Do you think SC 2 will get a 10

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="groowagon"]

i'm not talking about taking elements from other genres. i'm talking about innovation.

games like Supreme Commander, Company Of Heroes and World In Conflict are major improvements from the days of C&C, Warcraft, Dune Starcraft etc.

e: although i did like the RPG style leveling and equipment system in Dawn Of War II. it wasn't your typical RTS experience, but it was something fresh.

groowagon

What else is there to add, that is not a rip off of an aspect from a different genre? Maybe we can do all the missions from a vehicle.

that's propably the same question developers asked them selves when making those games i mentioned... and they succeeded. i don't think there's anything wrong in improving some old ideas.

I'd call all those RTS that you named pretty mediocre. I felt nearly all the reviews were too good to each game. The replayability was very low.

[QUOTE="groowagon"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

LOL. Steak isn't made better by dumping every condiment in the fridge on it. RTS aren't made better by adding elements from other genres.

GummiRaccoon

i'm not talking about taking elements from other genres. i'm talking about innovation.

games like Supreme Commander, Company Of Heroes and World In Conflict are major improvements from the days of C&C, Warcraft, Dune Starcraft etc.

e: although i did like the RPG style leveling and equipment system in Dawn Of War II. it wasn't your typical RTS experience, but it was something fresh.

What else is there to add, that is not a rip off of an aspect from a different genre? Maybe we can do all the missions from a vehicle.

No. Honestly if CoH couldn't get a 10 with its highly-progressive, brilliant gameplay and presentation, then I don't see how SC2 can get a 10, even with that editor.mo0ksi

SEA BATTLE.NET SERVERS are now LIVE !!

I'm OFF to CHAR ! :DD

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]No. Honestly if CoH couldn't get a 10 with its highly-progressive, brilliant gameplay and presentation, then I don't see how SC2 can get a 10, even with that editor.TerrorRizzing

SEA BATTLE.NET SERVERS are now LIVE !!

I'm OFF to CHAR ! :DD

LordAinav

HELL. IS IT ABOUT TIME YET :P ?

[QUOTE="TerrorRizzing"]

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]No. Honestly if CoH couldn't get a 10 with its highly-progressive, brilliant gameplay and presentation, then I don't see how SC2 can get a 10, even with that editor.mo0ksi

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"][QUOTE="TerrorRizzing"] Because starcraft 2 is more fun to play and has a wider appeal? This always happens, a great universally acclaimed game comes out and people try to discredit it because their favorite game wasnt as acclaimed.

TerrorRizzing

I'm really not trying to argue scores here as it's all subjective at the end. But I don't know where you got the idea that Starcraft had far greater acclaim than Company of Heores.

Seriously?

First of all, Starcraft 2 hasn't received any acclaim yet. Second, the original Starcraft has a 9.1 whereas Company of Heroes has a 9.0 on GS. Company of Heroes has a 93 Metacritic average based around 55 reviews whereas Starcraft has an 88 based around 15.

I'm really not trying to argue scores here as it's all subjective at the end. But I don't know where you got the idea that Starcraft had far greater acclaim than Company of Heores.

mo0ksi

This made my day :lol:

Some people really tries hard...The amount of delusion here is amusing.

StarCraft was released in the RTS spree of the nineties. At the time, the internet still wasn't so common, a lot of review sites didn't exist yet or they weren't anywhere near what they are today, people still used hearsay and magazines as the mean to learn about games, and the consistent amount of RTSs being released at the time raised the standard bar to a very harsh level.

The only ones who knew about StarCraft before its release were the few WC2 fans that already had an internet connection...look where the game is now. Universally considered to be the pinnacle of the RTS genre, it is still the most competitive and polished game to be ever released with 3 races that do not share ONE mechanic yet are flawlessly balanced and it is still one of the most played games online TWELVE years after its release.

Company of Heroes...not nearly as much. "Acclaim", yes, StarCraft *totally* crushes it.

The mere idea that you ignored all of these factors while making this post startles me, mooski. Are you so in need of a StarCraft bash that you've become reckless?

I didn't ignore those factors. I acknowledge them completely. My opinion on the matter still stands. I'd rather have something that brilliantly progresses the genre than one that mainly plays it safe.mo0ksi

Sure, your opinion does. The points you've presented, however, are dwindling. Sheer amount of reviews means nothing.

Being less acclaimed than StarCraft doesn't mean that a game is crap, or that you have to argue over petty details such as "StarCraft 2 has no acclaim yet"...the success of the beta is there for all to see.

Do you think any Relic game deserves a 10? I could argue the same way about their lack of polish.

