Giant Bomb Review

176 Comments

StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm Review

5
  • PC

If you're still at all invested in keeping up with StarCraft II, there's no reason you shouldn't have Heart of the Swarm.

A lot has changed for ol' Sarah Kerrigan.
A lot has changed for ol' Sarah Kerrigan.

StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty was such a throwback to its seminal but aged RTS predecessor, it's fitting StarCraft is one of the few franchises still being extended out in the spirit of the old '90s boxed PC expansion pack. Heart of the Swarm is the first such add-on to StarCraft II, a robust $40 package that, quite frankly, gives you more StarCraft II in every way. At the risk of sounding overly reductive, if you spent any time at all with Wings of Liberty, you already know exactly how excited you should be to play Heart of the Swarm, or even whether you should play it at all.

StarCraft II might as well be two separate products in one box: the story-driven single-player RTS campaign, which is self-explanatory enough that anyone can play it, and a multiplayer mode so wildly fast-paced and complex that it's arguably the hardest video game, if not one of the hardest competitive activities period, to excel at on the planet. Luckily for everyone who wants to avoid falling down the multiplayer rabbit hole, Blizzard made the wise decision with Wings of Liberty to largely differentiate the content of the campaign from the multiplayer mode. That philosophy continues on here, giving you a new set of story missions centered around Kerrigan and the Zerg that's just as varied in design as the Terran campaign in the previous game.

At two-thirds the price of Wings of Liberty, it shouldn't be surprising that you get about two-thirds as many missions here, but each one features distinctive enough mechanics, objectives, and new units that your progression through the story is thoroughly satisfying. Just like in the last game, there's never an objective as simple as "build a big base and then go blow up the other guy's base" (and there are expanded options for skirmishes with AI if that's what you want). Each level places some interesting twist or restriction on map control, time limit, the way you acquire units, and so on, in the same style as the last game. If you've been playing multiplayer since that game came out, you'll find the campaign disappointingly easy on anything but the highest difficulty. But with that mission-to-mission variation and a nicely designed, multi-tiered upgrade system that might be more satisfying than in the previous game, this campaign here is just as much fun as the last one.

Would you believe this guy is one of the more likable characters in the campaign?
Would you believe this guy is one of the more likable characters in the campaign?

For better or worse, Heart of the Swarm's storytelling picks up and runs with the same tone and elements established in Wings of Liberty, which is to say there's way more focus on prophecies, artifacts, ancient aliens, and the somewhat out-of-left-field romantic cheese between Kerrigan and Jimmy Raynor, and less on the backstabbing, intrigue, and factional maneuvering of the old StarCraft games. The plot is moderately successful at creating a redemptive arc of sorts for Kerrigan, which is good since you're playing as her in this add-on, though some of the dialogue between Kerrigan and Raynor is laugh-out-loud goofy. Some other aspects of the campaign story are a bit ridiculous and hackneyed as well, and if you've played many Blizzard games it's easy to predict exactly where this whole trilogy is probably going to end up. But there are also a handful of neat, nostalgic callbacks to the story of Brood War, and I found quite a few of the supporting characters to be pretty likable. There's also what feels like more of Blizzard's best-in-class CG cinematics than there were in Wings of Liberty. There are worse video game stories out there, and it's a lot easier to forgive since the single-player game is so much fun, but at this point the overall plot arc of StarCraft II is a bit easier to enjoy if you don't take it too seriously.

At any rate, StarCraft is on the very short list of games whose multiplayer modes have far surpassed their story campaigns in popularity, so if the updates on the multiplayer side weren't up to snuff, this whole expansion would be pointless. While it will take months for the true usefulness of the new units and changes to become clear, my initial impression is that the all the new stuff is going to provide a serious kick in the pants to the metagame, which had gotten stale enough to make me pay little or no attention to the game at all for several months. Most imporantly to me, the Protoss finally have a valid tech path through the Stargate, between the new support/harass flier the Oracle and the long-range Tempest, that frees them up from needing to go straight to a Robotics Facility every single match. And the defensive Mothership Core lets you expand early on without quite as much fear of a rush shutting you down before you get started.

The expansion's new and modified units seem like they'll really revitalize the evolving competition in multiplayer.
The expansion's new and modified units seem like they'll really revitalize the evolving competition in multiplayer.

