Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

StarCraft II To Be Released On July 27

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the guess-it's-ready dept.

Real Time Strategy (Games) 220

Blizzard announced today that StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty, the first game in a series of three, will be released on July 27. The game will contain the Terran campaign (29 missions), the full multiplayer experience, and "several challenge-mode mini-games," with "focused goals designed to ease players into the basics of multiplayer strategies." It will launch alongside the revamped Battle.net, which we've previously discussed. Blizzard CEO Mike Morhaime said, "We've been looking forward to revisiting the StarCraft universe for many years, and we're excited that the time for that is almost here. Thanks to our beta testers, we're making great progress on the final stages of development, and we'll be ready to welcome players all over the world to StarCraft II and the new Battle.net in just a few months."

cancel ×

220 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

bout time (1)

nj_peeps (1780942) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077554)

only been waiting for what? 10 years?

Re:bout time (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32077596)

Their office kept getting zerg rushed. Production could not be completed.

Re:bout time (5, Funny)

Dayofswords (1548243) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077770)

They required more vespene gas.

Re:bout time (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078030)

And additional pylons. My god, the pylons...

Re:bout time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078220)

oh my god, it's full of pylons?

Re:bout time (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077966)

I would have had first post, But i was too busy playing the beta.

Re:bout time (0, Troll)

jdpars (1480913) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078016)

Honestly, I think this may be fake. That article doesn't cite any source, just that "Blizzard announced..." It would be nice if they said that it was at another press tour like the announcement of the map editor and trial of the single player campaign. Also, there's nothing up yet on the official forums, which is where they post follow-ups to announcements like these.

Re:bout time (3, Insightful)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078574)

The press release is missing from blizzard.com, it's on the Activision site: http://investor.activision.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=466030 [activision.com]

I do hate it when people neglect to cite their sources, but most journalists probably received this as an email.

Re:bout time (2, Informative)

The Snowman (116231) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079508)

Honestly, I think this may be fake.

Is Blizzard's site [blizzard.com] a fake?

I think I can safely say that Blizzard said it will be released on July 27, 2010.

For completeness, here is the press release [blizzard.com] on blizzard.com.

Re:bout time (1)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078312)

They needed to spawn more overlords. And coders...

Re:bout time (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079792)

I think the official line is

"Hell, it's about time."

Finally! (5, Funny)

Schickeneder (1454639) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077560)

I've been waiting for this half my life!

Re:Finally! (5, Interesting)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077790)

For a second I thought that this was hyperbole, but then I realized it's actually true. Seeing as the original starcraft was released in 1998, it'd make the parent 24 years old.
God that's scary.

Re:Finally! (1)

PylonHead (61401) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078334)

I was talking to some kid on steam about Starcraft, and he was telling me that the Zerg used to give him nightmares. He was 11 when it came out. I told him I had been 27. He was shocked that someone as old as I was would still play games. :)

Re:Finally! (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078594)

I'll be shocked if I don't play them at that age. Just today I saw a 40 year old woman playing with a PSP in the subway.

Re:Finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078700)

Fuck, I'm turning 25 in a couple weeks and I feel ancient. The PC gaming demographic has always skewed pretty old, though. I remember the long-since-defunct Computer Games Strategy Plus released a survey about ten years ago (aaaargh) showing their subscriber base averaged something like 35. I'd bet the overall pool of PC gamers who actually buy games instead of pirating has an average age of 30+. Seems like a demographic that's a bit under-served, really.

Re:Finally! (1)

Haxzaw (1502841) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078808)

I'm 48, and I still play games. Can't imagine I'll ever stop - well not until I get too old to see the screen, and too slow to react.

Re:Finally! (3, Funny)

Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079642)

God that's scary.

Newly hatched zerglings should not trouble a fully mature high templar.

All your base are belong to us (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32077566)

Nerds unite! Now you can logout of WoW for 30 minutes to get your ass handed to you by a Korean teenager again!

Re:All your base are belong to us (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32077716)

I know its a joke, but the Korean server is completely separated and blizzard's matchmaking system usually puts you against someone of your exact skill level. It surprisingly works very well at the lower levels, high level players have a larger skill difference though and don't match up as well.