:lol: Man, this is rich. Because my opinion differs from yours, I'm bias? Towards what, exactly? Or are you still upset that I don't find Final Fantasy 7 as incredible as you do? Has it all of a sudden become taboo to speak ill of Starcraft around here? Like I said before, which all you chose to ignore, I still think SC2 is going to be excellent. I just don't think it's going to do much to actually progress the genre, especially compared to Company of Heroes, a game that many people have no problem calling one of the best in the genre. Man, I'm just starting to think that a lot of yous are being blinded by the hype. This is fun.mo0ksi

After that post about acclaim...

[QUOTE="AzatiS"] Mo0ksi you got some enterntaining , full biased opinions towards some games really... So SC2 is not highly - progressive , brilliant gameplay and presentation game? mo0ksi

Mo0ksi is right, new RTS games(CoH,DoW2) have evolved and progressed the genre. compared to them Starcraft 2 is a step backward.

EDIT: After readin through this thread some more I've decided that Starcraft fanboys make me :lol:

Sure, your opinion does. The points you've presented, however, are dwindling. Sheer amount of reviews means nothing.

Being less acclaimed than StarCraft doesn't mean that a game is crap, or that you have to argue over petty details such as "StarCraft 2 has no acclaim yet"...the success of the beta is there for all to see.

Do you think any Relic game deserves a 10? I could argue the same way about their lack of polish.

Mograine

I never said that first part. It has no real acclaim. But that's besides the point.

Their games are more than polished enough, just not as much as Blizzard's games. But I couldn't care less when the gameplay is a lot more interesting.

After that post about acclaim...

Mograine

As you see, I stopped talking about the reviews, when I said it's all subjective at the end. Another thing you chose to ignore.

I never said that first part. It has no real acclaim. But that's besides the point.

Their games are more than polished enough, just not as much as Blizzard's games. But I couldn't care less when the gameplay is a lot more interesting.

mo0ksi

You don't start talking about something just to say "it doesn't matter" the line after that.

Starcraft 2 hasn't received any acclaim yetmo0ski

You were arguing with TerrorRizzing about acclaim in a pretty rash manner. I assumed you took that "acclaim" part from him as an offense to CoH or something.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

After that post about acclaim...

mo0ksi

You don't start talking about something just to say "it doesn't matter" the line after thatMograine

You were arguing with TerrorRizzing about acclaim in a pretty rash manner. I assumed you took that "acclaim" part from him as an offense to CoH or something.Mograine

TerrorRizzing

Hell, I think Relic put Blizzard to shame when they released Homeworld; the RTS that introduced full-3D space gameplay in an RTS. Came out a year after Starcraft. Again, I'm not talking about scores here.

I used scores to be as "objective" as possible in this regard. You had...nothing. Your comparison is laughable, and I know not to take anymore what you say seriously. But nice talking to you! :)

Wow, are Blizzard fanboys on this board really that delusional that they start downplaying CoH, which is extremely well celebrated all over? :lol:mo0ksi

It's simply a matter of brand (blind?) loyalty and Blizzard fans have taken this concept to a whole new level. They really do go to eleven sometimes and, as annoying as it is, it's something you're simply going to have to get used to or go insane debating in circles. Trust me on this, you can't argue with them so you can either drink the kool-aid and join the masses or just ignore them.

Wow, are Blizzard fanboys on this board really that delusional that they start downplaying CoH, which is extremely well celebrated all over? :lol:mo0ksi

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]Wow, are Blizzard fanboys on this board really that delusional that they start downplaying CoH, which is extremely well celebrated all over? :lol:-wildflower-

It's simply a matter of brand (blind?) loyalty and Blizzard fans have taken this concept to a whole new level. They really do go to eleven sometimes and, as annoying as it is, it's something you're simply going to have to get used to or go insane debating in circles. Trust me on this, you can't argue with them so you can either drink the kool-aid and join the masses or just ignore them.

1. List said unnecessary plot points. soldine

..

[QUOTE="-wildflower-"]

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]Wow, are Blizzard fanboys on this board really that delusional that they start downplaying CoH, which is extremely well celebrated all over? :lol:TerrorRizzing

It's simply a matter of brand (blind?) loyalty and Blizzard fans have taken this concept to a whole new level. They really do go to eleven sometimes and, as annoying as it is, it's something you're simply going to have to get used to or go insane debating in circles. Trust me on this, you can't argue with them so you can either drink the kool-aid and join the masses or just ignore them.

i'd be surprised if it would even get a 9. judging from the videos and gameplay demonstrations, it looks more like a remake of the original; it doesn't seem to be offering anything new when it comes to gameplay. Battle.net being the major improvement...

groowagon

Consider that Super Mario Galaxy 2 got a 10, it is / was much in the same situation as SC2. It's largely builds on the original formula and takes a 'don't fix what isn't broken' approach to the core gameplay.

