• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Starcraft 2

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
RyanPaulShaffer said:
Sweet, a Starcraft 2 thread bumped from 2007!

Is someone going to bump it again in another two years when SC2 still isn't out? 😛
Click to expand...

It's currently slated for Q2 2010, but I have my doubts. I mean we don't even have a beta yet.

How long ago now did that trailer come out? It's been 3 years or close to it I believe.
 
ayabe said:
It's currently slated for Q2 2010, but I have my doubts. I mean we don't even have a beta yet.

How long ago now did that trailer come out? It's been 3 years or close to it I believe.
Click to expand...

Beta's last what, 3-4 months with Blizzard? I'd like to see a Beta though.
 
RyanPaulShaffer said:
"It's done when it's done."

Besides, deadlines are more like guidelines anyway, right? 😛
Click to expand...

I hear yah, but my excitement for SC2 has really waned these last few years - I'll still buy it, but damn it's not cutting edge tech or anything, it's going to start looking old soon.

They're planning at least two more releases for Protoss and Zerg with more or less the same engine, by 2012 or thereabouts I think this will look dated.
 
this is fvcken hilarious, dude!

My personal thoughts are that SC2 is so damn late, way-way later in stalled release than Warcraft 3, but War-3 was still in the safe zone in release. SC2 kind of looks sloppy and crappy, War-3 rip into outerspace.
Warhammer 40K has already done what SC2 is trying to accomplish, in many arrays.
But the campaign editor for SC2 should be incredibly awesome compared to the limited SC-1 editor.
 
ayabe said:
I hear yah, but my excitement for SC2 has really waned these last few years - I'll still buy it, but damn it's not cutting edge tech or anything, it's going to start looking old soon.

They're planning at least two more releases for Protoss and Zerg with more or less the same engine, by 2012 or thereabouts I think this will look dated.
Click to expand...

I agree. This will be the first non-WOW Blizzard game that isn't a day one purchase for me. If it ever comes out, that is...
 
fire400 said:
this is fvcken hilarious, dude!

My personal thoughts are that SC2 is so damn late, way-way later in stalled release than Warcraft 3, but War-3 was still in the safe zone in release. SC2 kind of looks sloppy and crappy, War-3 rip into outerspace.
Warhammer 40K has already done what SC2 is trying to accomplish, in many arrays.
But the campaign editor for SC2 should be incredibly awesome compared to the limited SC-1 editor.
Click to expand...

disagree. for one, SC still has a huge fanbase. secondly, WH40k has taken a completely different direction - they have moved to the squad level and reduced base building even further.

in SC2, base-building is still critical and large armies can be had. two different directions of gaming. SC = RTS, DoW2 ~~ RTT
 
I'd rather have Diablo 3 before Starcraft 2 as well, but I'm fairly certain that SC2 is the priority and D3 is still in nebulous "TBA, it's done when it's done" land.
 
Muadib said:
Sounds like I won't be upgrading this year then. Back to the xbox!!!
Click to expand...

No one said you had to upgrade anyway.
They already made it clear they want it to be playable on relatively weak systems.

Of course, they've said a lot of things over the years...........
 
shortylickens said:
No one said you had to upgrade anyway.
They already made it clear they want it to be playable on relatively weak systems.

Of course, they've said a lot of things over the years...........
Click to expand...

SCII deserves to be played on a brand new rig 🙂 not some junk from early this decade.
 
shortylickens said:
No one said you had to upgrade anyway.
They already made it clear they want it to be playable on relatively weak systems.

Of course, they've said a lot of things over the years...........
Click to expand...

I'm with Maximilian! Gamemakers always claim their stuff is playable if you
meet the low end requirements. Imo, 99% of the time doing so will mean a
sucky experience.
 
Muadib said:
I'm with Maximilian! Gamemakers always claim their stuff is playable if you
meet the low end requirements. Imo, 99% of the time doing so will mean a
sucky experience.
Click to expand...

Blizzard games usually have very low minimum requirements and are pretty playable with low end systems. They're the 1%.
 
Muadib said:
I'm with Maximilian! Gamemakers always claim their stuff is playable if you
meet the low end requirements. Imo, 99% of the time doing so will mean a
sucky experience.
Click to expand...

since when has blizzard ever made programs that required cutting edge rigs?

this isn't crysis. this is starcraft. this is blizzard.

that's probably one of the main reasons why blizzard is so successful - because their games run on a very large range of rigs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top