But wait, there's more! A lot more. The Terrans get some important close-quarters capability (and a nod to the old Firebat) with the Hellbat transformation mode for the Hellion, and the new hidden Widow Mine provides some really annoying defense and containment options, since the mine doesn't actually destroy itself upon firing but has to be taken out manually. (It helps to know about this before you go up against a mined ramp). The Zerg's new flying caster the Viper and burrowed siege unit the Swarm Host should give the creepy-crawliest faction some extra options in engagements and increased map control, respectively. I'm just starting to get my head around all this stuff in competitive play, but I can confidently say the new dynamics these guys are bringing about are already enough to get me interested in playing multiplayer again.

Ever since I randomly lucked into the beta for Warcraft III before my time in the games press, I've deeply admired Blizzard's take-no-prisoners approach to RTS balance, and Heart of the Swarm shows they still aren't afraid to make cuts and deep changes wherever appropriate. In that sense, the modifications to existing units may be even more important to the longterm health of StarCraft II than the new units. The overly powerful Terran Warhound from early in the beta is gone, while the Carrier, long subject to removal, somehow managed to survive through to the shipping game. Void Rays don't charge up anymore, but have an active ability with bonus damage to armor instead. The underused Hydralisk, a mainstay of the Zerg army in Brood War, finally has its speed upgrade back. The infernal Medivac also gets a speed boost with an awfully short cooldown. A speed boost? Like Terrans needed any help dropping your expansions? While each faction only gets two or three all-new units, there are so many changes across the board in this expansion that it practically feels like playing an entirely new game. And that's very exciting.

Even the interface around the multiplayer kind of feels like a new game.
Even the interface around the multiplayer kind of feels like a new game.

Blizzard has done quite a bit of work to the StarCraft II client interface, bringing all the content in Wings of Liberty and Heart of the Swarm together into a common interface that will clearly also house Legacy of the Void when it ships a decade from now. The single most important change, which will be new to you if you're just coming back to the game, is an unranked matchmaking option that lets you play against opponents of similar skill without any impact to your all-important ladder standing. This is a much-needed way to get back into the rhythm of competition or play off-race without any sort of ranking anxiety. There's also a new experience system, not dissimilar to that in most shooters these days, that lets you level your way up to new profile portraits and decals. You earn a little experience even when you lose, which ensures everyone will be able to unlock at least a few things. Some of these improvements are also retroactive to Wings of Liberty and thus aren't exclusively part of this expansion package, but they still make the whole experience more enjoyable. If you haven't played StarCraft II since the original came out, every last thing about it today feels different in some minor or major way.

The traditional expansion pack is such a rarity these days that in reviewing one, it's tempting to suspend our standard graded rating system in favor of a binary "buy it or don't" recommendation. If the occasionally cheesy storytelling or slavish adherence to resource-gathering and micromanagement put you off of Wings of Liberty, there's nothing in Heart of the Swarm that will bring you back in. But for those of us who still deeply love this specific style of real-time strategy and want more of it, this is a must-have add-on.

Brad Shoemaker on Google+
179 CommentsRefresh

Avatar image for alexgbro
Posted By AlexGBRO

They reality with rts games is that multiplayer is the focus just like shooters and fighting games, that said Blizzard did put a lot of effort into this game in the singleplayer even if story is so and so, the objectives are diverse, the normal dificulty is a bit easy but for more chalange there is hard and brutal.

Avatar image for drainblut
Edited By DrainBlut

Can't believe these people gave this shit 5/5. They're saying this is an all around masterpiece in every way possible. Are you fucking kidding me? This series has storytelling that gives the Star Wars prequels a run for the gold in "worst writing ever", featuring a rather boring, uninteresting, and overly fast paced campaign, and didn't really do much for MP either other than add a few new units. It seems that with Blizzard games, people either under rate or over rate based entirely on whether they like it, dislike it, or hype. The reality is that this is a generic, average, game. It would have been worthy of a 5/10 or maybe even a 6/10, but 5/5(10/10) is a fucking joke.