Re:All your base are belong to us (1)

alan_dershowitz (586542) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077998)

So, this is what I was told about the Koreans, which used to be everywhere: There used to be no servers on the Pacific Rim. Then they got them, they were running at capacity and Koreans would still connect to American servers. I personally saw tons of them, so I think it at least originated in fact. It was generally pretty easy to tell who the Koreans were, because their names looked like someone mashed the keyboard and they would swear at you while declaring the superiority of Korea.

Re:All your base are belong to us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078148)

I sought them out. American players were too pussy for me.

Re:All your base are belong to us (1)

John Saffran (1763678) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078166)

because their names looked like someone mashed the keyboard and they would swear at you while declaring the superiority of Korea.

Breaking news: Teenagers found to lack lack maturity .. followed by the shocking discovery that water is wet

I'm sure I've seen plenty of l337 d00ds around the internet proclaiming their superiority or that of their group (eg. nationality).

Re:All your base are belong to us (1)

dbet (1607261) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079322)

Hey! If I want to play with Korean teenagers, I'll unlock the basement.

Time to buy stock (3, Funny)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077568)

in power plants in South Korea. I hear they're going to have a boom come July.

Re:Time to buy stock (1)

TheRedDuke (1734262) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077776)

Well played - you beat me to the punch on the obligatory Korea joke.

Re:Time to buy stock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078466)

Don't be surprised if the morgues do too.

Not excited (2, Interesting)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077636)

So a friend got me in on the SC2 beta, and I've got to say, it really wasn't much fun. I loved the original SC, but when BroodWar came out, I felt like i had to coordinate too many units' special abilities during a battle, in a very small amount of wall-clock time. SC2 felt similar but perhaps even worse in that regard. Maybe some of that goes away after you've played for a while, but I'm just not in the mood to put in that time. Maybe it's just a stage-of-life difference, I dunno.

That being said, I *am* looking forward to Diablo 3 still.

Re:Not excited (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077704)

Yeah I tried it and it was kind of fun, but not as much as SC 1 was. Maybe I'm just getting too old. The weird thing is I've found that the only games I seem to enjoy these days are RPGs, particularly with a 3rd person perspective.

Re:Not excited (1)

Antiocheian (859870) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077868)

Gothic ?

Re:Not excited (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078042)

I'm not a fan of unit micromanagement either. It's one of the reasons I didn't enjoy Warcraft III. It's frustrating to me that that's the direction the genre is moving, though. C&C4 removed the economics and base building; it's nothing but unit management.

"Strategy" has a more big-picture connotation. I enjoy taking on the role of the general in charge of the theater, not the lieutenant leading a platoon. That latter thing is more "tactics".

Can anybody recommend a good RTS game that emphasizes economics, logistics, base building, and unit recruiting, while de-emphasizing direct control of small groups of units?

Re:Not excited (1)

ctishman (545856) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078160)

Supreme Commander 1 & 2. http://www.supremecommander2.com/ [supremecommander2.com]

Re:Not excited (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32079060)

SupCom 2 is teh suck. But yeah, the original is much more strategic; the economy is simply brilliant. So fucking annoying that they scrapped it completely in the sequel.

Re:Not excited (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078472)

SimCity?

Re:Not excited (1)

Miaowara_Tomokato (757775) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078856)

Try Empire:Total War (or any earlier entries from the series) for a strong focus on strategy -- you won't be sorry. The strategic map is a complete game in its own right, and the tactical battles in Total War games have been enjoyable since TW:Rome.

Re:Not excited (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079424)

The problem with the total war is the

***waiting screen while we load battle***

amount of downtime while

***2 minute walk to the opposing army, even in 3x speed***

you try to get from one thing

***After 3 minutes of pitched battle we now have 5 of boring mop up, which you can't just ignore since you need to make sure your general doesn't die***

to another. I mean I could almost play a game of Civ while

***Loading campaign map again, 3 minute wait***

this stuff goes on

Re:Not excited (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32079330)

spring rts
http://springrts.com/

Its open source, runs on Linux, Mac, and windows.

Re:Not excited (1)

Dragoniz3r (992309) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077796)

I am looking forward to discovering whether Diablo 3 is as good as Diablo II. I still haven't seen enough to know whether I care about it or not. I hope they don't make it a campaign oriented mini-WoW. I really want it to have a very strong single player experience.

