Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 98

Thread: Vote for SC2!

  1. #21
    Zeraszana's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    193

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    It's funny to see how Blizzard defenders consider WoL a complete game or one part of a more expensive game as they see fit
    first of all - i consider sc2 a whole game and as such wol as its intro never a separate part (i dont give 2 shits what others call it, i'll never change my view of that) and don't call me a blizz defender, i don't defend their asses, i'm giving them a chance to make things right

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    Seriously, if we are to consider this like 1/3 of SC2, it must be one of the most expensive games ever. They said the other two were expansions, anyways, so this is to be judged as a whole game.
    again, i don't give a shit if it turns in the most expensive game ever, i consider wol the beginning of a game and lotv the ending, don't care whether they call them expansions or not (i still think they only said expansion for the price nothing else)

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    There was a very easy way of making the 3 parts epic by themselves: use one enemy per game, and try to not show greater enemies until the next part. For example: the Queen of Blades could had been the enemy in WoL, instead of been an useless character.

    They could even do the artifact stuff if they wanted, but Kerrigan been alive after that could be a surprise. They would use it so that the attack on Char is possible. It wouldn't be a bad idea if they use it in orbit to survive the attack of the flyers, and have time to land, and have an excuse for it to be uncharged when they land (there was none in the game, IIRC). Then they wouldn't need the Protoss part at all, and could concentrate on the fight against Kerrigan/Mengsk better.
    Even if you consider this only a part, the fact that a lot of missions are filler, "choices" don't impact the story much (and that's an understatement) and dialogue was crap, can be judged the same. It doesn't makes any difference about that.
    I agree with you here, it could have been made much much better, but i still like the game, they could have done more, but they didn't, they choose to make any gameplot and focused on the multiplayer (which i btw didn't see any of you bitching about here, aint that right DEMOLITIONSQUID?

    Quote Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid View Post
    Why would I vote for SC2? It was garbage. We should ignore it to let Blizzard know they dropped the ball.
    Quote Originally Posted by TychusFindlay View Post
    Multiplayer says hi

    and i'm still not complaining about them choosing to bring you all the best way to play against each other even thought i never play it, so don't diss the game that probably all of you play like mad when you have the time, because the multiplayer is as much of a part of the game as the singleplayer mode, i chose to be happy for you buttholes that got to play on it and enjoy hours and hours of fine play on the bnet, even though it was on the back of all the players like me who don't do anything on it and only ever use the singleplayer part


    i'll side with waste and hawki here (especially about the toss part because why the hell would jimmy save kerrigan if he swore revenge for fenix and tons of other people) i enjoyed my butt off playing it(even though my brain was hurting after some things) and i'll wait to see what happens next


    [no disrespect meant or anything sorry if i sound like i'm flaming you or whatevs ]
    Last edited by Zeraszana; 11-27-2010 at 07:50 AM.
    Can't figure if Zeratul is trolling or...

  2. #22

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    first of all - i consider sc2 a whole game and as such wol as its intro never a separate part (i dont give 2 shits what others call it, i'll never change my view of that) and don't call me a blizz defender, i don't defend their asses, i'm giving them a chance to make things right
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    because sc2 consists of 3 parts arse...i would rather wait and see if they learned something and give us again epic stuff then judge by a single failure
    So, it's a whole game / 3 parts ?
    Anyways, if it's a complete game, or 1/3 of one game, it doesn't changes the fact that it costed $60, and SP was a failure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    again, i don't give a shit if it turns in the most expensive game ever, i consider wol the beginning of a game and lotv the ending, don't care whether they call them expansions or not (i still think they only said expansion for the price nothing else)
    Well, i do, specially if they're putting so little care to story.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    I agree with you here, it could have been made much much better, but i still like the game, they could have done more, but they didn't, they choose to make any gameplot and focused on the multiplayer (which i btw didn't see any of you bitching about here, aint that right DEMOLITIONSQUID?
    Yeah, MP is good. I hope they continue to polish balance and BN2. There was some stupidity there, however, like splitting the community into fixed regions, with fixed languages per region, because of a bussines model decision (they "buy time to play" model). All of this means that i had to choose if i buyed the LA or NA version, which forever fixed my choice of who can i play, and what languages can i choose, and of course, means that i have not even a box and DVD, because all the DVDs on sale are the time-limited version.

