Should I get Starcraft bundle?

I'm just getting into PC gaming these past 6 months. I know that Starcraft 2 is coming out in 2010. Bestbuy is selling a Starcraft "Battle chest" for $20. Should I pick it up or just wait for Starcraft 2?

I'm just getting into PC gaming these past 6 months. I know that Starcraft 2 is coming out in 2010. Bestbuy is selling a Starcraft "Battle chest" for $20. Should I pick it up or just wait for Starcraft 2?

Josh5890

So, you're the one who doesn't have SC! ;)

Answer: Yes, definitely get it.

On amazon.com and bestbuy.com it shows Starcraft 2 at $60. Is that really gonna be the price because I thought that PC games were cheaper than console games.

On amazon.com and bestbuy.com it shows Starcraft 2 at $60. Is that really gonna be the price because I thought that PC games were cheaper than console games.

Josh5890

EDIT: Hey look a post made 2 months ago im pretty sure TC made his decision by now. sadly i was to late to stop the dawn of war vs starcraft flame war that ensued :(

I got the StarCraft Battle Chest pack thing a few months ago, and it was one of the best choices I've ever made. If you were gonna move up to StarCraft 2, you should have the background story of the originals. You'll get used to the tactics, strategies, and all of the units and stuff. Basic straight up answer? Get it, it's only $20!

Definatly pick it up, the Starcraft expansion is very good.

On amazon.com and bestbuy.com it shows Starcraft 2 at $60. Is that really gonna be the price because I thought that PC games were cheaper than console games.

Josh5890

No, save your money for something better like Company of Heroes or DoW.

Yes, you should :)

Its worth it ^^ greatest music in an rts ever... apart from the cool, "nont too dark" music, the game is pretty darn fun, I break it out once a year to play through the tarran campaign.

Mind you it IS old, and for an rts game there is not alot of options for a player.

Yeeeeeeeessss....

No, save your money for something better like Company of Heroes or DoW.

ZuluEcho14

I sense a logic failure here.

Yes, get it. Althou you may not enjoy the multiplayer as much as you could in its "glory years", it's still worth it.

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]

No, save your money for something better like Company of Heroes or DoW.

Mograine

I sense a logic failure here.

Yes, get it. Althou you may not enjoy the multiplayer as much as you could in its "glory years", it's still worth it.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]

No, save your money for something better like Company of Heroes or DoW.

ZuluEcho14

I sense a logic failure here.

Yes, get it. Althou you may not enjoy the multiplayer as much as you could in its "glory years", it's still worth it.

How so?pvtdonut54

Logic failure? Because I don't like what I think is the most boring and generic RTS I've ever played?ZuluEcho14

You just hate it because you were zerg rushed before you realized you could move your SCVs, ragequitted and started crying :P

Seriously, it's the most balanced and competitive RTS you can find out there. Saying it's boring and generic means you either don't know how to play it, or have never even tried to play it.

The levels make my eyes vomit in digust and boredom,

read ^

the AI and pathfinding is non-existant,

I agree that pathfinding often screws up. But in a competitive match, pathfinding is done by the player, not by the AI.

the setting is ripped off,

So what?

it did nothing besides the whole balance thing which results in same unit spams.

This, again, proves you've never played it.

It's just so bleh.

The only point that made sense is the pathfinding issue, and that only matters in very, very low competitive levels. So, you saying it's "so bleh" is pointless.

ZuluEcho14

The levels make my eyes vomit in digust and boredom, the setting is ripped off,

ZuluEcho14

the AI and pathfinding is non-existant, it did nothing besides the whole balance thing which results in same unit spams.
ZuluEcho14

You just hate it because you were zerg rushed before you realized you could move your SCVs, ragequitted and started crying :P

Seriously, it's the most balanced and competitive RTS you can find out there. Saying it's boring and generic means you either don't know how to play it, or have never even tried to play it.

Mograine

Yes, because people totally cry because of a game, unless that person is you. :roll:

I consider myself an experienced RTS player and I've tried to like it, I really did, this game is just ugly and boring.

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]

The levels make my eyes vomit in digust and boredom, the setting is ripped off,

pvtdonut54

the AI and pathfinding is non-existant, it did nothing besides the whole balance thing which results in same unit spams.
ZuluEcho14

What did Dawn of War ripped off? And you can't consider the WWII setting ripped off, WWII is not copyrighted.Besides I didn't play CoH for the setting.

And no, I never actually beat the Terran campaign because the game made my brain want to break out of my skull. But please, tell me how to "play it right".

Yes, because people totally cry because of a game, unless that person is you. :roll:

I consider myself an experienced RTS player and I've tried to like it, I really did, this game is just ugly and boring.

ZuluEcho14

It was a joke. Sorry if the ":P Seriously, " part didn't make it obvious enough for you.