Re:Not excited (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078758)

i got to play the beta at blizcon and it seemed to be an updated version of Diablo II. It seemed to have the same mouse wearing out click fest as the first 2 had.

Which Race? (1)

nobodyman (90587) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077878)

I'm inclined to agree, but I wonder how much of my enjoyment (or lack thereof) comes from the fact that there's no single-player element as well as the fact that I don't know any of the people I'm playing (only one other friend of mine is on the beta).

Other random observations:

  • The UI seems more streamlined, but much less social. No chat rooms, no ability to interact with players before/after matches.
  • I don't like playing people I don't know, even when I win.
  • The games seem to take less time, which I like overall. Most of the games I've played seem to be over in 30 minutes.
  • Terran seems less fun, Protoss seems more fun. It seems like terran gameplay requires *a lot* more micromanagement. Is that just me?
  • The gameplay feels very similar to SC1, which I like

Re:Which Race? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078400)

# The UI seems more streamlined, but much less social. No chat rooms, no ability to interact with players before/after matches.
# I don't like playing people I don't know, even when I win.

It's because it's beta. There will be chat on release. The beta is for testing game balance, the match-making system and the program on a wide range of hardware, not for hanging around in chat rooms.

Re:Not excited (5, Informative)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077920)

The game can be quite micro-heavy, especially for certain unit types, but with the matchmaking system if you're not capable of playing at that level, you will rarely get stuck playing against someone who is and is capable of easily wiping the floor with you. The general idea behind their match-making system is that you should win about as many games as you lose so that it will always be a challenging and enjoyable experience. At least that's the theory. We'll have to see how well it actually works when the game finally launches.

If you don't care to learn those abilities, you'll likely play other people who can't or can't be bothered to learn them either.The original Starcraft tended towards high micromanagement ability requirements at the highest levels of play, but it may just be that you never got that far or even thought about how to effectively micro the vanilla units. You should check out some of the video casts of the various SC tournaments if you're interested in seeing some great high-level play. It's absolutely crazy watching some of the best players.

Re:Not excited (0)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078298)

I'd mod this up if I had points.

Re:Not excited (1)

ACS Solver (1068112) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078712)

At the same time, SC2 seems to be less micro-heavy. Which I like to a degree. SC1 had a bunch of micro features that even "average" players knew and that would let them wipe the floor with anyone who doesn't. Like moving shot (having units fire while continuing to move without any deceleration). It would let, for instance, Corsairs totally destroy Mutalisks. Starcraft 2 has smart casting, a better UI with much larger amounts of stuff being selectable at once, rally points you can set on resources and the like, so it's probably going to be easier to become of average skill in SC2. I realize the high-level play will still be very micro intense, but it sure feels like the required micro levels for mid-level play are going to be lower. As a side-note, the beta matchmaking system sucks, it's calibrated to find games quickly, which means you get matched too often against people that roll over you effortlessly, or vice versa.

And as another side-note, I don't envy the Blizzard employees that have to deal with beta tester feedback. The beta community forums are horrible which is why I don't feel like I can effectively provide any feedback or criticism. It's an immature forum full of players whining, where most arguments include some form of "you're retarded" remarks and where a bunch of platinum-level players acts like anyone from a lower league is automatically wrong about any issue. Gah.

Re:Not excited (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32079496)

The general idea behind their match-making system is that you should win about as many games as you lose so that it will always be a challenging and enjoyable experience.

For many players, that's a contradiction

Re:Not excited (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 4 years ago | (#32080064)

So true. The amount of crying would fill an ocean if MW2 forced players of similar level to play together rather than providing a steady stream of n00bs to the elite players so they can use the Tactical Nuke 3 minutes in on every map.

Re:Not excited (1)

kikito (971480) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078198)

You need to use the Zerg then.

I'm hoping to play it out of my system in the beta (1)

Tatarize (682683) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078838)

It has a lot more modern control things so you can shift click and queue up the activities, but it is absolutely true that the best players will always win by microing. A few hellions can destroy your zealot army no matter how huge it is if they are properly micro'ed. And reapers are untouchable still if the person controlling them has any good ability to micro. It has a lot more stuff to watch for via terrain and such now too. Reading Art of War is probably a pretty good idea with the way it's set up, and learning to micro is absolutely essential. If you don't click 20 times for every time your opponent clicks, you suck.