Avatar image for skareo
Edited By SKaREO

I completely disagree with this review. I gave WoL 9/10, but this crap gets no more than a 6/10 from me, and that's being generous. $40 for a few new units is a rip off, and after Diablo 3, Blizzard is going to have a really hard time convincing me to spend money on their software again.

Avatar image for chocolaterhinovampire
Edited By chocolaterhinovampire

@ch3burashka said:

Is there any chance Giant Bomb will return to video reviews? I loved the format; they were great additions to the written review. I figure they're labor-intensive for both the speaker and video editor, but it's probably my third favorite GB feature after QL's and the Bombcast.

I haven't really missed the video reviews as of late, but looking back it was a good feature. Brad's video review of Wings of Liberty might be my favorite GB video review:

Loading Video...

Durger

Avatar image for brozik
Edited By Brozik

This is Jimmy.

Avatar image for dystopiax
Posted By DystopiaX

@rhaknar said:

as someone who only plays the single player, i quite enjoyed it, but WoL was much better in my opinion. This might sound redundant (since this IS an expansion) but the campaign felt just like that, an expansion. The mutation missions are just glorified tutorials that last a few mintues only (and 7 of the 27 missions are that) and the Stukov campaign felt like rushed padding. Still liked it tho, but I grew up on anime, so cheese in stories doesnt bother me.

And Brad is right, you can see how this will end a mile away, its basically just warcraft retold again, but in space

I think the campaign does a really good job of making you feel like you're playing as the zerg, if that makes sense. I specced out my units in such a way that roaches were spawning more roaches, swarm hosts were really powerful, and dead lings would be respawning for free, so in missions I felt like I really was controlling a huge swarm. The times when the game gives you like 250 supply of units to fight with does a really good job of making you feel like you're playing a distinct faction as well. It might be because I play zerg in multiplayer but I liked this campaign better than the WoL campaign, even if it was shorter.

Avatar image for stepside
Posted By Stepside

For those of you like me who never/rarely play the competitive multiplayer aspect of RTS games, I'm halfway through the campaign and it's awesome. Definitely worth the $40 to the single-player lovers out there.

Avatar image for rhaknar
Edited By Rhaknar

as someone who only plays the single player, i quite enjoyed it, but WoL was much better in my opinion. This might sound redundant (since this IS an expansion) but the campaign felt just like that, an expansion. The mutation missions are just glorified tutorials that last a few mintues only (and 7 of the 27 missions are that) and the Stukov campaign felt like rushed padding. Still liked it tho, but I grew up on anime, so cheese in stories doesnt bother me.

And Brad is right, you can see how this will end a mile away, its basically just warcraft retold again, but in space

Avatar image for codesamurai
Posted By codesamurai
Avatar image for silversaint
Posted By SilverSaint

@happypup70: I am not saying this is a 4 star game or quibbling over 4 vs 5 as a game with 4 or 5 stars can be of equal fun since its more about the style of the game and the players preferred genres. A 5 is saying the game has minor flaws, when there are straight up major flaws in HoTS just taken as eh, "if you just consider this story a joke its all good". I would personally give this expansion a 3-3.5 due to how disappointing the SP story/balance was(sad for how long this game was in production) and how good the MP balance was(it better be after taking more then 2 years). The sheer disappointment from the single player campaign at this point also makes it less likely for people to buy LotV as the story has a clear path now (Zeratul getting some sort of artifact, power, or gathering forces and eventually joining Kerrigan and Jim/Valerian to destroy Amon).

Avatar image for y2ken
Posted By Y2Ken

I'm probably 1 or 2 missions from the end of the campaign now. Loved it, yeah Brad's right the story is better if not taken too seriously but it's decent enough, and actually pretty funny at times (in ways which feel intentional as well as the dumb stuff). I like the hero unit mechanics (including a couple of missions which almost feel like a MOBA more than an RTS), the single-unit stuff feels way better to me than the ones from the WoL campaign.

As for multiplayer, I love everything they've done with the presentation and generally everything which surrounds the game itself. And the new units and changes seem pretty cool, I've been watching mainly WoL until now with a bit of HotS stuff here and there, but the transition has been very smooth and I loved the MLG final between Flash and Life yesterday.

