. Starcraft II is sure to top that - just check out the new campaign trailer, theres alot more to the single player than most poeple know of.
just check out the new campaign trailer, theres alot more to the single player than most poeple know of.
And you know more than "most people" by looking at the trailer?
inatan you are just bashing the game because a windows live key wont work with starcraft 2
No it would appear he is bashing the game because he has no life. What will you do with your time iNathan after people stop talking Starcraft2?
Before we get to that happy place weโll no doubt be subjected to hundreds of your posts bashing, dismissing and belittling anyone who dares like this game. I seriously want to know what you get out of posting hundreds of times trying to convince people that they wonโt enjoy the game โ why? I understand someone who likes the game, or is excited about its release posting, but what do you get out of this thread?
@FISKER_Q
Alright then, we should wait and see. Not long until release.
dr-nix wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNrQLDrdvLw <- part 2 of 2
This looks as ridiculous as my GIF, units going into each other at 4:40 and on. This is a 2010 game, for crying out loud! I haven't seen this kind of unit behavior in years!
Spoiler:
If I only read your posts iNatan, I'd think sc2 sucks too. fortunately I've played the game and have liked it.
you seem to work hard on making fun of people who are excited about this game. it's your opinion that SC2 is not revolutionary, and it's your opinion that it's overhyped. Other people should be able to expressed the opposite without having to convince you on every page of this thread.
you've expressed your opinion for so many pages now, I think we all understand your opinion by now... on release date, someone will probably have to make a gameplay only thread because some of us actually want to talk about the game, rather than bashing at a video from 2007 with outdated units.
keep posting what you will, but when SC2 does well in reviews or sales, please dont post something saying blizz fans are brainless and will buy any crap blizz makes. Some of us have fun with this game, much like many of you have fun in DoW or CoH. Different games for different tastes.
PS:
Spoiler:
the Thor was meant to be a bulky unit with slow turn speeds so that smaller units can outmicro him. But during beta they realized how bad the pathfinding is so they shrunk it a bit. the only unit that still has this problem is the zerg ultra, but they've buffed it extensively in other ways... but you probably dont care...
also, would it make a big difference to you if the two buildings crossed each other at different altitudes rather than on the same altitude? common, even I can come up with less trivial criticisms about this game lol.
Can't say I understand what you all mean when you say he's just saying random bad stuff about the game. He brings up valid points.
In some people's opinions, it's valid. some of the things he say I agree with, even though it might be a more cynical point of view. But he has been posting the same thing for more than 10 pages now, I think everyone who follows this thread knows his opinion down by heart and dont really need to be reminded of it anymore.
iNatan thinks SC2's multiplayer is not revolutionary enough, he thinks blizz is playing it safe rather than exploring new options like THQ did. He also thinks that nothing has been shown to us about the single player experience that proves it'll be revolutionary either.
I've posted what I think is revolutionary about SC2's multiplayer pages back. I've also included a link to a single player preview that sums up what is cool about it. These are the things that got me excited about SC2 and if it's not enough for him, oh well, everyone have different tastes. However, it seems to be not enough for him to agree to disagree with someone. He keeps posting the same one liners in this thread to troll on people who are actually excited about the game. We get it that you dont like the game, you dont have to post on every page to express your disappointments.
I think most people would agree to disagree, and let the issue rest. keep posting the same gif over and over doesn't make it any more important.
Because they are playing World of Warcraft all the time. You know, that game is addictive, specialty if you don't pay the monthly fee because you work at Blizzard.
iNatan thinks SC2's multiplayer is not revolutionary enough, he thinks blizz is playing it safe rather than exploring new options like THQ did.
Is that why the multiplayer is dead for DoW2? It's so revolutionary that no one wants to play it? Laughable to even bring up this minor league game with Starcraft 2. Like Blizzard needs example from Relic how to create a popular, competitive multiplayer game that lasts for years. It's other way around...
First, it's not dead. If it was dead, Relic would not be working on major patches the community has asked for.
Second, it's "dead" because of G4WL shit - it's horrible and imposes horrible restrictions on MP and modding. This is why people prefer to play on unranked "private" and "public" matches instead of "ranked" ones (G4WL terminology). This is the "downfall" of DoW2. This is why DoW2 is "dead" and CoH is still "alive".
No, they will never be as popular as SC (BW or 2). But this is hardly a measure of quality; Twilight is also hugely popular, so? Would you suggest all films go for "Twilight values" so they "last for years" in retarded teenager minds? Oh dear!
This goes back to the same discussion we had in another thread. Playing safe for mass market and mainstream versus improvements that might mean the Zerg hordes in Korea don't all drool to televised MP matches. Quality vs. quantity.
I really have no problem discussing the game's weaknesses, unlike the Blizzard side. I think they made a huge mistake going with G4WL. I think they made a huge mistake of not supporting mods properly (a mistake that they will be somewhat fixing with the next major patch), I think relying on community hacking to get modding going is horrible. So is it perfect? Hell no. I have no problems admitting it.
I'd hardly call DoW 2 a "minor league" game. It won quite a few awards and got great reviews across the board. In fact, because of DoW 2, Relic has become one of my very top favorite devs, thanks to all of the free DLC and quality support of DoW2. I salute them for trying something different. I still think it's a great game and because it's different than SC2, still has a niche. Now, I will admit I've been a huge SC2 fan since the beta and am getting the CE version, but I also bought DoW 2 at release and CR xpac and voted it GOTY for me last year. The matchmaking was not all that great, granted, but the game has great production values and is fun. Also, The Last Stand showed a lot of potential as to a very addictive game mode that really could be more fleshed out and hell, maybe even be it's own game if developed as such. DoW 2 was one of those games that you either loved or hated. Some hated it because of the "simplicity" and lack of base building. To me, that was one thing that I loved about it. After playing RTS for many years, CoH included, it was nice to have a game that focused on just tactics and combat as opposed to build orders and a huge macro game.
None the less, despite DoW 2 being an amazing game, I'm very stoked about SC2. The beta was a blast and the game shows a ton of promise in the mod area as well as the main game. It could easily be GOTY, but time will tell. This year is pretty amazing for quality games, with other blockbusters like Mafia 2, the new Deus Ex and I personally think that COD:BO looks like it will be the FPS to pull me away from BC2. Obviously, there are quite a few other superb titles coming out as well, but I'm very excited about SC2.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