And there's something to the criticism that it's SC with updated graphics. There are certainly some very nice things added to it.

Re:Not excited (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079228)

"but when BroodWar came out, I felt like i had to coordinate too many units' special abilities during a battle,"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7VAhzPcZ-s [youtube.com]

Re:Not excited (2, Insightful)

DeadboltX (751907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079270)

Any highly competitive situation where you're required to multitask in an environment you're not familiar with is likely to cause a small bit of anxiety; certainly enough to ruin the 'fun factor' in a game. With no manual, no tutorial, and no single player to familiarize yourself with the units and buildings you find yourself learning as you go, or sometimes learning as you get your ass kicked.

I was familiar with the original SC, but hadn't really played an RTS for a few years, and I found myself uncomfortable in the game until about 7-10 multiplayer matches. I think most of it is because this is a beta and you're just thrown right into multiplayer (sometimes against highly skilled players, during the placement games).

When the full game comes out the single player campaign should be more than enough to ease players into the game so that multiplayer can be a fun experience from the very first match.

Re:Not excited (3, Interesting)

thenextpresident (559469) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079744)

It's actually not that bad, and it doesn't take long to get into the understanding. SC2 goes a long way toward assisting with all the micro and macro elements of the old SC. Matchmaking is also pretty good. I'm horrible, and play in the Copper ladder, and I when about half my games. They are challenging and fun, and I'm slowly seeing improvement in my game. I don't feel like I'm getting rolled all the time. I can usually look back on games and say "Yup, I should have worked on building an army and not just more drones." or "I failed to properly keep tabs on my opponent and he kept tabs on me, and that let him trounce me."

At the same time, I've also learned how to keep fighting and still remember to build units back at the base.

The thing is, SC2 is gonna be around a while. So I know the number of hours I get from the game will be worth it from a dollar's spent pov. It's like TF2 in that regard. That game was well worth the price (even moreso because it was in the Orange box).

But will it have LAN? (1)

Dunderflute (1001355) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077686)

Lan.. lan.. lan.

Re:But will it have LAN? (2, Funny)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077898)

Dude, wrong franchise.

That's WoT (Wheel of Time) and I don't think there's a RTS game in the works for that franchise, only a piss-poor MMO that'll never get off the ground, what with all the braid-pulling and emoization of the main characters and all.

Ploader will fix this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078736)

There could always be another daemon run in the background similar to Ploader, so when you load a map with multiple computer-controlled teams, the Ploader-like daemon can synchronize as a peer to other Ploader daemons to manipulate the StarCraft executable in memory to overlay each of the users' client manipulation in place of the non-networked computer-controlled multiplayer entropy.

There's nowhere you can run Blizzard. All your jmp and cmp are belong to us naoooo!

Not sure what to think. (1)

nobodyman (90587) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077710)

At first, the decision to split the story arc into three games (terran, protoss, zerg campaigns) seemed to be an obvious money-grab. But 29 missions seems to be on par with what you got w/ SC1 (anyone remember how many missions were in it?).

That said, if they're pricing each campaign as a full-on game, are the 2nd and 3rd titles going to be as popular if the first gives you access to full multiplayer?

Finally, has anyone from Blizzard answered whether any form of LAN play will be supported? Is it going to be authentication only, or will literally every byte of data between players be sent to/from battle.net, even if the competitors are 5 feet away from each other?

Re:Not sure what to think. (1)

Itninja (937614) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077818)

There were 30 [carlsguides.com] , plus a few 'secret' missions.

Re:Not sure what to think. (1)

Dragoniz3r (992309) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077830)

Rob Pardo indicated in a June interview that LAN support would not be included in StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty.[48][49][50] Removing LAN has the effect of forcing players to connect through Blizzard's servers, Battle.net, before playing multiplayer locally. This has created a large amount of protest mainly in the form of online petitions, and calls for boycotting the game.[51] It has been reported that Blizzard is considering implementing a system whereby a LAN connection is possible after first authenticating with Battle.net.
Source [wikipedia.org]

So, as far as we know, it's the latter approach, but there have been unsubstantiated rumblings of the former.

