Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

443 Comments

StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty Review

5
  • PC

Top to bottom, this is a totally worthy successor to one of the best strategy games in history.

 If Jim Raynor can't get it done, no one can.
If Jim Raynor can't get it done, no one can.

Twelve years is a long time to wait for a sequel, even a sequel to one of the best games ever made. Blizzard itself has poked fun at StarCraft II's long gestation with its frequent refrain of "Hell, it's about time," and while it is in fact about time, it was also completely worth the wait. The Terran-focused Wings of Liberty is so good on all counts that it's going to be really tough to wait for the second and third Zerg- and Protoss-focused chapters of the story, and given Blizzard's penchant for taking its sweet time making games, that might be a long wait. It's a good thing the competitive part of StarCraft II is so great that a lot of players will still be busy battling it out online not just until those follow-ups arrive, but even long after they've come and gone. I know I will be.

While Blizzard has revisited real-time strategy once since 1998 with Warcraft III--and plenty of other developers have refined and evolved the genre in their own ways--the elegant three-way balance of the original StarCraft has remained an institution, so close to perfection that more than a decade later it's still famously practiced as a national pastime in some parts of the world. That's why StarCraft II hews to the same factions and gameplay formula as its vaunted predecessor, and why Blizzard couldn't, and shouldn't, have changed the fundamental core of what this game is. The developers of the new NBA Jam aren't going to add an extra hoop to their sequel just for the sake of making changes. If there's ever another Quake, I'm pretty sure you'll play it in first-person with a gun protruding out of the bottom of the screen. Some games, especially intensely competitive ones, are so brilliantly put-together that their inner workings are basically etched in stone. StarCraft is one of them.

 Some of the story missions are downright epic.
Some of the story missions are downright epic.

All that is to say that in StarCraft II, you still place unit-producing buildings around a town hall, extract minerals and vespene gas with worker units, and manage multiple production queues simultaneously to win battles. Making more units than the other guy, and using them more deftly than him, remain the two concepts key to achieving victory. That framework is carried over as you remember it from the first game. It's in each race's roster of units and the game's streamlined interface that you'll find the years' worth of improvements you'd expect. There are as many new units as old ones, and even the old ones largely behave in very new ways, and yet that sublime three-way balance is still there. I love the Protoss' giant laser-spewing War of the Worlds walkers the colossi and the Zerg's incredibly annoying flying siege unit the brood lord, and players will be debating the finer points of utilizing these and every other unit in the game for years. There are also plenty of obscure-sounding minor changes to the way the game plays--abilities that now cast unaided, the ability to group production buildings, automation in things like resource-mining--that add up to a major improvement in the way the game plays. StarCraft II is still StarCraft, yes, but modernized in ways that make it feel current and will keep it viable for years to come.

But hold on a second. If you're not some kind of crazed StarCraft grognard who knows what terms like "8 pool" and "natural" mean, all this multiplayer gobbledygook might sound inapplicable (if not downright nonsensical) to you. For you, there's Wings of Liberty's story-driven campaign, which I submit is both accessible and engrossing enough that anyone can enjoy it. It's mostly about the plight of downtrodden hero James Raynor and his ragtag group of rebels, who are still fighting against the human tyrant they unwittingly helped install to power in the first game. Of course, the fallen Terran operative-turned-horrendous Zerg queen Kerrigan gets involved, Raynor's Protoss ally Zeratul shows up with an ancient prophecy, and the next thing you know the fate of creation is in jeopardy. Although this is only the first act of a three-part story, you're left with enough closure to feel satisfied--as well as enough loose ends to make you really wish the next game were already here. The events in Wings of Liberty are momentous enough to completely change the landscape of the series' fiction, and I have no idea how Blizzard intends to continue the story arc. But the storytelling here is good enough that I can't wait to find out.

 Getting to know your crew goes a long way toward fleshing out the story.
Getting to know your crew goes a long way toward fleshing out the story.

The first StarCraft was split into three short campaigns, each with a handful of missions focusing on one faction, so the outcry was understandable when Blizzard said this game would focus only on the Terrans. But the quality and depth of this campaign bears out that decision; the focus on one faction lets the writers and the designers go far deeper with the characters, the story, and the gameplay mechanics than they ever could have while juggling three factions in one product. In that first game, the objectives rarely got more complex than "destroy the enemy's base to win" or "survive and protect this special unit until the timer runs out," and the story played out only in generic mission briefings, mid-mission voiceover, and infrequent CG cutscenes. In that light, Blizzard has absolutely outdone itself with this game's far longer campaign that contains nearly 30 missions, all of them entirely unique. Every one has individualized, Terran-specific mechanics built into it so you're literally never doing the same thing twice and you're always doing something engaging.