Ugly...uh, it's a 2D 1998 game. Boring, I don't really know. I only have over twelve thousand hours spent on it and stopped playing it as regularly when WoW was launched, I'm not really sure I can say it's boring...

[quote="ZuluEcho14"]The levels make my eyes vomit in digust and boredom,

read ^

the AI and pathfinding is non-existant,

I agree that pathfinding often screws up. But in a competitive match, pathfinding is done by the player, not by the AI.

the setting is ripped off,

So what?

it did nothing besides the whole balance thing which results in same unit spams.

This, again, proves you've never played it.

It's just so bleh.

The only point that made sense is the pathfinding issue, and that only matters in very, very low competitive levels. So, you saying it's "so bleh" is pointless.

Mograine

Read what? You made no argument agaisnt this accusation. The grey and brown symmetric maps are ugly and unrealistic.

But supposed to be done by the player, that's why the AI is there. Next you know you will have to click on an enemy for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet.

Yeah, this game does nothing new why should the setting be any different?

Please tell me anoter "revolutionary" feature of the almigthy Starcraft. I have seen videos of competitive players playing, all I saw there were the walker terran units and those winged zerg creatures unit spam.

Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?

Read what? You made no argument agaisnt this accusation. The grey and brown symmetric maps are ugly and unrealistic.ZuluEcho14

They are not supposed to be realistic, they're supposed to be competitive.

But supposed to be done by the player, that's why the AI is there. Next you know you will have to click on an enemy for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet.ZuluEcho14

But it is so. It's a physical law that concentrating a force on a single point is more likely to break the target than spreading the force on the object's surface.

Yeah, this game does nothing new why should the setting be any different?

Please tell me anoter "revolutionary" feature of the almigthy Starcraft. I have seen videos of competitive players playing, all I saw there were the walker terran units and those winged zerg creatures unit spam.ZuluEcho14

:?

Nothing new? What other RTS before SC was so perfectly balanced with so different races and mechanics, and such an efficient online system?

It's called build order and versatility - and those units are extremely hard to use properly.

Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?

ZuluEcho14

It does not matter. I've been playing SC since the week after it was released, and I was 6 years old at the time, not very competitive if you ask me.

Never participated in a competitive match and never found it boring.

The grey and brown symmetric maps are ugly and unrealistic.

ZuluEcho14

[QUOTE="pvtdonut54"]

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]
So is Dawn of War and Company of Heroes...

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]
the AI and pathfinding is non-existant, it did nothing besides the whole balance thing which results in same unit spams.
ZuluEcho14

What did Dawn of War ripped off? And you can't consider the WWII setting ripped off, WWII is not copyrighted.Besides I didn't play CoH for the setting.

And no, I never actually beat the Terran campaign because the game made my brain want to break out of my skull. But please, tell me how to "play it right".

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]

Read what? You made no argument agaisnt this accusation. The grey and brown symmetric maps are ugly and unrealistic.Mograine

They are not supposed to be realistic, they're supposed to be competitive.

The competitive community can go **** off, to me strategy isn't about having the same amount of minerals and the same terrain advantage (not that terrain matters much because bullets just fly through things (yes I know this is also a flaw in the original Dawn of War)) but utilising what you have effectively through tactics and effective unit use.

But supposed to be done by the player, that's why the AI is there. Next you know you will have to click on an enemy for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet.ZuluEcho14

But it is so. It's a physical law that concentrating a force on a single point is more likely to break the target than spreading the force on the object's surface.

I don't know how that is relevant but, whatever.

Yeah, this game does nothing new why should the setting be any different?

Please tell me anoter "revolutionary" feature of the almigthy Starcraft. I have seen videos of competitive players playing, all I saw there were the walker terran units and those winged zerg creatures unit spam.ZuluEcho14

:?

Nothing new? What other RTS before SC was so perfectly balanced with so different races and mechanics, and such an efficient online system?

It's called build order and versatility - and those units are extremely hard to use properly.

Like I said, there's nothing new to it gameplay wise besides the unit balance. And since when is using one unit called versality? I don't see how a unit by clicking on an enemy that you want to attack is "extremely hard to use properly"

Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?

ZuluEcho14

It does not matter. I've been playing SC since the week after it was released, and I was 6 years old at the time, not very competitive if you ask me.

Never participated in a competitive match and never found it boring.

So is it or is it not competitive?Maybe you didn't but I did, maybe you just haven't played better RTS's and don't know better.

[QUOTE="pvtdonut54"] How so?ZuluEcho14

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

They are not supposed to be realistic, they're supposed to be competitive.

The competitive community can go **** off, to me strategy isn't about having the same amount of minerals and the same terrain advantage (not that terrain matters much because bullets just fly through things (yes I know this is also a flaw in the original Dawn of War)) but utilising what you have effectively through tactics and effective unit use.

ZuluEcho14

Er, this doesn't make a lick of sense, not only in SC terrain advantage is a huge factor in battles but also having different minerals means a unfair disadvantage which as slight as it might be it can make the difference in a serious match.