Re:Not sure what to think. (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077844)

If you've ever downloaded fan-created mission content, I think you'll agree that 29 missions could well-be 'on par', or it could still be a 'money-grab'. Hard to say, and definitely in the 'wait and see' category for me. I need a series of solid reviews before I'd lay out this initial investment.

Most likely, I'll wait for the inevitable 'battle chest' version that contains all of the titles for one reasonable price.

Finally, has anyone from Blizzard answered whether any form of LAN play will be supported? Is it going to be authentication only, or will literally every byte of data between players be sent to/from battle.net, even if the competitors are 5 feet away from each other?

I'm confident the answer on this has always been 'no support'. There's really no reason why they'd go to the trouble of handling the auth and gameplay via separate channels when they could just be lazy and run it all through their servers. From a purely stance point of view, though, they simply do not care about any non-battlenet use. In fact, their 'future vision' stocks report implied they'd go more towards always-online games than away from them.

Re:Not sure what to think. (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078784)

That has never happened. In SC1, games were always P2P, with the "hoster" serving as the server. That's why you had to NAT your router: http://world-editor-tutorials.thehelper.net/firewall.php [thehelper.net]
Battle.net was only an indexing server.

Re:Not sure what to think. (1)

Tresh (1797276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077912)

Keep in mind, however, that most of those 29 missions will probably be mini missions. I remember from the first teasers that you'd make a quick trip to some random place and kill some random zergs in order to get some more units (in my memory, it was the reapers) Most likely we'll end up with 15ish full missions and some side ones... Not too shabby either.

I still have bugs that make the game unplayable. (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077794)

I have a new computer I bought last summer for SC2 beta. They announced beta last summer so I got a computer so I'd be ready to play. When playing the game, I often times get,"You've been dropped from Battle.net" and autolose a game. When I click "Quit game" it crashes me to desktop.

Heres one you "LAN Lovers" will get a kick out of. If I play 1vcpu, I still get dropped against the computer! Yes, if you lose Battle.net connection during LAN or fighting a computer, you get disconnected from your game.

I'm going to get it, but I can't play until they fix bugs that prevent me from playing it.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (4, Insightful)

CecilPL (1258010) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077866)

The beta sometimes crashes? The horror!

Clearly they won't fix those for the final version.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077948)

Yeah. Exactly. GP, have you been submitting good thorough bug reports? Sometimes the automated report doesn't give them enough info, perhaps you should be on their forums or whatever helping them out.

If you have, then I'm sure it'll likely be resolved by release date.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078142)

I've contacted them, walked through with a tech support through several emails. I posted in about 50+ different places about it. The Blues won't even acknowledge the problem on the forums. I've been through a lot of beta tests in the past, and almost none of them fix their bugs.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078252)

What are you running on? You've Piqued my interest

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

destroyer661 (847607) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077884)

Funny enough I've been playing for ~1 month and have not experienced ANY of the problems you've had. Sounds like your machine/OS install or something. *shrug*

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078246)

I call shenanigans. The official beta does not support 1vcpu.

I've been playing the beta on a decent connection (Verizon FiOS) and I haven't had the problems your describing. I did have the game crash. Only twice though. Out of 30+ games that I've played. And one of those times was right after a match was over.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

Triv (181010) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078840)

"I call shenanigans. The official beta does not support 1vcpu." Wrong. Create a game. right-click on the empty opponent field. Select "Computer Opponent" or somesuch. Select a race and a team color and off you go. Now, the computer opponent only has one difficulty setting, "very easy", which essentially means it builds bases slowly, rarely attacks your base (and never in force) and can be wiped out by a toddler mashing the keyboard, but it IS available if you want to figure out the units available to you without embarassing yourself against a real-live person.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

Dhrakar (32366) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079380)

and can be wiped out by a toddler mashing the keyboard

Woot! A skill level that is finally right for me! :-)

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

Sowelu (713889) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078396)

Dropped against the computer? That's the saddest joke ever. With my occasionally-flaky wireless, damned if I'm going to buy any games from this generation--and I don't pirate, either.

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078550)

That is probably because 1vCPU isn't supported via the beta. In fact, I have no idea how you are doing so. You can setup 1 vs CPU in the map editor sure enough, but that has nothing to do with Battle.net. In fact you can do so with no internet connection at all. So I am somewhat doubting your story...