One of them has you attempting to pick up an artifact on a planet being ravaged by a sun that's about to go nova; you're literally fleeing from a wall of fire while you're fighting the enemy, moving your base as you go. Another has you racing to grab minerals faster than a competing faction in order to buy out a mercenary's contract, so she'll help you and not them. (Spending that cash to fight the other faction and slow down your own progress is, of course, a tactical risk.) There's a zombie-style holdout with a day/night cycle where hordes of Zerg-infested humans rush your central position after the sun sets. You rob trains in one mission. I could sit here all day describing unique mission scenarios, but let it suffice that they keep things consistently interesting. It doesn't hurt that there's a shocking number of units and art assets unique to the campaign that you'll never see in multiplayer. It makes the campaign feel shiny and new, all the way through.

 This short Protoss campaign makes for a nice diversion from the Terran action.
This short Protoss campaign makes for a nice diversion from the Terran action.

The stuff you do between missions is great, too. You roam around Raynor's ship the Hyperion, chatting with the misfits you've brought to your cause, and I think this is where the focus on a single faction really pays off. There's more here--more depth of character, more believable pathos, more surprise twists--than I honestly expected out of the story. Raynor's a tortured guy, and that comes across in frequent real-time cinematics that are interspersed between each mission. This is the StarCraft universe seen from a close-up view you never got during the breakneck pace of the first game, from barroom fights with Raynor's armored ex-con buddy Tychus to news reports spewing Emperor Mengsk's propaganda. Blizzard's ludicrously detailed CG cinematics also pop up now and again, with one particularly poignant flashback to the events of the first game that really stuck with me (and, curiously, made me wish StarCraft Ghost was still in production). The world that's filled in around the missions feels more fully realized than you'd expect from a real-time strategy game like this. StarCraft may not be the most original piece of fiction ever, but it's sure a lot of fun to watch it play out.

This downtime between missions also gives you the chance to customize your campaign experience, through a huge number of possible persistent upgrades. Every unit you deploy has a couple of specific bonuses you can purchase that makes them tougher or more capable in a fight, and there are also two research trees you fund with Zerg and Protoss samples collected during missions. Every tier of these trees offers two really significant bonuses, but you can only choose one of them, so you're always making tradeoffs that affect how your strategies in subsequent missions will play out. Do you want access to a massive transport that can move your entire army around the map, or a robotic panther with an electrical area of effect attack? Do you want a building that can mind-control any Zerg unit, or another one that dramatically slows down all Zerg units? It's a great way to give you an extra level of control over your strategy, and it makes you feel like you're really building up a rough-and-ready army as you gallivant around the galaxy. That's even reflected in the window dressing as you move through the Hyperion; the neat view of the ship's huge hangar that fills up with new additions to your forces as you acquire them, and gives you a look out the window at the planet you're currently orbiting, is a nice touch.

 Blizzard has really amped up its cinematic storytelling here.
Blizzard has really amped up its cinematic storytelling here.

With its wide range of difficulty levels, Wings of Liberty's campaign is accessible to just about anyone. The multiplayer, by its nature, is less so. But the newly redesigned Battle.net service makes a valiant effort to ease new players into what's admittedly a very complex game. There's a really useful series of tough tiered challenge levels that teach you the basics on a per-faction basis, from which units counter which other units to how to micromanage your troops and how to rely on hotkeys to streamline your game. You can play AI opponents on multiple difficulty levels and with friends, to practice and learn before you get online. And once you do, you get 50 unranked matches that don't go on your permanent record in which to practice against other random players. Once you're ready to play for real, there's an elaborate five-tier league system that matches you to players of similar skill, based on your performance in five placement matches.

Depending on how those random matches go, you might place a little too high or too low on the ladder before your subsequent performance equalizes and you settle into the appropriate level. You may lose at first, but that's how you learn. StarCraft II is such an intricate game that the potential for further developing your skills is almost endless, and with a little time the ladder system will put you in the mix with others who are working on a similar skill level. The days of Brood War's Wild West online play are pretty much over. StarCraft II is a sometimes unforgiving but immensely rewarding online experience, and I think the new Battle.net helps make it more the latter than the former.

