Question for the Starcraft fans...

jinduy

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2002
4,781
1
81
would you rather see Starcraft 2 be released, or have yet another expansion added onto the original Starcraft series (like 2 new races and new additions to each race)?

 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
Starcraft 2. The only reason I prefer War3 over Starcraft is the game matching service, and I don't think that is the sort of thing they would add in an exp pack.
 

jinduy

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2002
4,781
1
81
i'm a long time sc player (and i still play) and playing wc3 is a headache for me.... too much micromanagement :( and game seems real slow to me. but yeah the game matching service is awesome.
 

MAME

Banned
Sep 19, 2003
9,281
1
0
I agree, wc3 is slow and not fun.

I'd rather see SC2. Better graphics and a continuation of the story line.
 

DanTMWTMP

Lifer
Oct 7, 2001
15,908
19
81
Originally posted by: jinduy
i'm a long time sc player (and i still play) and playing wc3 is a headache for me.... too much micromanagement :( and game seems real slow to me. but yeah the game matching service is awesome.

yeah same here lol ...

i just like creating massive amounts of zerglings
 

josphII

Banned
Nov 24, 2001
1,490
0
0
sc2, although im not sure how much better, aside from graphics, they can make the game.

they also need bnet improvments for sc like they have for wc3 (opponent cant see what race your picking, no 2min no disc rule, and a few others)
 

HonkeyDonk

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2001
4,020
0
0
Originally posted by: josphII
sc2, although im not sure how much better, aside from graphics, they can make the game.

they also need bnet improvments for sc like they have for wc3 (opponent cant see what race your picking, no 2min no disc rule, and a few others)

yeah, agreed. There are a bunch of gameplay features in WC3 that I don't know how I lived w/o during the SC days. Like pinpointing on the map, locked teams (no allied vic shiet, or switching teams, teams together, controlled units when players leave, and much much more.

If they can incorporate those into the original SC/BW or into a new SC2, then I'm sold.
 

PowerMac4Ever

Banned
Dec 9, 2000
5,246
0
0
In the latest StarCraft patch they added a multiplayer mode called "Top Vs. Bottom" which allows you to lock the teams in place.

I would like to see a StarCraft 2 for the better graphics, the continuation of the story line, and possibly more races. I think it would be cool if they made the Xel' Naga a fourth race.
 

jinduy

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2002
4,781
1
81
i'm sure sc2 will come out within the next 5 years... i just hope it doesn't lose the gameplay that makes it so fun (ie being able to command 100+ units).
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
Originally posted by: josphII
sc2, although im not sure how much better, aside from graphics, they can make the game.

they also need bnet improvments for sc like they have for wc3 (opponent cant see what race your picking, no 2min no disc rule, and a few others)

yeah, agreed. There are a bunch of gameplay features in WC3 that I don't know how I lived w/o during the SC days. Like pinpointing on the map, locked teams (no allied vic shiet, or switching teams, teams together, controlled units when players leave, and much much more.

If they can incorporate those into the original SC/BW or into a new SC2, then I'm sold.

they are... top vs bottom for no ally changing, shift clicking for waypoints...
 

BaboonGuy

Diamond Member
Aug 24, 2002
4,125
0
0
SC2. RTS/FPS would rule. you control/build all your guys like regular SC in beautiful 3d overhead graphics. then in fierce battles you can enter the fray yourself and commandeer one of your own troops in FPS mode. would be mega cool!
 

GtPrOjEcTX

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
10,784
6
81
SC2. better graphics and continuation of the story line as someone else has said would be ideal.
 

HonkeyDonk

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2001
4,020
0
0
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
Originally posted by: josphII
sc2, although im not sure how much better, aside from graphics, they can make the game.

they also need bnet improvments for sc like they have for wc3 (opponent cant see what race your picking, no 2min no disc rule, and a few others)

yeah, agreed. There are a bunch of gameplay features in WC3 that I don't know how I lived w/o during the SC days. Like pinpointing on the map, locked teams (no allied vic shiet, or switching teams, teams together, controlled units when players leave, and much much more.