Re:I still have bugs that make the game unplayable (1)

DeadboltX (751907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079190)

You may want to investigate your ISP for the connection problems, unless you don't have problems with any other persistent connection applications.

...... And that's the day (1)

KuRa_Scvls (932317) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077850)

And that's the day the South Korean GDP drops to Zero.

LAN? (1)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077922)

Is lan support in the final version? If not, they will not see a dime from me or my friends.

Re:LAN? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078140)

No LAN. Just pirate it and run the OSS server (PvPGN) when it gets compatibility.

Re:LAN? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078174)

You have friends? Seriously, lighten up a bit.

Re:LAN? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078460)

How many times do they have to say no before you people will stop asking this over and over again? And just so you know they won't miss you in the least bit.

Bye bye social life (1)

Khenke (710763) | more than 4 years ago | (#32077958)

And I was hoping it would never be released. Now I will never get a girlfriend again... Unless their matchmaking servers fill my dating needs too. :)

Re:Bye bye social life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078214)

Do your dating needs involve koreans, lonely male teenagers or 40 year old pretending to be girls? If not, better forget.

Re:Bye bye social life (1)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078482)

I can see it now, StarCraft2OnlineDating.com. Amongst the typical profile details, there will be options to choose a mate based on what race they play as, how far up the ladder they are/have been, and what custom maps they run. You can exclude matches that use a different race by default. What you're looking for will will be described as such: Pylon looking for additional pylons (male for male), Zerg Queen looking for more pylons (female for male), and Pylon for Zerg Queen. Yeah, I can really see this taking off. Hmmm.... Well, I'm off to register the domain!

Re:Bye bye social life (1)

TheRon6 (929989) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079918)

Unless their matchmaking servers fill my dating needs too. :)

Blizzard has got you covered: http://us.battle.net/matchmaking.html [battle.net]

It's alright (4, Informative)

phizi0n (1237812) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078102)

I've been in the beta for a week and it's alright but I liked warcraft 1/2 and starcraft 1 more. BW and WC3 required too much micro so I didn't like them. Currently some SC2 units seem useless and some of the new ones are OP.

The matchmaking system in SC2 is working rather well and matches you against similar skilled players. There are some concerns over it because it's loosely based on the Elo rating system used for chess and other competitions, but some people argue that they've destroyed everything good that the Elo system does. Elo gives people a starting pool of points and then trades points between the winner and loser of a match and the amount traded depends on the difference between the numbers. This makes it so that a good player beating a poorly rated player will gain hardly any points whereas if they lose then they lose a lot of points because they're good but lost to someone bad, and if they're evenly skilled then a moderate number of points will be traded. Eventually you top out and reach a number that corresponds with your skill and will stay roughly the same unless skill changes. With the SC2 rating system there are 5 leagues that separate skill levels, and within each league are divisions consisting of 100 players. Each division has its own Elo ratings and if you change leagues because your skill is out of place then your rating resets and you start a new Elo rating all over again in the new league/division. There are also 'bonus' points that accumulate while you're not playing that you can then gain once you do gain, much like WoW's rested xp system. These bonus points cause inflation within each division. For these reasons you can't compare the Elo style rating between divisions or leagues, your rating only shows how good you are within your division.

Playing the Beta (1)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078286)

And I'm ultimately unimpressed. Here's Blizzard's history:

Warcraft -- First RTS
Warcraft 2 -- Added sea/air units, multiplayer
Starcraft -- Asymetric factions, battle.net
Warcraft 3 -- Hero units, 3D
Starcraft 2 -- I can select 255 units at once now?

Is there anything I'm missing other than a conspicuous lack of risk or innovation?

Re:Playing the Beta (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078666)

Blizzard never innovates. They just do what everybody else does without the suck. I LOVE THEM!!!

Re:Playing the Beta (3, Insightful)

chrisG23 (812077) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078830)

And I'm ultimately unimpressed. Here's Blizzard's history:

I honestly cannot tell if you are being sarcastic or not. In the event that you are not being sarcastic, allow me to elaborate on your points.