 All the new Battle.net features make it easy to track stats and get games going.
All the new Battle.net features make it easy to track stats and get games going.

That tiered matchmaking system is the critical piece of the online puzzle, but all the social features wrapped around it are also incredibly well integrated. Your friends list is accessible at any time and you can even pop up little IM-style chat windows with any other player while you're in the middle of a campaign or multiplayer game. (Though, if you're playing multiplayer, what are you doing chatting?) The game has a non-invasive Facebook Connect feature that lets you easily get people you know onto your friends list, and once they're on the list, it's easy to get people into parties and start multiplayer matches. There's a shocking amount of data available through the profile view, showing everything from which of the game's dozens of achievements a player has earned to intensive breakdowns of every online match they've ever played. I'm talking about timecoded build orders, detailed economy graphs, the works--more data than you'd ever want to see, really, unless you're the sort of person who's worried about streamlining your openers or increasing your "actions per minute." But if you are that person, this sort of thing is invaluable. Everything on this new Battle.net is smartly connected and streamlined in the ways you'd expect out of an online service that's contemporary with other excellent platforms like Steam and Xbox Live.

StarCraft II expertly walks the line between remaining faithful to its design legacy and evolving everything about itself that can evolve without fundamentally changing what the game is. I'm so enamored with it that this review is now officially getting in the way of playing more of it, so I'll just say in closing that anyone with even a passing interest in real-time strategy games should absolutely give Wings of Liberty a look. There's a good reason the original StarCraft persisted for over a decade, and its sequel is fully equipped to pick up the torch and carry on for at least as long.

Brad Shoemaker on Google+

443 Comments

Avatar image for capthavic
capthavic

164

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

Edited By capthavic

Starcraft 2 is a glorious example of the right way to make a sequel.
Avatar image for rincewind
Rincewind

417

Forum Posts

258

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By Rincewind

Nice review.

Avatar image for wolvodin
Wolvodin

21

Forum Posts

9

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Wolvodin

So I'm not a huge RTS fan.  I'm certainly not very good at any of them.  I played Starcraft every now and then with my friends simply to hang out, not because I really like the original.  Well they convinced me to get this one.  Let me say that the single player campaign is AMAZING!!!   
 
It's definitely designed so someone like me who isn't a natural at RTS games can get into it and understand what needs to be done.  The missions get just a little more difficult with each new one without the difficulty jumping up all kinds of crazy as I've found previous RTS games to do including the original Starcraft and Warcraft 3.   
  
I haven't actually played ranked multiplayer cuz I'm afraid. I played a couple custom games with my friends and got pretty much owned.  But seriously the single player alone has made it a worthwhile purchase.

Avatar image for benderunit22
benderunit22

1978

Forum Posts

9567

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

Edited By benderunit22

Loving the game so far. The campaign is so well designed and varied, the pace is excellent and the universe fleshed out. Having the player upgrade units to fit his play-style is fantastic, the non-linear progression gives some flexibility and exploring the ship is fun. Also digging the load of achievements, the multiplayer is outstanding with easy match-making, good tutorials and already a bunch of custom maps.
 
The only stuff I don't like is part of Battle.net 2.0 like the lack of chat rooms (coming) and cross-realm play as well as incorporated tournament options.

Avatar image for tuckertime
Tuckertime

47

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Tuckertime

multiplayer is great but am I the only person who finds the story anything but compelling?

Avatar image for foggel
foggel

2780

Forum Posts

531

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By foggel

gg

Avatar image for ajamafalous
ajamafalous

13992

Forum Posts

905

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Edited By ajamafalous

Man, Brad can't catch a break. 
 
 
Comments on this review are making me cry.

Avatar image for rabidwombat
rabidwombat

101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By rabidwombat

Being a fanboy cuts both ways.  If Starcraft 2 hadn't lived up to the expectations (which there were a lot of, after 12 years), he would have been pissed, and that would come out in the review. 
 
All of the Starcraft fanboys at my work were surprised at how much they liked this game.  Made me go out and get it, and now I agree too.