    It's much to ask them to think in the community first, instead of wanting to make the maximum possible profit at any costs? I'm already seeing roughly the same or less players than in the beta, so it seems like it was a good idea to get the NA version, or i would probably have less than 3000 players to play.

    Worse, that decision shot themselves in the foot regarding to balance, because now the different regions are so isolated, than the metagame developed way differenty on every one of them.

    I was really wanting to see a good SP experience here. They pretty much ruined it. Overall, it seems like they put less attention than they should with this game. Things like the lack of coordination with the BN2 team and using people of the SC2 teams to work on WoW, delaying the game further, makes me wonder how seriously they taken the game.

    Did they forgot how much renown did SC1 give to them? Why didn't they cared their own franchise as much as it deserved?

    If you make a 2nd part of a game, you must take into account what made the first so succesful. It's the MP, but also the SP, which was epic. SC1's SP and story is very good, and they should had given it a lot more attention.

    They wanted to split the SP stories in 3 parts, because that would allow them to make them much better, but in turn we received only a dissapointing Terran campaign.

    So, excuse me if i don't put any more money on it unless i see good comments about HotS.

    Excuse me if i rage now and then, but i'm dissapointed. I expected much more about the SP experience.
    Last edited by Norfindel; 11-27-2010 at 09:00 AM.

  3. #23
    Zeraszana's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    193

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post

    Well, i do, specially if they're putting so little care to story.

    It's much to ask them to think in the community first, instead of wanting to make the maximum possible profit at any costs? I'm already seeing roughly the same or less players than in the beta, so it seems like it was a good idea to get the NA version, or i would probably have less than 3000 players to play.

    I was really wanting to see a good SP experience here. They pretty much ruined it. Overall, it seems like they put less attention than they should with this game. Things like the lack of coordination with the BN2 team and using people of the SC2 teams to work on WoW, delaying the game further, makes me wonder how seriously they taken the game.

    Did they forgot how much renown did SC1 give to them? Why didn't they care their own franchise as much as it deserved?

    If you make a 2nd part of a game, you must take into account what made the first so succesful. It's the MP, but also the SP, which was epic. SC1's SP and story is very good, and they should had given it a lot more attention.

    They wanted to split the SP stories in 3 parts, because that would allow them to make them much better, but in turn we received only a dissapointing Terran campaign.

    So, excuse me if i don't put any more money on it unless i see good comments about HotS.

    Excuse me if i rage now and then, but i'm disappointed. I expected much more about the SP experience.
    I absolutely and completely agree with you on all of these points , but lets hope for a better tomorrow (and damn those bastards, the game costs 90 bucks in here lol) and ill support the last sentence till i drop dead

    p.s nice catching me there, but i didn't put wol as a separate part (thats what i thought you did) i merely regard it as an intro, heart as a culmination and legacy as an ending of the story...dunno if that helps you understanding my point of view any its like...sc2 is the shit, standalone and the 3 mini-stories are what makes the big story and can't stand on their own (i know i know..probably the stupidest explanation..i suck at such stuff, but maybe for reference think I,Mengsk book, it has 3 stories that make 1 book or story (story about the mengsk dynasty) helpful?
    Can't figure if Zeratul is trolling or...

  4. #24

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    most notable is that actually blizz is in USA..someone needs to get their facts straight XD

    P.S voted
    Most notable is that SC2 is actually a popular game in SOUTH Korea, a U.S. ally. Not NORTH Korea, which is probably what that ignorant moron is thinking of. I wouldn't be surprised if he/she is unaware there even is a North AND South Korea.

    Btw, we went to war with the entire country of Vietnam in the 60's. /sarcasm

    How come Fallout New Vegas wasn't even in the first round? There's actually a lot of dumb games in this "contest" and a lot of mediocre to good games missing.
    Last edited by Jabber Wookie; 11-27-2010 at 11:09 AM.

  5. #25
    Zeraszana's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    193

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jabber Wookie View Post
    Most notable is that SC2 is actually a popular game in SOUTH Korea, a U.S. ally. Not NORTH Korea, which is probably what that ignorant moron is thinking of. I wouldn't be surprised if he/she is unaware there even is a North AND South Korea.