Warcraft -- First RTS

It was not. Usually Dune 2 by Westwood Studios gets credit for this. Warcraft 1 did have some innovations, but both of those games are really horrible if you try to play them now.

Warcraft 2 -- Added sea/air units, multiplayer

Thats innovation isn't it?

Starcraft -- Asymetric factions, battle.net

Ok, now here is one where the innovation, or at least the execution, cannot be overstated enough. There weren't just three factions each basically the same with slightly different units and maybe a faction specific unit and building or two. Starcraft had three entirely different factions, with almost entirely different build mechanics, and definitely with entirely different feels and strategies that work. They also managed to balance the factions fairly well, after many balance patches (they never quit making balance changes until it got to be just right). People are still playing it now, 10 years later. In Korea it has become something of a sport (leagues, teams, televised games, etc) and over here it is gaining momentum, and has been since I got into it two years ago. Oh, and the best players in the world don't play on the Battle.net server, they play on a server called ICUP

Warcraft 3 -- Hero units, 3D

Maybe not as much innovation. It took balls though to not just rehash SC or Warcraft 2. Blizzard's main competition was the Command and Conquer series of rts games, and those got rehashed and made into so many sequels that I didn't even know C&C 4 came out a week or a month or something ago, and didn't care either. Also, WC3's map editor is quite robust and has spawned many interesting games, including something called DoTA, which in itself is becoming a new genre of competitive multiplayer gaming

Starcraft 2 -- I can select 255 units at once now?

Is there anything I'm missing other than a conspicuous lack of risk or innovation?

Probably, yeah.

Innovation (1)

EnsilZah (575600) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079144)

Storyline?
Art design?

I believe Starcraft 2 does have some gameplay mechanics changes like variable mission order and being able to unlock various units depending on which missions you've done or how many resources you have.
But in general once a game franchise is established there's not much innovation being done, it's mostly polishing and evolutionary improvement. (at this point I feel compelled to mention the abomination that is C&C 4)

Personally I'm most interested in the narrative in a game and innovation is pretty far down on the list, you might want to look into some indie games if that's what floats your boat.

Re:Playing the Beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32079182)

"Is there anything I'm missing other than a conspicuous lack of risk or innovation?"

You're forgetting the part where you have fun.

Re:Playing the Beta (1)

DeadboltX (751907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079436)

Since you're counting 3D as one of two achievements for War3 then you should certainly be able to add the graphical improvements of SC2 to the list, and it is my personal belief that you can add 'removal of hero units' to the list of improvements as well.

There are tons of subtle game mechanics that do wonders for the game play which include, but are not limited to: selecting multiple buildings for unit construction queuing, smart casting, being able to waypoint buildings to a movable unit (opposed to static waypoint on the ground), waypointing minerals so that freshly created drones start harvesting right away, in-game voice chat, the ladder system, resource requesting in addition to regular resource giving (in team games), pinging a location on the map for teammates.

The mapmaking/script system is incredibly complex compared to any other RTS, and I think we'll be seeing a ton of awesome custom maps/mods.

The improvement between War3 and SC2 is greater than first glance, and I think you have to play it for a bit to become familiar with all it has to offer.

What I'd like to see... (4, Interesting)

Skyshadow (508) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078336)

The trouble with multiplayer RTS games is that, after a while, they appeal largely to the type of folks who want to learn the recipe for success on a given map and then practice until they're able to apply it faster than the other loser they're playing against.

What I'd like to see in the next wave of RTS games, then, is a method by which they screw with the various units just enough from game to game that simply being able to do the same thing over and over again as quickly as possible does not equal success in multiplayer -- somehow introduce a measure of creativity and quick-thinking rather than just "zergling rush the bitches until Blizzard patches us"-style tactics.

Re:What I'd like to see... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078512)

learn the recipe for success on a given map and then practice until they're able to apply it faster

That just doesn't work against any competent player (given the game is properly balanced). The "recipes" are like openings in chess. You can know your opening book by hearth and still suck. What goes on later in game is as much a mind game as a click-fest.

"zergling rush the bitches until Blizzard patches us"-style tactics

That's just for losers and the balance changes in the beta try to avoid that. It works for Brood War at the moment; there's no one winning strategy, the game and the community is evolving constantly, even after 10 years.