While the general MP gameplay of SC2 is very similar to SC1 the overall unit composition, special abilities and tactics has changed a lot. Also, there has been relatively little information about the single player aspect of the game but it sounds like it's going to offer a lot of new elements to the overall campaign: The ability to research new bonuses and units between missions, the ability to buy / hire special units for missions of your choice, branching campaigns.

I have no idea if the game will get a 10, it seems very hard to even guess at since the requirements to hit that score are unclear. I'm sure that SC2 will have the polish and the quality worthy of a 10, however if its hit ten is going to be a matter of personal preference on the part of the reviewer.

probably will get between a 9 - 9.5 :)

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]Wow, are Blizzard fanboys on this board really that delusional that they start downplaying CoH, which is extremely well celebrated all over? :lol:TerrorRizzing

So Mooski, you just acknowledged that SC is a deeper game then CoH. CoH is a great game who's depth of strats can't compete with traditional RTS design, of which SC2 shall become the pinnacle. Getting back to RTS roots is now innovative because of the direction the genre has taken over the last 10 years.

So Mooski, you just acknowledged that SC is a deeper game then CoH. CoH is a great game who's depth of strats can't compete with traditional RTS design, of which SC2 shall become the pinnacle. Getting back to RTS roots is now innovative because of the direction the genre has taken over the last 10 years.

Rawtheory333

I'm betting it will get an 8.5 just to attract hits to the GS website. The review will cite the game as being too similiar to the original. Fanboys will nerdrage and there will be mass account suicides. The world at large won't care and will buy the game by the millions. Blizzard employees will cry over their game not being hailed as the greatest RTS of all time and go dry their tears with $100 bills before going for a swim in their giant moneypit.

you must be living in a bubble lol, we didnt donwplay anything... you just cant compare the love for starcraft to company of heroes.

TerrorRizzing

WHAT THE @{{[#&/"!? you, dear boy, are delusional. go give your Terran plush a big hug. talking about fanboyism...

e: i didn't initially mean to start bashing SC2, but i just mean i don't see the big fuzz here. maybe i would think otherwise if had played the beta. i might just buy this for the sheer support for PC gaming. they don't do this big games to PC too often anymore. and again, it's made by Blizzard, so i doubt it will be a failure.

[QUOTE="TerrorRizzing"]

you must be living in a bubble lol, we didnt donwplay anything... you just cant compare the love for starcraft to company of heroes.

groowagon

WHAT THE @{{[#&/"!? you, dear boy, are delusional. go give your Terran plush a big hug. talking about fanboyism...

e: i didn't initially mean to start bashing SC2, but i just mean i don't see the big fuzz here. maybe i would think otherwise if had played the beta. i might just buy this for the sheer support for PC gaming. they don't do this big games to PC too often anymore. and again, it's made by Blizzard, so i doubt it will be a failure.

Nearly everyone gushing over this game has played the beta. Myself, I wasn't too enthused until I played it and then I shouted to the heavens OMGWTFBBQ.

Whoever does the Video Review will probably give it a 8/10 just because he sucks at Starcraft.

Probably at least a 9. Doesn't really matter. I've been playing since Brood War, and I already played the beta. Definitely will love it.

How did I miss this thread? Wow 100+ posts.

Now, I'm going to set aside the actualy game and say that lot's of GS recent ratings were sort of based on hype, or maybe that's the wrong way to say it but basically they were just... not their opinion.

Knowing GS, they'll give SC2 8-9.

I truly, truly, detest blizzard fanboys. Some of your arguments here are laughable, especially the part about company of heroes or even Homeworld......HOMEWORLD'S being inferior to starcraft. I had a good laugh, my friends did too. Thanks

I truly, truly, detest blizzard fanboys. Some of your arguments here are laughable, especially the part about company of heroes or even Homeworld......HOMEWORLD'S being inferior to starcraft. I had a good laugh, my friends did too. Thanks

omenodebander

I truly, truly, detest blizzard fanboys. Some of your arguments here are laughable, especially the part about company of heroes or even Homeworld......HOMEWORLD'S being inferior to starcraft. I had a good laugh, my friends did too. Thanks

omenodebander

[QUOTE="Vfanek"][QUOTE="NLahren"]i guess the score will be 7-8,5 not higher NLahren