Avatar image for singular
singular

2559

Forum Posts

359

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By singular

Great review.
Avatar image for ouvintes
ouvintes

87

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By ouvintes

Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to play it yet. I was about to buy it digitally, day one. But then I found the multiplayer is region locked, wich meant I would have to download a Latin America-specific file, with only portuguese and spanish as options for the laguage. Now, I can appreciate Blizzard taking their time and money to localize the game, but, as with movies and other media, I like my games in their original language. A space marine talking portuguese would sound really bad, no matter how good the voice actors are. I don't understand why the english version couldn't be available everywhere. Anyway, this is a good review but I still wish the concerns of the community towards this game had been better adressed

Avatar image for willy105
Willy105

4959

Forum Posts

14729

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 1

Edited By Willy105
@ajamafalous said:
" Man, Brad can't catch a break.   Comments on this review are making me cry. "
Totally.
Avatar image for markwahlberg
MarkWahlberg

4713

Forum Posts

3782

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By MarkWahlberg

nerd.

Avatar image for crono
Crono

2762

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 6

Edited By Crono
@TwoLines said:
" Guys! People would like journalists that DON'T like RTS's to review an RTS. Don't you get it? That's what un-biased means! Um.. y-yeah!  Brad became a "fanboy" of the game after playing the beta. So he became a big fan of the game- after he played it and realised how good it was. It's like saying that someone that gave a game 5 stars is a fanboy, and shouldn't have reviewed this game. Ridiculous.Great review Brad, the game's as awesome as I thought it would be. "
This.
 
I mean seriously, before Brad played the beta, how often did you hear him talk about StarCraft at all?  Yeah, he isn't some fanboy with deeply rooted interest in the game - his interest piqued from the beta and the beta was a huge reflection of what the retail product ended up being.  Really, quite honestly, these fanboy attacks are rather baseless.
Avatar image for arbitrarywater
ArbitraryWater

16104

Forum Posts

5585

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 66

Edited By ArbitraryWater

Expected? Certainly. Deserved? Probably.

Avatar image for zol
Zol

64

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Zol

I guess Brad never played Supreme Commander 2 or Dawn of War 2 which have both much better gameplay, visuals and animations. 
 
Sure, the campaign mode in Starcraft 2 is the best but actual gameplay is quite primitive and decrepit.

Avatar image for scrumdidlyumptious
Scrumdidlyumptious

1679

Forum Posts

4386

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I didn't realize this game was coming out until the day before release because I hadn't followed the hype cycle and I wasn't really excited about it, but I made an impulse buy because I just wanted to try a Starcraft game so I'd like to think I have an "unbiased" opinion. Based on the time I've played this game since release, I can vouch for Brad's review. It's a good game and I'm a new Starcraft convert. The campaign is enjoyable and easily accessible (There is still a good level of challenge, though maybe I don't understand enough of the game mechanics to make a judgment on the difficulty yet). The adventure gamey bits were really enjoyable for me and I really like the upgrade system. Multiplayer is hard, but fun as well. Overall a purely fun game (even for someone who isn't an RTS player) with an extremely high level of polish and solid gameplay. I'd say that warrants a 5/5. 
 
I hate how people over complicate arbitrary rating systems. A 1 means don't buy, 2 means it's a bad game, 3 means it's alright, 4 means it's a good game, and 5 means it's an excellent game. That's all there is to it. Reviews shouldn't be treated like exam percentages and compared with other students to determine which percentile they're in.

Avatar image for rsistnce
RsistncE

4498

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RsistncE
@Meowshi said:
" @RsistncE said:
" @Turambar:  No, no, I was criticizing those comments saying that his fanboyism DIDN'T get in the way of him writing the review. My bad if I typed it in a way that wasn't easy to understand. "
Damn, that was the only part of your post that made me think you weren't just whining.  Then you just come and shatter my dreams.   "
Damn, your post makes me think you're just too busy sucking on Brad's dick to realize some of the terribly stupid reasons he uses to back up Blizzard recycling a 12 year old game.
Avatar image for dsd21
dsd21

144

Forum Posts

21

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dsd21

Brad is biased, but I totally agree (guess that makes me biased too). This game is fantastic. For "core" gamers and casuals alike, pick this up and you'll have your fun.

Avatar image for scenium
Scenium

19

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Scenium

Great Review by Brad! And I agree with Him all the way. I had high hopes for StarCraft 2 but I never thought it would be this FUN! Especially the Campaign, the other RTS game developers have some stepping up to do when it comes to how they involve You in the story.