David Kim said on the forums today that he doesn't feel anyone has a full grasp of what some of the new (and altered) units are capable of yet, so I'm definitely interested to see where people can take it. Definitely having an amazing time with it, and it's great seeing a launch (albeit for an expansion) go so smoothly and have the transition be as well-handled as it was by Blizzard. So good job there.

Avatar image for troispoint
Posted By Troispoint
Avatar image for thisisjimmy
Posted By ThisIsJimmy
Avatar image for icarusfoundyou
Posted By IcarusFoundYou

The gameplay is good, the plot is moronic.

Avatar image for darkhollow
Posted By Darkhollow

Great review Brad.

Really enjoyed the campaign and I can't wait 'till Legacy of the Void hits to see how the story concludes.

It's a lot of content for an expansion and also cheaper which is nothing but a plus. I don't care for the multiplayer myself since I don't like the competitiveness of it, but hey that's just me, I'm a story guy.

Avatar image for cirdain
Posted By Cirdain

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar image for lind_l_taylor
Posted By Lind_L_Taylor

It scored a 5/5? Get out!

Avatar image for assirra
Posted By Assirra

@brad: Hmmm....It still says 26 for me, in WOL. Where are you getting 29? Maybe there are extra Protoss missions the game doesn't take into account? Thanks for the clarification on HOTS, though.

Well i know at least 1 secret mission (the hybrid space station) and 2 choices (tosh/nova and kill ground or air force of zerg)

Online
Avatar image for bolognarock
Edited By bolognarock
Avatar image for bolognarock
Posted By bolognarock

@cataphract1014: Oh, right. I played my second playthrough on a different computer, so that's probably why it doesn't count the other 3.

Avatar image for cataphract1014
Posted By Cataphract1014

@bolognarock: I believe WoL counts the missions where you have to make a choice like help Tosh or Nova, save the colonists or help the protoss.

Avatar image for bolognarock
Posted By bolognarock

@brad: Hmmm....It still says 26 for me, in WOL. Where are you getting 29? Maybe there are extra Protoss missions the game doesn't take into account? Thanks for the clarification on HOTS, though.

Avatar image for assirra
Posted By Assirra

Another pointless Brad review. "Game isn't for everybody, it's kind of just more of the same" 5 out of 5.

So you mean an expansion for a game has be completely different?

It's a bloody expansion, ofcourse its more of the same, you know, like the people that bought the first one wanted.

Online
Avatar image for spandexmonkey
Edited By spandexmonkey

Another pointless Brad review. "Game isn't for everybody, it's kind of just more of the same" 5 out of 5.

Avatar image for brad
Posted By Brad

HOTS has "two-thirds" as many missions as WOL? It's strange that Brad would say that considering WOL has 26 missions and HOTS has 27.

WOL has 29, and half a dozen of HOTS' missions are just five-minute tutorials for the upgrades.

Staff
Avatar image for suicidepacmen
Edited By suicidepacmen

shocking

Avatar image for zevvion
Posted By Zevvion

I personally don't see how this "expansion" could receive 5 stars. I could conceivably accept 4 stars simply because its a blizzard game and the only RTS around, but even then...

There are 3 types of people who will buy this expansion: 1) those that still play the multiplayer, thus want to upgrade to the new units(many pros don't care about the campaign), 2) those who play both the multiplayer and are interested in the singleplayer, and 3) those who stopped playing and now want to just play the campaign for the story and might play some multiplayer, if any at all, for a bit while its fresh. The majority of people will probably fit into the 2nd and 3rd(majority here) category meaning the singleplayer will almost certainly be more important then the multiplayer for the majority of people.

Singleplayer: The story is terrible, which creates writing where some of the voice acting isn't just cheesy, but comes off as really bad. Also the majority of characters are entirely forgettable and non-unique(lets be honest if Dhaka wasn't conveniently used for a future mission he would literally serve no purpose). The mechanics are literally the same as WoL(which makes sense, but when someone does that in an expansion for any other game type people complain about how its more of the same), except now you have this hero unit in Kerrigan who is godlike and dumbs down much of the game. Many of the missions are less unique then the WoL missions. I will admit the "boss" battles with the primal zerg were cool, but that is literally the only "new" thing adding any positive merit from a SP standpoint.

Multiplayer: If you are NOT currently playing starcraft 2 multiplayer, this expansion WILL NOT be a reason for you to start, its literally the exact same stylistically. There are new units(making the current tournaments more interesting to watch for a bit) and balance was preserved quite well, but spending $40 for just this aspect is pretty terrible for the cost.

This expansion essentially added nothing new or better for the average Starcraft 2 consumer and for a dedicated Starcraft 2 consumer it only adds new multiplayer elements in new units and strategies from them. The mechanics from the engine are still great and it is still the only real RTS in town, but that doesn't help if you have your writer's children write the story.

I seriously doubt that.

Also, an expansion is to expand the existing game. Which means it's logical it would be 99% similiar in mechanics if not 100%. What you're thinking of is sequels.

Anything else is really your opinion against Brad's isn't it? You thought the story was terrible, he thought as long as you don't take it very seriously, it's not that bad. You thought all the characters were forgettable, he liked a few of them.

If you read the review, it's pretty clear why Brad gave it 5 stars. You can pick the review apart for things you don't appreciate yourself and decide whether or not to buy the game based on that. It's all in there to make a well informed decision I think. I don't think it's possible to write a review that applies to everyone objectively.

Avatar image for dberg
Posted By Dberg

I've given it more thought and I think the only way I could've been happy with the multiplayer of a new starcraft game would be if they added another faction. That's extremely unlikely to happen though because ~~Esports~~. I'm just so done with what's already there. It was amazing 15 years ago, it was a nice nostalgia ride last year, but its welcome wore off. The Protoss SC2 "expansion pack" will likely be the first Blizzard game I skip.

At least they've never been afraid to mix things up with the Warcraft RTS games, so there's always the hope that a 4th might come around and be completely off the rails. Barring that or a Rock n Roll Racing remake, I think Blizzard have stopped catering to people like me.

Avatar image for happypup70
Posted By happypup70

I personally don't see how this "expansion" could receive 5 stars. I could conceivably accept 4 stars simply because its a blizzard game and the only RTS around, but even then...

There are 3 types of people who will buy this expansion: 1) those that still play the multiplayer, thus want to upgrade to the new units(many pros don't care about the campaign), 2) those who play both the multiplayer and are interested in the singleplayer, and 3) those who stopped playing and now want to just play the campaign for the story and might play some multiplayer, if any at all, for a bit while its fresh. The majority of people will probably fit into the 2nd and 3rd(majority here) category meaning the singleplayer will almost certainly be more important then the multiplayer for the majority of people.

Singleplayer: The story is terrible, which creates writing where some of the voice acting isn't just cheesy, but comes off as really bad. Also the majority of characters are entirely forgettable and non-unique(lets be honest if Dhaka wasn't conveniently used for a future mission he would literally serve no purpose). The mechanics are literally the same as WoL(which makes sense, but when someone does that in an expansion for any other game type people complain about how its more of the same), except now you have this hero unit in Kerrigan who is godlike and dumbs down much of the game. Many of the missions are less unique then the WoL missions. I will admit the "boss" battles with the primal zerg were cool, but that is literally the only "new" thing adding any positive merit from a SP standpoint.

Multiplayer: If you are NOT currently playing starcraft 2 multiplayer, this expansion WILL NOT be a reason for you to start, its literally the exact same stylistically. There are new units(making the current tournaments more interesting to watch for a bit) and balance was preserved quite well, but spending $40 for just this aspect is pretty terrible for the cost.

This expansion essentially added nothing new or better for the average Starcraft 2 consumer and for a dedicated Starcraft 2 consumer it only adds new multiplayer elements in new units and strategies from them. The mechanics from the engine are still great and it is still the only real RTS in town, but that doesn't help if you have your writer's children write the story.

Brad fits in category 2. Quibbling about 4 stars versus 5 stars is ridiculous. Maybe if they had a bigger staff they wouldn't put the starcraft fan in charge of the review. This game is fun. You may be right other RTS games that don't exist could be fun. you should write your own review and assign your own star rating

Avatar image for belligerentengine
Edited By BelligerentEngine

I love to talk shit on Brad for better or worse. However regardless of that, this is a very well put together review anyone who reads the entirety of it should have a very cognizant opinion on whether this expansion is for them or not. Nicely done.

