laclongquan
Arcane
It's not worth the full "Derp!" utterance. That's how bad WH40K is.It's "Warp!" not "Erp!", you dingus.
It's not worth the full "Derp!" utterance. That's how bad WH40K is.It's "Warp!" not "Erp!", you dingus.
zerg op? I dunno what changed since last time I played, but I always played terrans in team dm, if there were 3 terrans on one side (and one or less on the other) it usually was a quick win (well, protoss could still screw us over sometimes).At least it shows the current balance of sc2. Zerg op, viking suck shit in both air and on ground, tank damage is laughable and zerg can just a-move through sieged terran position.
And of course the human master-race gets the least new toys to play with.
yup. I used to watch a lot of SC2 stuff like GSL, but now it's boring to watch because of Zerg. Even if it wasn't for Infestors being broken, it would still be boring to watch because of Zerg. zerglings, roach, hydra, broodlords... all a-move units.At least it shows the current balance of sc2. Zerg op, viking suck shit in both air and on ground, tank damage is laughable and zerg can just a-move through sieged terran position.
And of course the human master-race gets the least new toys to play with.
Well. SC2 isn't actually made for it's story. It was made to be an e-sport game. That said, SC2s was one of the best story outings they've had in a long while: They went for a straight up action film story, and they did that well. Compare that to Diablo 3 with it's childish stupid story, with over-expository dialogs and stupid cartoony villains informing you at every turn what their next move was and that even though you stopped x y and z, you're certainly not going to stop w! Or WC3s story which was almost equally stupid, and with annoying characters I hated with a passion, such as the warden, or the moon priestess. Not saying that it had a fantastic story, but at least it achieved what it set out to do.I tried to like SC2 but the single-player is dissapointing ( it wouldn't be a problem if they hadn't decided to do 3 games instead of one), there are some really good missions (that mission where you have to defend from the zerg at night and attack at morning is awesome) but most missions are the typical RTS stuff, sometimes with a little gimmick, and the story is incredible stupid, on SC 1 the story was about the humans and Protoss trying to survive and the zerg raping everything, in SC 2 the story is about saving Kerrigan with an artifact that the writer took from his ass. The guy who wrote the SC 1 manual, and SC 1story is the same who wrote SC 2 story? If it is, something really bad happened with him.
(...) SC2s was one of the best story outings they've had in a long while. (...) Or WC3s story which was almost equally stupid, and with annoying characters I hated with a passion, such as the warden, or the moon priestess. (...)
SC2 isn't actually made for it's story. It was made to be an e-sport game. That said, SC2s was one of the best story outings they've had in a long while: They went for a straight up action film story, and they did that well. Compare that to Diablo 3 with it's childish stupid story, with over-expository dialogs and stupid cartoony villains informing you at every turn what their next move was and that even though you stopped x y and z, you're certainly not going to stop w! Or WC3s story which was almost equally stupid, and with annoying characters I hated with a passion, such as the warden, or the moon priestess. Not saying that it had a fantastic story, but at least it achieved what it set out to do.
That's a pretty good point. Though note that SC2 is the only game here, with two upcoming expansions continuing the story from the viewpoint of zerg and protoss. Not three games.I know, but they are going to make 3 games and the official excuse was that they had an amazing story to tell and one game wasn't enough
That's certainly the line Blizzard's PR is pushing hard.That's a pretty good point. Though note that SC2 is the only game here, with two upcoming expansions continuing the story from the viewpoint of zerg and protoss. Not three games.
Well, you can't really say that it's "three different games", when it has a) the content of an expansion and b) is priced like an expansion.That's certainly the line Blizzard's PR is pushing hard.That's a pretty good point. Though note that SC2 is the only game here, with two upcoming expansions continuing the story from the viewpoint of zerg and protoss. Not three games.
Not saying that it had a fantastic story, but at least it achieved what it set out to do.
Generally, yes. But not in this case. They set out to make a generic action film plot, that succeeded at it, it's exactly what I expected going into the story, and I thought it was good for that. That's what I meant. You don't go to Jean Claude Van Damme movies for deep philosophical musings, do you?Not saying that it had a fantastic story, but at least it achieved what it set out to do.
That's like saying that the new car I buyed and which is made of cardbox with wooden wheels coloured and painied to look like a real car is actually good, because it's a car and the company who made it has achieved their goal... to build and sell a car.
I think that's entirely fair, that's what nice products are for. Though sc2 isn't exactly a niche product (though in a way, it also is). Not everything needs a deeper meaning. A chair is a chair, and is designed for sitting. It doesn't need to function like anything else.But it's imho a little bit too cheap to say "if you don't like, don't buy it"?
If they had decided to do SC2 without story (maybe only a small text explaining what is going on before each mission), I could agree with you, the problem is that they made a weak and cliche story and to me a shitty story is like I'm buyng a chair with metal spikes on it, tecnichally I could sit on it , but it would be an uncomfortable experience. They do shitty stories but don't know about it (There are alot of expensive cutscenes on SC2, if they didn't care about the story, why waste money making them? Most people is going to play only multiplayer anyway.).I think that's entirely fair, that's what nice products are for. Though sc2 isn't exactly a niche product (though in a way, it also is). Not everything needs a deeper meaning. A chair is a chair, and is designed for sitting. It doesn't need to function like anything else.But it's imho a little bit too cheap to say "if you don't like, don't buy it"?
I think that's entirely fair, that's what nice products are for. Though sc2 isn't exactly a niche product (though in a way, it also is). Not everything needs a deeper meaning. A chair is a chair, and is designed for sitting. It doesn't need to function like anything else.But it's imho a little bit too cheap to say "if you don't like, don't buy it"?
I would call you weird for liking the WC3 story though, but each to his taste.