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]But supposed to be done by the player, that's why the AI is there. Next you know you will have to click on an enemy for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet.Mograine

But it is so. It's a physical law that concentrating a force on a single point is more likely to break the target than spreading the force on the object's surface.

I don't know how that is relevant but, whatever.

How not? You said "you will have to click for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet", and it *should* be so in every battle since concentrated fire wins over spread fire when luck isn't a factor.

[quote="ZuluEcho14"]Yeah, this game does nothing new why should the setting be any different?

Please tell me anoter "revolutionary" feature of the almigthy Starcraft. I have seen videos of competitive players playing, all I saw there were the walker terran units and those winged zerg creatures unit spam.Mograine

:?

Nothing new? What other RTS before SC was so perfectly balanced with so different races and mechanics, and such an efficient online system?

It's called build order and versatility - and those units are extremely hard to use properly.

Like I said, there's nothing new to it gameplay wise besides the unit balance. And since when is using one unit called versality? I don't see how a unit by clicking on an enemy that you want to attack is "extremely hard to use properly"

Well, at this point you are screaming as loud as you can "I don't have a clue how SC and RTSs in general work" :?

[quote="ZuluEcho14"]Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?

ZuluEcho14

It does not matter. I've been playing SC since the week after it was released, and I was 6 years old at the time, not very competitive if you ask me.

Never participated in a competitive match and never found it boring.

So is it or is it not competitive?Maybe you didn't but I did, maybe you just haven't played better RTS's and don't know better.

Mograine

Again, what you are saying doesn't make a lick of sense. I said you can play it competitively or not, your "Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?" is therefore completely irrelevant.

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

They are not supposed to be realistic, they're supposed to be competitive.

The competitive community can go **** off, to me strategy isn't about having the same amount of minerals and the same terrain advantage (not that terrain matters much because bullets just fly through things (yes I know this is also a flaw in the original Dawn of War)) but utilising what you have effectively through tactics and effective unit use.

Mograine

Er, this doesn't make a lick of sense, not only in SC terrain advantage is a huge factor in battles but also having different minerals means a unfair disadvantage which as slight as it might be it can make the difference in a serious match.

Please specify an example. What I ment by that is that you don't need to have a simmetrical map to have a fair match, so long as you know what to do and how to do it.

[QUOTE="ZuluEcho14"]But supposed to be done by the player, that's why the AI is there. Next you know you will have to click on an enemy for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet.Mograine

But it is so. It's a physical law that concentrating a force on a single point is more likely to break the target than spreading the force on the object's surface.

I don't know how that is relevant but, whatever.

How not? You said "you will have to click for each unit everytime you want to fire a bullet", and it *should* be so in every battle since concentrated fire wins over spread fire when luck isn't a factor.

I think you think I said you have to click on an enemy unit to make it attack another, I was comparing having to micro all your way throught the map due to lousy pathfinding to having to click every time on an enemy unit to fire a bullet.

[quote="ZuluEcho14"]Yeah, this game does nothing new why should the setting be any different?

Please tell me anoter "revolutionary" feature of the almigthy Starcraft. I have seen videos of competitive players playing, all I saw there were the walker terran units and those winged zerg creatures unit spam.Mograine

:?

Nothing new? What other RTS before SC was so perfectly balanced with so different races and mechanics, and such an efficient online system?

It's called build order and versatility - and those units are extremely hard to use properly.

Like I said, there's nothing new to it gameplay wise besides the unit balance. And since when is using one unit called versality? I don't see how a unit by clicking on an enemy that you want to attack is "extremely hard to use properly"

Well, at this point you are screaming as loud as you can "I don't have a clue how SC and RTSs in general work" :?

At this point you are completly stopping of responding to my arguments in favor of insulting my intelligence.

[quote="ZuluEcho14"]Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?

ZuluEcho14

It does not matter. I've been playing SC since the week after it was released, and I was 6 years old at the time, not very competitive if you ask me.

Never participated in a competitive match and never found it boring.

So is it or is it not competitive?Maybe you didn't but I did, maybe you just haven't played better RTS's and don't know better.

Mograine

Again, what you are saying doesn't make a lick of sense. I said you can play it competitively or not, your "Have you ever thought that the TC might not want a competitive game?" is therefore completely irrelevant.

Then if you don't play it competitivly the good things about it (balance) completly goes to hell and the game just becames an average RTS

Anyway, looks like this whole this is useless, didn't notice the thread was two months old and no matter how much we argue I'm not going to change my opinion and your not going to change yours.

[QUOTE="Josh5890"]

On amazon.com and bestbuy.com it shows Starcraft 2 at $60. Is that really gonna be the price because I thought that PC games were cheaper than console games.

johnny27

EDIT: Hey look a post made 2 months ago im pretty sure TC made his decision by now. sadly i was to late to stop the dawn of war vs starcraft flame war that ensued :(