    Btw, we went to war with the entire country of Vietnam in the 60's. /sarcasm

    How come Fallout New Vegas wasn't even in the first round? There's actually a lot of dumb games in this "contest" and a lot of mediocre to good games missing.
    agree agree jeah i know your history (assuming you're from USA)

    indeed, fallout 3 was a kickass game (sry, didn't play Vegas jet)
    Can't figure if Zeratul is trolling or...

  6. #26

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    agree agree jeah i know your history (assuming you're from USA)
    I'm from Texas actually, so it's unusual that I know my history considering our textbooks will soon teach kids that there was no such thing as slavery, but instead an Atlantic Triangular Trade.

    indeed, fallout 3 was a kickass game (sry, didn't play Vegas jet)
    lol I actually have only played Fallout 3 as well, but I just assumed New Vegas was probably good enough to be included, especially since some NBA game was on there along with a few other strange choices.

    It's guna be tough deciding between RDR, ME2, and SC2 though. I could care less about Halo Reach and am surprised Black Ops was knocked out so quickly, but I think I'd go with SC2 over them all just because of the e-sport aspect. Otherwise, ME2 and RDR have far better stories.
    Last edited by Jabber Wookie; 11-27-2010 at 04:01 PM.

  7. #27

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Could someone please tell Tychus not to respond to my posts, because I have him blocked and thus don't read anything that seeps out of his facehole. I've told him like 4 times already but he can't get it through his thick skull that nothing he says is worth my time reading.

    @Zeraszana
    A game with a 10/10 in multiplayer but only a 4/10 in campaign is still only a 7/10 game. It also depends on taste. Personally I love FPS and enjoy the multiplayer in Reach, thus I cannot instantly say even StarCraft 2 multiplayer is the best.

  8. #28
    TheEconomist's Avatar Lord of Economics
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,895

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    I use your post as a starting point for a general response. I never directly respond to you. Not just because you have me blocked (because you can't handle criticism of your "balance" ideas) but because you also seem to get overly emotional when I disagree with you which is bad for the forum.

    I've also told you with four times but you never get to see it.



    Rest In Peace, Old Friend.

  9. #29

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid View Post
    @Zeraszana
    A game with a 10/10 in multiplayer but only a 4/10 in campaign is still only a 7/10 game. It also depends on taste. Personally I love FPS and enjoy the multiplayer in Reach, thus I cannot instantly say even StarCraft 2 multiplayer is the best.
    Don't know how true that is. Portal won a shitton of awards and its multiplayer is a solid 0/10. Clearly people didn't consider it to be a 5/10 title for its 10/10 single-player.
    http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/7699/commun1.png

  10. #30

    Default Re: Vote for SC2!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeraszana View Post
    I absolutely and completely agree with you on all of these points , but lets hope for a better tomorrow (and damn those bastards, the game costs 90 bucks in here lol) and ill support the last sentence till i drop dead

    p.s nice catching me there, but i didn't put wol as a separate part (thats what i thought you did) i merely regard it as an intro, heart as a culmination and legacy as an ending of the story...dunno if that helps you understanding my point of view any its like...sc2 is the shit, standalone and the 3 mini-stories are what makes the big story and can't stand on their own (i know i know..probably the stupidest explanation..i suck at such stuff, but maybe for reference think I,Mengsk book, it has 3 stories that make 1 book or story (story about the mengsk dynasty) helpful?
    Yeah, they still can make the remaining parts great, it's not too late. I just hope they put all the effort and resources this game deserves, as it's not only a multiplayer game. Even if that's considered the most important part of the game, SP is still very important, and is one of SC1's most praised aspects.

Similar Threads

  1. Is Battle.net 2.0 in a release state? (Read post before vote)
    By Gifted in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 06-30-2010, 05:41 PM
  2. If you could vote again, which Dark Templar?
    By Edfishy in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-07-2010, 06:15 AM
  3. Please vote for sc
    By anonimouse in forum Off-Topic Lounge
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-28-2010, 03:12 AM
  4. Vote for SC2 as Spike VGA Most Anticipated Game
    By Blazur in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 12-12-2009, 10:06 PM
  5. BLIZZARD POLL: Vote for future BR matchups!
    By n00bonicPlague in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-09-2009, 12:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •