Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty Video Review
Slasher chats with Ryung to get his thoughts on his run at the WCS North American Finals.Posted Jun 1, 2013 | 3:00 | 486 Views
Slasher catches up with HerO after his match against Alicia in a Protoss versus Protoss battle at the WCS North American Finals.Posted Jun 1, 2013 | 2:47 | 2,124 Views
It's a StarCraft blowout on Gaming Meme History, as we take a look at the origins of the zerg rush and construct additional pylons!Posted Apr 21, 2013 | 2:17 | 24,330 Views
Warcraft studio confirms buyout of IPL; several staffers will head to Blizzard to support existing games and to work on eSports team.Posted Apr 8, 2013 | 1:31 | 2,287 Views
Developer reveals overhaul to World Championship SeriesPosted Apr 3, 2013 | 1:25 | 2,405 Views
- Aug 2, 2010
Kevin VanOrd threatens the Dominion in this video review for Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty.
Hell, I must've played this game... what? 3 times, at least. The campaign, that is. A 9.5 score is the most suspicious there is, when I've never heard of a 10. That said, I've never agreed more with a GSpot review before. This isn't just a triple-A title, this stands far above your mainstream, world-famous best-sellers such as Modern Warfare. To each his own and all, but frankly, this really is a superior work, artistically speaking, in all the senses that art encompasses, which includes entertainment. The game is as good as I could expect it to be, if not imagined (fertile imagination...). The only negative feeling this game originated in me was that it ended when I didn't want it to end. No Zerg or Protoss campaign, not something to like, not on its own, but its definitely a 1/1 game. The Terran campaign is long and a whole story on its own, worth about as much as the 3 separate campaigns of the original. Alright, that's debatable, but still, the plan always was to deliver the other 2 campaigns in fully-fledged games of their own, what's there to complain about? I sure as Hell prefer it that way, despite the unsettling waiting. The campaigns will only be all the better for it. And I believe it's not a greedy way to reach into your pockets, the games won't simply bring a new campaign, like a super DLC or Half-Life-esque episode. They'll bring many improvements over this first game, not the least of which many new units. The following zerg campaign, for instance, won't be so similar to this first Terran one. This isn't your usual RTS campaign comprising a sequential number of missions with intermittent cutscenes to go along. The world between missions is an aspect on its own.
Well, we'll see about all that. Heart of the Swarm was released just yesterday. We're about to find out for sure.
For the sake of continuity, the original first. If you have the time. In terms of ka-ching, SC's price must be negligible by now, surely.
Given your Doom avatar, it might imply you can well appreciate old games. You'll need that for the original StarCraft, since it has long aged. As old(er) games go, however, SC feels about as modern and practical to play as they can get. It's only the old 2D engine that might dampen your enjoyment.
never played a game like this rly, cept old c&cs and world in conflict, if they even count, i like the look of it tho, is it worth the money?
After the great skepticism created by WoW, Blizzard really "done good" with this one, delivering an authentic master piece of gaming and proving they still got it.
Sadly, it would appear Diablo 3 didn't release so hot; and it's perhaps all the more sadly so that it's only due to reasons not directly related to core game values and mechanics, but to DRM and server-side unpreparedness.
Playing that one, either way, definitely. Love the actual content of their games, they feel right to me the most, out of all games, if you get my meaning. And I know this is not due to fandom as I am still critical of their games and find faults in them, nothing is perfect.
C'ant believe I waited two years to get this! Got it last night as a digital purchase and played until...way too late. Awesome game,period.
NOOOOOOOO, the nydus network is better w/ mass banelings, and as protoss he had colossi carrier w/ out a mothership... NOOB ALERT!!!
@rholding2000 you are right,im playing this game since it commed out i play almost only SC2 (98% SC 2% other games)
I LOVE this game. It is probably one of my favorite games of all time. If you are questioning whether you should buy this or not, the answer is YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!
2 reasons i not play this game, almost every mission you need to do in time, i like rts where i can build and upgrade without rushing in every mission, missions so xxxxxxg SHORT and loading times so xxxxxxg LONG, verdict game = SUX! Game can be playeble in multiplayer onli, single mode is disaster!