Avatar image for blueredandgold
Posted By blueredandgold

Looking for the Giant Bomb Group....can't find it and don't know how to use the interface to search for it either!

Avatar image for silversaint
Posted By SilverSaint

I personally don't see how this "expansion" could receive 5 stars. I could conceivably accept 4 stars simply because its a blizzard game and the only RTS around, but even then...

There are 3 types of people who will buy this expansion: 1) those that still play the multiplayer, thus want to upgrade to the new units(many pros don't care about the campaign), 2) those who play both the multiplayer and are interested in the singleplayer, and 3) those who stopped playing and now want to just play the campaign for the story and might play some multiplayer, if any at all, for a bit while its fresh. The majority of people will probably fit into the 2nd and 3rd(majority here) category meaning the singleplayer will almost certainly be more important then the multiplayer for the majority of people.

Singleplayer: The story is terrible, which creates writing where some of the voice acting isn't just cheesy, but comes off as really bad. Also the majority of characters are entirely forgettable and non-unique(lets be honest if Dhaka wasn't conveniently used for a future mission he would literally serve no purpose). The mechanics are literally the same as WoL(which makes sense, but when someone does that in an expansion for any other game type people complain about how its more of the same), except now you have this hero unit in Kerrigan who is godlike and dumbs down much of the game. Many of the missions are less unique then the WoL missions. I will admit the "boss" battles with the primal zerg were cool, but that is literally the only "new" thing adding any positive merit from a SP standpoint.

Multiplayer: If you are NOT currently playing starcraft 2 multiplayer, this expansion WILL NOT be a reason for you to start, its literally the exact same stylistically. There are new units(making the current tournaments more interesting to watch for a bit) and balance was preserved quite well, but spending $40 for just this aspect is pretty terrible for the cost.

This expansion essentially added nothing new or better for the average Starcraft 2 consumer and for a dedicated Starcraft 2 consumer it only adds new multiplayer elements in new units and strategies from them. The mechanics from the engine are still great and it is still the only real RTS in town, but that doesn't help if you have your writer's children write the story.

Avatar image for bolognarock
Edited By bolognarock

HOTS has "two-thirds" as many missions as WOL? It's strange that Brad would say that considering WOL has 26 missions and HOTS has 27.

Avatar image for arkasai
Posted By Arkasai

I started the campaign on hard yesterday, at some point I switched to brutal and it's been lots of fun. It doesn't feel cheap or unfair on the hardest setting, when you mess up it's usually very clear what you did wrong. Audio bugs have been pretty common throughout the campaign, usually looping or stuttering - probably because I didn't wait for it to finish patching, so all the audio and cinematics have streamed as I've needed them. Even with the slight bugs, I'm glad they give you the option to play before it's finished downloading.

I played a ton of the beta and have a pretty good idea how I'll be playing, so for now the campaign has all of my attention. Once I've conquered that, I'll be back on the ladder.

Avatar image for foolishchaos
Posted By FoolishChaos

@norusdog said:

a perfect score from brad on a StarCraft game? sorry if I fail to have it mean anything. Shoulda had someone NOT so fucking obsessed with it review it.

yes I bought it. Yes I love it. But Brad reviewing a StarCraft game causes said review to lose all merit.

Yeah he is totally obsessed, having not played WoL for half a year and barely remembering its existence the week before it came out.

That's beside the point though. You are upset because you don't think its a 5 star game. You will do yourself some good if you accept right now that some reviewers will disagree with your opinion. Just because the game might have received a lower score if reviewed by Vinny or something, who only plays part of any starcraft game because he isn't "obsessed" with it and plays the multiplayer, doesn't mean giantbomb fucked up. It just means that you disagree with brad a little bit. That's okay.

Avatar image for flanker22
Posted By flanker22

expected

Avatar image for nictel
Posted By Nictel

People seem to forget that this is an expansion. As such Brad is the perfect person to review this. Because if you didn't like Star Craft before this isn't going to change your mind. No this review is for people who own Wings of Liberty. I want someone who was into the original telling me if this is as good or better as that original.

Avatar image for redcricketchase
Posted By RedCricketChase

Never realized how much I enjoy Brad's writing style. That man can write the hell out of a review.