If they can incorporate those into the original SC/BW or into a new SC2, then I'm sold.

they are... top vs bottom for no ally changing, shift clicking for waypoints...


apparently you dont understand what i wrote.

First, I know you can do shift+click on SC for waypoints, but i'm not talking about that. I meant that if you do alt + G on WC3, a little "!" appears letting your team know that something is important, you can'tdo that on SC.

Second, i know about the TvB feature, but for WC3, your teams are all next to each other, where as in SC, u could be surrounded by enemies while the rest of your partners are all together. Again, they might have changed that w/ patches.
 

MAME

Banned
Sep 19, 2003
9,281
1
0
Originally posted by: BaboonGuy
SC2. RTS/FPS would rule. you control/build all your guys like regular SC in beautiful 3d overhead graphics. then in fierce battles you can enter the fray yourself and commandeer one of your own troops in FPS mode. would be mega cool!

How can you control your buildings and stuff when you're in first person mode? That would suck
 

adelphi

Banned
Dec 28, 2003
564
0
0
i hope they release before we need dentures/depends/walkers/metamucil/hearing aids/lovenox (sitting for longer sessions)
 

Lifer

Banned
Feb 17, 2003
1,948
0
0
Originally posted by: Chiropteran
Starcraft 2. The only reason I prefer War3 over Starcraft is the game matching service, and I don't think that is the sort of thing they would add in an exp pack.

what's game matching?
i don't play wc3 but i play sc.
 

BaboonGuy

Diamond Member
Aug 24, 2002
4,125
0
0
Originally posted by: MAME
Originally posted by: BaboonGuy
SC2. RTS/FPS would rule. you control/build all your guys like regular SC in beautiful 3d overhead graphics. then in fierce battles you can enter the fray yourself and commandeer one of your own troops in FPS mode. would be mega cool!

How can you control your buildings and stuff when you're in first person mode? That would suck

exactly. it's the payoff you take for having getting uber control. (like not being able to control ur shizzle is the cost for being able to control a marine and headshot a ton of zealots)

of course you could switch out super fast and go back to your stuff and manage it once the battle is won/lost or wahtever.
 

ed21x

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 2001
5,411
8
81
Originally posted by: MAME
Originally posted by: BaboonGuy
SC2. RTS/FPS would rule. you control/build all your guys like regular SC in beautiful 3d overhead graphics. then in fierce battles you can enter the fray yourself and commandeer one of your own troops in FPS mode. would be mega cool!

How can you control your buildings and stuff when you're in first person mode? That would suck

you should try Savage :)
http://www.s2games.com
 

PowerMac4Ever

Banned
Dec 9, 2000
5,246
0
0
Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
Second, i know about the TvB feature, but for WC3, your teams are all next to each other, where as in SC, u could be surrounded by enemies while the rest of your partners are all together. Again, they might have changed that w/ patches.
whoa whoa, being potentially surrounded by your enemies is part of the fun of StarCraft!
 

jinduy

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2002
4,781
1
81
Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
Second, i know about the TvB feature, but for WC3, your teams are all next to each other, where as in SC, u could be surrounded by enemies while the rest of your partners are all together. Again, they might have changed that w/ patches.
whoa whoa, being potentially surrounded by your enemies is part of the fun of StarCraft!

yep that's part of the fun :).
 

JustAnAverageGuy

Diamond Member
Aug 1, 2003
9,057
0
76
What I want to know is. Blizzard (should) knows that they would sell just stupidly large numbers of copies, makes massive amounts of money, why don't they just do it?

I mean, you have a kickass game, kickass balance, a big mod community, still popular after atleast 8 years, and you left the story off with a massive cliffhanger.

What's stopping them?
 

josphII

Banned
Nov 24, 2001
1,490
0
0
Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
What I want to know is. Blizzard (should) knows that they would sell just stupidly large numbers of copies, makes massive amounts of money, why don't they just do it?

I mean, you have a kickass game, kickass balance, a big mod community, still popular after atleast 8 years, and you left the story off with a massive cliffhanger.

What's stopping them?

the game came out in like march of '98, so it would be six years, but im sure the game will still be very popular in two more years