Avatar image for scenium
Scenium

19

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Scenium
@ajamafalous said:
" Man, Brad can't catch a break.   Comments on this review are making me cry. "
 
Yeah, what's wrong with people?
Avatar image for thatfrood
thatfrood

3472

Forum Posts

179

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 15

Edited By thatfrood
@Zol said:
" I guess Brad never played Supreme Commander 2 or Dawn of War 2 which have both much better gameplay, visuals and animations.  Sure, the campaign mode in Starcraft 2 is the best but actual gameplay is quite primitive and decrepit. "
This is a statement that you have no business making.
I'm sorry that an RTS came out that is popular, I'm sorry that you now want to be the "cool" RTS player that really "knows" the genre. I guess you want someone to recognize that you're actually a really great RTS player and you feel bad about losing in Starcraft because it's for noobs.
You're wrong about the gameplay. You know how I know? Because there is always room for improvement in Starcraft. Tic Tac Toe is primitive, eventually everyone knows how to play. With Starcraft you can always be better.
That's also the case with SupCom and Dawn of War, I've played both, I play loads of strategy games. I've preordered RUSE and own every single AOE and Red Alert.
And despite all that, Starcraft 2 is still incredibly fun for me. I love playing it. That's all I know and that's all I really care about, the fact that I can keep improving, get better. The games are satisfying and you're being a shithead.
Avatar image for hungub
HunGub

2

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By HunGub

Totally gonna buy this :P

Avatar image for michaelbach
MichaelBach

975

Forum Posts

75

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By MichaelBach

I think this game should get a Video Review. Great review, I am not finished with the game yet, but so far I agree 100% Just played my first online match and to mu surprise actually one after an hour. Good to see you not always get slaughtered online!

Avatar image for krrutch
Krrutch

153

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Krrutch
@Crono said:
" @TwoLines said:
" Guys! People would like journalists that DON'T like RTS's to review an RTS. Don't you get it? That's what un-biased means! Um.. y-yeah!  Brad became a "fanboy" of the game after playing the beta. So he became a big fan of the game- after he played it and realised how good it was. It's like saying that someone that gave a game 5 stars is a fanboy, and shouldn't have reviewed this game. Ridiculous.Great review Brad, the game's as awesome as I thought it would be. "
This.  I mean seriously, before Brad played the beta, how often did you hear him talk about StarCraft at all?  Yeah, he isn't some fanboy with deeply rooted interest in the game - his interest piqued from the beta and the beta was a huge reflection of what the retail product ended up being.  Really, quite honestly, these fanboy attacks are rather baseless. "
Doubly this.
Avatar image for korosuzo
Korosuzo

231

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By Korosuzo
@zacharai said:
" Being a fanboy cuts both ways.  If Starcraft 2 hadn't lived up to the expectations (which there were a lot of, after 12 years), he would have been pissed, and that would come out in the review.  All of the Starcraft fanboys at my work were surprised at how much they liked this game.  Made me go out and get it, and now I agree too. "
Agree completely.  I was very hesitant about how this would play out even after playing the Beta which I enjoyed but didn't spend much time with.  The single player has blown me away and the Battlenet 2.0 additions have impressed me with the wealth of stats and achievements.  I was happily surprised with the game and it's the only PC game that I care to play for at least the next 6 months if not longer.
Avatar image for 234rqsd2323d2
234r2we232

3175

Forum Posts

2007

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 16

Edited By 234r2we232
@Tintelpe said:
" @sofacitysweetheart said:
" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @ptys said:

" Does fives stars mean that it stands up to games like Mass Effect, Red Dead and Uncharted, or does it mean as far as RTS goes, this is the best you can get? "

I'm pretty sure most game can stand up to Red Dead. "
 Wrong.    But yes, Starcraft II absolutely stands up to those games. GOTY contender. "
My opinion is no less correct than yours. "
What? My opinion? Go look at sales figures and any number of reviews, champ.  Thanks for playing, though. "
Champ? Oh, so it's about reviews and sales, the true mark of a quality game. Well then, we must be talking about MW2, a game that beats all of those. thx. "
Don't be an idiot.  Yes, if a game outsells almost everything and is universally praised by reviewers it's an amazing game. "
I'm an idiot because I don't agree with you? Let's see. So, if what you're saying is true, by that logic... Modern Warfare 2 is a far superior game then all those mentioned. Thus, liking those inferior games makes you an idiot and you should be outcast by your peers for just talking about another entry into this "video game" genre. Nice.
Avatar image for ebritt
ebritt

149

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By ebritt

So a great, critically acclaimed game with an average user rating of 4.7 and people hate on brad for saying its pretty good. 
 