Avatar image for silver-streak
Posted By Silver-Streak

@mikbal: By your own statement, Blizzard stated all 3 as 3 full games. This is correct. This means that, just like the singleplayer campaigns being unique between the 3, the multiplayer capabilities will be as well.

It was never stated that the multiplayer units were going to be brought backwards into prior releases, at least not as far as I can find through the use of google.

Avatar image for darlan
Posted By Darlan

As someone who felt somewhat lukewarm feelings for Starcraft II, I'd love to hear what the other guys have to say about it as well. (Not that Shoemaker isn't totally awesome and the right guy for this review, just wondering...of course Brad was going to love this!)

Avatar image for supermonkey122
Posted By supermonkey122

Brad "5-star" Shoemaker does it again.

Avatar image for slot9
Edited By slot9

Great review! Reading it was like hearing you speak!

Avatar image for scaramoosh
Posted By scaramoosh

Blizzard create nothing but over rated shit since TBC. I liked Warcraft 3 and Vanilla WoW, just thought everything since has been complete shit.

Avatar image for shishkebab09
Posted By shishkebab09

@dberg: I'm enjoying the Heart campaign a lot more than I did Wings'. I think Kerrigan is a far more interesting protagonist than Raynor. Then again, you say you may have been won over by space rednecks, and I'm definitely being won over by the protagonist being female and evil.

Avatar image for kittyvondoom
Posted By KittyVonDoom

Not Age of Empires/10.

Avatar image for dberg
Edited By Dberg

The story was tedious and not even up to par with the plot of Wings of Liberty. I enjoyed the campaign in Wings and went for all the achievements there, but here I was bored to tears just four missions in. I forced myself to play through it all in case it had a high point, but all it did was introduce the flattest supporting cast imaginable. Maybe the space rednecks thing won me over in Wings, it was definitely more atmospheric and it had more personality. The closest thing you get to an interesting character here is Infested Stukov, but there's no gravity to him. He just joins you with no fanfare, goes on one mission and spends the rest of the game standing on the bridge.

I've read the review and I understand that the scores are on a game to game basis, not to be compared to each other, but Wings was better than Heart in every way. Other sequels have received a slap on the wrist for that. It should be reflected somewhere here as well or it just sounds like it got 5 because it has the Starcraft name on it.

And, yeah, maybe we shouldn't care too much about the campaign, but then what are we paying for here? 40 bucks for what is essentially DLC to a multiplayer the average Joe burned out on last year?

Avatar image for mezmero
Posted By Mezmero

I never finished Wings of Liberty because my mouse and general desk set up is not good. I'd pick this game up in a heartbeat if I didn't have such issues. Zerg are my favorite race in this universe though I suck at the multiplayer (again, rough mouse). The thought of a whole game based of them sounds awesome. Also need a better PC for a nicer looking experience. Alas, such is the fate of the impoverished. Thanks for the review.

Avatar image for mikbal
Edited By mikbal

@sooty said:

@mikbal said:

So now my Wings of Liberty copy is garbage.

Everyone will be playing Heart of Swarm.

Why don't multiplayer changes apply to Wing of Liberty?

Because it's an expansion. The balance changes are around the new units, if you don't have the new units, the changes may not fit in properly to the WoL meta.

It has been almost three years since Wings of Liberty, and it's not Blizzard's fault 'everyone' will be playing Heart of the Swarm.

That's not what they promised. When they announced SC2 as 3 separate games they said buying any of them was enough for a full experience. Many like me trusted them and bought into idea of 3 games.

I like to play with new multiplayer units and maps as they promised before. They already allow rules sets to switched from the options, but only if you pay additional 40 bucks for HoS.

Whatever, i didn't buy any Activision game since 2010. I'm not likely to buy any in the foreseeable future.

Avatar image for fminus
Posted By FMinus

It's a fun addictive game, one of the best RTS on the market no doubt, but I'd have to duck scores for having performance issues, which shouldn't be there looking at how the game looks - but alas that's a Blizzard tradition, games looking mediocre (from a technical standpoint, not artistic) and running like crap when there is a bit of commotion on the screen.

I still think it's a super fine game as said, but Blizzard should really invest a bit more into tech, all of their games perform sub-par on modern PCs.