[QUOTE="sky_rend"][QUOTE="DerekLoffin"]At this point, I'd say AA. It is seriously lacking in many features that many other RTSes have (and in many cases, not for good reason). It's a good solid RTS beyond that, but the lack of many features should hold it back from AAA status.DerekLoffinCan you list some of these features? Just curious as SC and WC3 were the last RTS's I've played. Mostly Battle net 2.0 lacking (no common chat, no passwords on games, friend system is terrible, no good way to put a descriptor on a game). There is also some less serious, but still lacking in game stuff (net code is rather lag inducing, no Lan support, no 'no rush' timer, no draw mechanism to deal with stalemates) and some stuff lacking that perhaps is due to balance concerns but still (no formations, no cast targeting via icon (something they deliberately removed), no quick interface for access production buildings). It still is a very solid RTS, but it feels behind the times in many respects.
While I respect your opinion, most of your complaints listed are about bnet and this has almost nothing to do with the actual game and how well it plays.
As for your other points: formations...The idea here is to not limit players and dumb down the game by specifying formations. As if blizz didnt include formations because they didnt have time. Quick access to production buildings...Have you ever heard of hotkeys?
I'm not even sure what cast targeting via icon even means but hotkeys and bindings work like a charm.
I fear that people who have little to no knowledge of SC will be turned off by the complexity and wallow in ignorance.
Log in to comment