I don't think I will ever understand the internet.

Avatar image for stingingvelvet
StingingVelvet

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By StingingVelvet
@sofacitysweetheart said:
" @Tintelpe said:
" @sofacitysweetheart said:
" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @ptys said:

" Does fives stars mean that it stands up to games like Mass Effect, Red Dead and Uncharted, or does it mean as far as RTS goes, this is the best you can get? "

I'm pretty sure most game can stand up to Red Dead. "
 Wrong.    But yes, Starcraft II absolutely stands up to those games. GOTY contender. "
My opinion is no less correct than yours. "
What? My opinion? Go look at sales figures and any number of reviews, champ.  Thanks for playing, though. "
Champ? Oh, so it's about reviews and sales, the true mark of a quality game. Well then, we must be talking about MW2, a game that beats all of those. thx. "
Don't be an idiot.  Yes, if a game outsells almost everything and is universally praised by reviewers it's an amazing game. "
I'm an idiot because I don't agree with you? Let's see. So, if what you're saying is true, by that logic... Modern Warfare 2 is a far superior game then all those mentioned. Thus, liking those inferior games makes you an idiot and you should be outcast by your peers for just talking about another entry into this "video game" genre. Nice. "
Also by his logic Titanic is the best movie ever made... or was until Avatar, which is now the best movie ever made.
 
Please...
Avatar image for emem
emem

2063

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By emem

Hi,
is there a video review still in the making or is it just the written review this time?
 
Usually I'm more of a Quakeworld (FPS) kinda guy, always have been.. I played the first Starcraft back then, but never felt like getting into the multiplayer.
I am 3/4 through the singleplayer campaign and it makes me want to play "more". That's probably the biggest compliment I can give for any game.
 
And like most of the time your review is pretty much spot on with what I am thinking, Mr. Brad, Sir.
So.. nicely done.
 
Cheers

Avatar image for dethfish
dethfish

3899

Forum Posts

2623

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 14

Edited By dethfish
@Crono said:
" @TwoLines said:
" Guys! People would like journalists that DON'T like RTS's to review an RTS. Don't you get it? That's what un-biased means! Um.. y-yeah!  Brad became a "fanboy" of the game after playing the beta. So he became a big fan of the game- after he played it and realised how good it was. It's like saying that someone that gave a game 5 stars is a fanboy, and shouldn't have reviewed this game. Ridiculous.Great review Brad, the game's as awesome as I thought it would be. "
This.  I mean seriously, before Brad played the beta, how often did you hear him talk about StarCraft at all?  Yeah, he isn't some fanboy with deeply rooted interest in the game - his interest piqued from the beta and the beta was a huge reflection of what the retail product ended up being.  Really, quite honestly, these fanboy attacks are rather baseless. "
Yeah, this is basically what I was going to say.
Avatar image for claude
Claude

16672

Forum Posts

1047

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 18

Edited By Claude

I have two stars worth of interest in this game.

Avatar image for brackynews
Brackynews

4385

Forum Posts

27681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 48

Edited By Brackynews

 Unfettered Knowledge in 3-D, bitches!
 Unfettered Knowledge in 3-D, bitches!
Thanks Brad!  Good luck on your tier climbing. Hopefully you don't have to run FRAPS again. :) 
 
I have four stars worth of interest in the single player.  
Wish they sold it separately for $30. What kind of future is digital delivery giving us, huh??  Bollocks. 

Maybe I should just reinstall Alpha Centauri.
Avatar image for michaelbach
MichaelBach

975

Forum Posts

75

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By MichaelBach
@Brackynews: Here in Mexico the game is 299 pesos (25 Bucks) So just take a road trip to Tijuana ;)
Avatar image for marcusoflycia
MarcusOfLycia

96

Forum Posts

415

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By MarcusOfLycia

Great review, fantastic game, and awful comments.