@GTA-Like_Fan It's funny you mentioned that because it was supposed to be 18 months after release for the first expansion which is coming up soon.Atleast it will be bug free.
Wait so its nearly 2012 now and they still didnt released the 2 other games ... wow ... Some things never changes lol
why do they give 10 for gta 4 and mgs and not for this?i mean, this game is 10 times better than metal gear solid
I can in no way be considered a rts fan but starcraft is a whole other story this game is amazing and Blizzard is one of the few companies left that consistently makes good games
@Descalabro because there is no LAN and you can only play against people in the same continent as you. They probably really had to work at those restrictions. ...
@h4wk0lf613 I suck so bad @ SC2 that even though I stopped playing online I still would play against the AI.This game has so much to do I don't know how anybody can't like it unless you don't like RTS.
@williebazerka Well said. I don't know who disliked your comment. Probably someone who suck at strategy games.
People who dislike SC2 for whatever reason are definately in the minority.Maybe if they learned how to play better they'd like it more.
@Kamfrenchie I've played ALL the original Blizzard games and I see where you're coming from. Yet, I strongly disagree that that the campaign is inferior and that the new graphics don't work for Blizzard games. They are beautiful and fit the games pretty well. And also, reviewers aren't supposed to be objective, they're supposed to be subjective. Reviewers tell us whether a game is good or bad. THAT IS SUBJECTIVE. I wouldn't come to a reviewer if I wanted to learn about a game. Just saying Kamfrenchie, you put out three posts, and no one agrees with you. STARCRAFT 2 is a great game.
@varunvikram1 Well honestly i dislike the new graphisms and design. The flashy cartoon look of blizzard games don't appeal to me much, i find it doesn't fit universes supposed to be "dark" like starcraft and diablo. And well you payed 60 $ for better graphisms but inferior campaign and an inferior battle net, while you could have had SC1 for 10-15 $. I wouldn't consider it to be a great deal. And yes developpers want to make money like everyone, but there are different ways to do it than just give better graphisms and a hollywood like campaign to theoriginal game, and also reviewers souldn't shoot "alleluia" when that happens I ain't especially a SC1 veteran, even though i played quite a bit. I moved on to games that innovate more and rely more on actual strategy and tactic than on crazy clicking
@Tokugawa77 Reviewers are supposed to be as objective as possible, especially professional ones. And they aren't in this review.
@Kamfrenchie The story begins... I discovered starcraft like in 2009 and learned how good and big the following for the game is. Looked at starcraft 1 gameplay once and the only thing that came to my mind is that there is no way am i playing this if the graphics didnt improve, its 2009 for crying out load. Yes its shallow of me but that is how most people are now. Sure starcraft 1 veterans might complain about how this game sucks etc. But the fact remains making this game graphical than its predecessor has made millions(hope i m not exaggerating) more appreciate the game. Isnt that what every game developer wants a bigger market. Its pretty simple really bigger market bigger profit.
It is a biased reviews, when people say "some people criticize this aspect of the game but don't listen to them". The truth is, Starcraft 2 bring nothing new, except flashy graphisms that looks wost than Dawn of war 1, and too few interface improvements. The story is poor unless you love the basic hollywood blockbuster movies, and the campaign isn't challenging strategy wise, only apm wise. Bioball + the new unit you get on the missions owns 90% of the missions. And 60 $ on top of that. Starcraft 1 is beter in almost every aspect.
@BuLL3Tz-_: Do you have the Retribution add-on? I reckon that's where most DOWII players are. But to answer your question, the gameplay in SC2 is wholly traditional. It has resource gathering, base building and tech trees. But it's the best damn game out there with this formula.
@grum88 actually, he has lost a lot of weight and maybe you should focus the review and not his appearance. I bet you yourself are overweight and are just trying to make yourself feel better, if your gonna troll then good for you, but the rest of us don't need to deal with someone who doesn't have any friends or a life and needs to make fun of people just so he can sleep at night.