Campaign Creations

Man am I glad I sat out on getting SC2. I can just tell a bad game when I see one. The only thing it had going for it was the hype and novelty of a new release after waiting so long. After WC3 Blizzard lost it's touch. Diablo II was their last great game, and the only possible good game they could make now is Diablo III if only because it's so much simpler. How could they fuck it up?

Just watch them, though.

D3 is looking like it will be decent gameplay-wise, but an RPG is a lot easier to fuck up than an RTS, especially an action-RPG. I'm not expecting much for the story, though. Can only wait and see as it's a different team and they are much more hush-hush about it.

It's still missing key graphical stuff like normal mapping from what it appears, though. The graphics need a really significant overhaul if they're to compete with even Titan Quest.

Definitely, but it won't be the decider. What made Diablo so addicting (and then not as relevant once MMOs came around) was that it was a grind for the best build, the best XP, and the best items.

That the player could set when they played and get what they wanted without need for relying on trade or PvP makes it more accessible to casual gamers at the time than Everquest or Ultima. I could see D3 being the more casual alternative to WoW's timesinking but to capitalize, Blizzard really needs to push it on the consoles where the Elder Scrolls game made a good deal of money.

I don't know what they plan to do with D3's item drops but trying to get the best you could get took more time than WoW if you didn't bot.

XP? Nah. That instantly vanished the moment bots came out. The average player Baal runs, bots just kill shit so fast and efficiently they level on their own. Bots took everything out of that game, and Blizzard tried to balance it for botters by making items wholly impossible to get until botters had flooded the market so much the value of everything dropped low enough for the average coon who had grinded his balls off for a year to buy one thing.

You think they'll be as tolerant this time? Blizzard still hasn't represented D3 as anything other than a casual alternative (or even if you'll laugh, a more high-quality graphics alternative) to WoW and whatever other MMOG they're working on.

Ironically, if they actually make D3 a smaller game and make it a more enclosed grind like DotA, LoL, or CoN - they could make some good money. Imagine that kind of gameplay with Blizzard production values and you can start to blush.

It's not a question about tolerance, it's a question about laziness. And yes, I think they'll be just as lazy as every other game they've released so far.

mAc Chaos wrote:Man am I glad I sat out on getting SC2. I can just tell a bad game when I see one. The only thing it had going for it was the hype and novelty of a new release after waiting so long. After WC3 Blizzard lost it's touch. Diablo II was their last great game, and the only possible good game they could make now is Diablo III if only because it's so much simpler. How could they fuck it up?

Just watch them, though.

Wait a minute, are you actually saying you even haven't TRIED SC2 and that you're just basing your opinion on other people's rants?

I used to (and still) have issues with WC3, especially with the difficulty, Normal being too easy and Hard being just... insane, but after giving it a chance, I now think it was a decent effort.

A simple synopsis provided by any of our experienced editors or watching a few videos tells you all you need to know about sc2, really.

DrumsofWar wrote:You think they'll be as tolerant this time? Blizzard still hasn't represented D3 as anything other than a casual alternative (or even if you'll laugh, a more high-quality graphics alternative) to WoW and whatever other MMOG they're working on.

Man, if you knew just how many people are bitching their 6 year old computers can't run WoW anymore....

johnnythewolf wrote:

mAc Chaos wrote:Man am I glad I sat out on getting SC2. I can just tell a bad game when I see one. The only thing it had going for it was the hype and novelty of a new release after waiting so long. After WC3 Blizzard lost it's touch. Diablo II was their last great game, and the only possible good game they could make now is Diablo III if only because it's so much simpler. How could they fuck it up?

Just watch them, though.

Wait a minute, are you actually saying you even haven't TRIED SC2 and that you're just basing your opinion on other people's rants?

I used to (and still) have issues with WC3, especially with the difficulty, Normal being too easy and Hard being just... insane, but after giving it a chance, I now think it was a decent effort.

Wait a minute, are you basing your opinion of WC3's quality as a game on its AI difficulty? Now I see why no one takes your posts seriously.

Oh, and for the record, I knew exactly what I was getting when I decided to buy the game. I'm sure mAc has a good idea of what he's talking about.

RazorclawX wrote:

DrumsofWar wrote:You think they'll be as tolerant this time? Blizzard still hasn't represented D3 as anything other than a casual alternative (or even if you'll laugh, a more high-quality graphics alternative) to WoW and whatever other MMOG they're working on.

Man, if you knew just how many people are bitching their 6 year old computers can't run WoW anymore....

You just blew my mind.

How did this thread last 5 pages?

I guess I just didn't care enough to really judge the story that much one way or another. The ending basically doesn't make sense... yet. I'm interested to see where they go with the story in Heart of the Swarm. But a big part of that is me just not caring to belabor the flaws of WoL's story until we get a chance to see how badly they really railroad it into death in the next installment. I'm assuming they'll have to try to get rid of Kerrigan as a character as quickly as possible because any sort of dialogue between Kerrigan and Jim is just going to be hilarious almost no matter what they write.

In fact, I guess I actually prefer the story going this way. I want to see just how bad they can really make it. The more I think about it, actually, the more I see the whole thing as just one huge joke.

I guess I was just thrilled to see that the SC2 single player missions were actually playable. The SC1 single-player, frankly, was dreadful in comparison. At least they got one thing right in this installment. Maybe in the next one they'll figure out how to tell an rts story. One thing at a time here people.

Yeah, they tried a little in Brood War and then they tried harder in SC2, even if they probably got some of the ideas off BW UMS or campaigns. Expect to see lots of Jimmy Kerrigan dialogue though, as Kerrigan is the fated one and Jim is the big hero, even if he's not the POV character in the next 2 expansions.

(Maybe he'll finally die.)

DrumsofWar wrote:Yeah, they tried a little in Brood War and then they tried harder in SC2, even if they probably got some of the ideas off BW UMS or campaigns. Expect to see lots of Jimmy Kerrigan dialogue though, as Kerrigan is the fated one and Jim is the big hero, even if he's not the POV character in the next 2 expansions.

(Maybe he'll finally die.)

Dude if he died he would be reanimated in the body of a dragoon.

Humans can do that now didn't you hear?