Avatar image for supersecretagenda
SuperSecretAgenda

689

Forum Posts

172

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ryanwho said:
" "I could stay here all day listing the unique scenarios" gave me a laugh. Cus he named about 5 out of 7 total. "
There's...quite a number of unique scenarios. Sure, maybe they're not all that different, but at least they mix things up a bit, compared to SC1 where it was just 'Go here, blow everything up, maybe blow an objective up' with very little variety.
Avatar image for thecheese33
TheCheese33

399

Forum Posts

1246

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

Edited By TheCheese33

Why are people giving Brad the third degree here? I HATED the first StarCraft, but somehow StarCraft II pulled me in and I love every cubic centimeter of it. In fact, I don't think I'll need to buy another game for at least two years, when the expansion comes out.

Avatar image for xxxxxxxrick
xxxxxxxrick

102

Forum Posts

1216

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 2

Edited By xxxxxxxrick

 @Brad that's a little unfair. All things are subjective, I agree. And no, my viewpoint is not important. Yours is because some people are going to spend their hardearned cash based on your reviews. All I'm saying is that it can't hurt to step back, let the game sink in more. The lastest innovating step in the RTS genre has been the big scale battles (Supreme Commander). Even though Blizzard has big piles of cash and the game has been in devellopment for years, it's very muc 'old school' and doesn't  bring anything new to the table. I'm not saying that's a bad thing because what is does it does well, but some people like new stuff. Just think about it. Ok?    

Avatar image for jaketaylor
jaketaylor

365

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jaketaylor
@Krrutch said:
" @Crono said:
" @TwoLines said:
" Guys! People would like journalists that DON'T like RTS's to review an RTS. Don't you get it? That's what un-biased means! Um.. y-yeah!  Brad became a "fanboy" of the game after playing the beta. So he became a big fan of the game- after he played it and realised how good it was. It's like saying that someone that gave a game 5 stars is a fanboy, and shouldn't have reviewed this game. Ridiculous.Great review Brad, the game's as awesome as I thought it would be. "
This.  I mean seriously, before Brad played the beta, how often did you hear him talk about StarCraft at all?  Yeah, he isn't some fanboy with deeply rooted interest in the game - his interest piqued from the beta and the beta was a huge reflection of what the retail product ended up being.  Really, quite honestly, these fanboy attacks are rather baseless. "
Doubly this. "
Yeah. This.
Avatar image for karatekid
KarateKid

67

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By KarateKid

I've gotta say this review created a lot of discussion. I think the fact that it did speaks for the impact of the game.  
 
I enjoyed the review a great deal, it was well thought out and well written, even though as a none native English speaker I actually had to find the dictionary for some of the words. 
As far as public opinion and discussion goes, I think giving the game anything less then 5 stars would be doing it and everyone a disservice. Because it is a great game, not just for an RTS, but for a game in general. 
 
Great review Brad, hope you will keep the so far great SC2 coverage going.

Avatar image for maddprodigy
MaddProdigy

1074

Forum Posts

178

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By MaddProdigy
@ryanwho:  Dude did you play a different campaign than Brad, myself, and everyone else I've talked to whose played that game? Cause math isn't everyone's strong suit but uh...7 is a tad on the low side.
Avatar image for foolishchaos
FoolishChaos

515

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By FoolishChaos
@sofacitysweetheart said:
" @Tintelpe said:
" @sofacitysweetheart said:
" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @ptys said:

" Does fives stars mean that it stands up to games like Mass Effect, Red Dead and Uncharted, or does it mean as far as RTS goes, this is the best you can get? "

I'm pretty sure most game can stand up to Red Dead. "
 Wrong.    But yes, Starcraft II absolutely stands up to those games. GOTY contender. "
My opinion is no less correct than yours. "
What? My opinion? Go look at sales figures and any number of reviews, champ.  Thanks for playing, though. "
Champ? Oh, so it's about reviews and sales, the true mark of a quality game. Well then, we must be talking about MW2, a game that beats all of those. thx. "
Don't be an idiot.  Yes, if a game outsells almost everything and is universally praised by reviewers it's an amazing game. "
I'm an idiot because I don't agree with you? Let's see. So, if what you're saying is true, by that logic... Modern Warfare 2 is a far superior game then all those mentioned. Thus, liking those inferior games makes you an idiot and you should be outcast by your peers for just talking about another entry into this "video game" genre. Nice. "
He is NOT saying that these games follow some sort of numeric scale which states that the higher you are on this graph, the better you are. He is SAYING that if you are high on this graph, then there is a very small chance that the game itself is not amazing. Not being your cup of tea != not amazing. 
Avatar image for ockman
Ockman

227

Forum Posts

9

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Ockman

I have nothing really against Brad's review, I just really didn't care to read his review, because before it was even posted, I knew it was going to get 5/5. I already knew Brad's feelings on the game long before this review was posted. That's mainly why I would've been more interested in reading a review from one of the others in the Giantbomb crew. I remember hearing during the TNT, Jeff had been playing the game some, and I don't think he really play the beta much like myself. I would've been much more interested in hearing Jeff's opinion on the game, since he'd be approaching it with fresh eyes,  rather than Brad, who we already knew ever since the beta has been into this game.