Re:What I'd like to see... (2, Informative)

Myji Humoz (1535565) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079570)

That's like saying chess appeals to folks who like memorizing openings and practicing until they're able to apply it better than the other loser they're playing up against. I'm sorry it takes practice and "skill" to not get stomped, but surely you wouldn't want to play with losers anyway eh?

At any decently high level, RTS games are a reactive series of attacks and counterattacks. Starcraft: Brood War in particular became popular in large part to how dynamic strategies became, and how much properly managing one's army matters.

Screwing with random units from game to game will just frustrate newbies and introduce an unneeded luck element.

Re:What I'd like to see... (2, Interesting)

benhattman (1258918) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079718)

That's like saying chess appeals to folks who like memorizing openings and practicing until they're able to apply it better than the other loser they're playing up against. I'm sorry it takes practice and "skill" to not get stomped, but surely you wouldn't want to play with losers anyway eh?

Except, many people do believe that is a significant problem with the game of chess. One particularly famous player invented an alternative game called Fischer Random Chess. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess960 [wikipedia.org]

Re:What I'd like to see... (2, Insightful)

Myji Humoz (1535565) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079888)

Fischer happened to be at a level where openings were a matter of players choosing the type of game they wanted to play. Was it open and aggressive? Closed and positional? Most players who think openings are a significant problem with chess likely haven't jumped that skill hurdle and are getting wrecked competitively because of it.

Starcraft sold huge numbers of copies and is still widely played in Korea at a very high level. Chess is a game known across the world and played by a vast number of people from every walk of life. They're successful games, and Blizzard seems to know a thing or two about making games require strategy (macro) and execution (micro.)

Duke Nukem Forever (2, Funny)

Haxzaw (1502841) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078744)

So, could Duke Nukem Forever be just around the corner?

I'm looking forward to the SP more than MP. (1)

SupremoMan (912191) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078760)

Not a big fan of the micro-fest that has evolved from these RTS games. Back when starcraft was new, people would have great time building up huge economies and tossing huge armies at their opponents without a thought to the actual rate of success of such attacks. Then a sudden paradigm shift happened, and all the game focused on micro. Winning early was no longer rushing, and frowned upon. And a casual player had no hope of success against a much more experienced, and twitchy, player.

As an older gamer, I'll tell you that I will more likely only play the SP campaign. Maybe I will play MP{ with a friend, but probably in a comp-stomp capacity. I have no desire to compete in what I consider a very un-fun contest. Though I may become one of those armchair commanders when it comes to watching live matches.

you fai7 it!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32078764)

here, 4le4se do

multiplayer with only humans? (0, Troll)

dargon (105684) | more than 4 years ago | (#32078782)

Perhaps someone in the beta can enlighten me. Till they get the other expansions out, isn't terran vs terran multiplayer gonna be rather boring?

Re:multiplayer with only humans? (1)

Tregelen (1579247) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079466)

So far in the Beta I have already played as Zerg and Protoss, its a full multiplayer. When released it will still be a full multiplayer but a single race single player

Not a Series (2, Interesting)

oljanx (1318801) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079816)

Games like Starcraft, Warcraft, C&C, etc almost always have one campaign for each faction. That's been the standard for decades now. Blizzard is slowly releasing a single game over (a year or two?) and making a lot more money in the process. I'll admit that 29 missions is slightly longer than your average campaign, and challenge modes are a nice way of recycling content, but it certainly doesn't make for a complete game. I'll still buy it.

But I haven't even gotten my Mac Beta to work yet! (2, Interesting)

bughunter (10093) | more than 4 years ago | (#32079820)

Somehow I doubt that general release will meet that schedule. There are still widespread installer issues with the Mac beta, and reading the beta forums one is left with impression that there are still severe balance issues between races.

So I expect they'll delay release. Or -- worse -- they'll delay the Mac release until sometime after the PC release.

Remember the original StarCraft? The Mac Release was more than a year after the Windows release. Few people seem to remember it, but I do; I was pissed. Blizzard pledged "never again" but somehow I doubt that they'll stick to that pledge if it threatens them with any real opportunity costs.

Most of my friends are already playing the Windows version on PCs or using BootCamp. But if that becomes a requirement, why even bother pretending to cater to Mac users?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>