Avatar image for chris_woods
Chris_Woods

48

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Chris_Woods
@sofacitysweetheart:  
Haha, dude.  What is wrong with you?  MW2 is an amazing game as well.
Avatar image for fjordson
fjordson

2571

Forum Posts

430

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By fjordson
@StingingVelvet said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @Tintelpe said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:
" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @Fjordson said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @ptys said:

" Does fives stars mean that it stands up to games like Mass Effect, Red Dead and Uncharted, or does it mean as far as RTS goes, this is the best you can get? "

I'm pretty sure most game can stand up to Red Dead. "
 Wrong.    But yes, Starcraft II absolutely stands up to those games. GOTY contender. "
My opinion is no less correct than yours. "
What? My opinion? Go look at sales figures and any number of reviews, champ.  Thanks for playing, though. "
Champ? Oh, so it's about reviews and sales, the true mark of a quality game. Well then, we must be talking about MW2, a game that beats all of those. thx. "
Don't be an idiot.  Yes, if a game outsells almost everything and is universally praised by reviewers it's an amazing game. "
I'm an idiot because I don't agree with you? Let's see. So, if what you're saying is true, by that logic... Modern Warfare 2 is a far superior game then all those mentioned. Thus, liking those inferior games makes you an idiot and you should be outcast by your peers for just talking about another entry into this "video game" genre. Nice. "
Also by his logic Titanic is the best movie ever made... or was until Avatar, which is now the best movie ever made.  Please... "
Wrong. Avatar isn't even remotely close to being as critically acclaimed as TONS and TONS of movies. Same goes for Titanic. Also, I don't get the MW 2 reference. As far as reviews go, it wasn't received as well as Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, or Uncharted 2. It has a lower Metacritic score than all three games. Also, Mass Effect 2 and Uncharted 2 aren't able to enjoy the boost in sales that MW 2 gains from its multiplatform status, and RDR has been on the market for a considerably smaller amount of time than MW 2. Call of Duty also has a large set of previous games in the franchise that helps increase its profile when it comes to the average buyer.
 
I'm not saying any of them would outsell MW 2 in any circumstance, but I was not talking about a strict numeric order of sales. There are so many factors when it comes to that, it would be a colossally stupid way to pass judgment on the merit of games. You're misconstruing my original point, which was simply that games that a lot of people buy and a lot of people love are usually pretty good.
 
And this whole criticism of Brad being a "fanboy" is ludicrous. People whine when someone with an inherent negative feeling towards a genre reviews it, thus usually giving a lower score because of that natural dislike. With SC II, they gave it to someone who clearly understands Starcraft the most, and who would invest an equally substantial amount of time into single-player and multiplayer. Yet now other people are complaining about that. This is another one of those examples that illustrates how futile it is to try and please the public as any sort of entertainment critic.
Avatar image for stinky
stinky

1564

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By stinky

 
Dear Brad,
You didn't write the review i wanted to hear. I kindly request that you rewrite this review until it echoes my own opinions 
instead of your own. 
 
Now i will write a list of games i that no one cares about in defense, Chu Chu's Rocket, Alabama Breakout, 
and The Deer Hunter.

Avatar image for meatsim
MeatSim

11201

Forum Posts

150

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 23

Edited By MeatSim

Alright I will bite still not a huge intrest in multiplayer but the single player sounds good enough for a full price purchase for me.

Avatar image for omurra
Omurra

21

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Omurra

I can't believe how well they did with the campaign. It really does make up for the fact that it's just the Terran campaign at launch.

Avatar image for finmon
finmon

141

Forum Posts

1725

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 3

Edited By finmon

If I wait 3 or 4 months to get this, will I just get destroyed online?  
Actually scratch that, it sounds like I'd be demolished initially regardless of when I start

Avatar image for drebin_893
Drebin_893

3332

Forum Posts

1124

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Edited By Drebin_893

Just a really, really good review.