Something went wrong. Try again later
    Follow

    StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty

    Game » consists of 10 releases. Released Jul 27, 2010

    The first chapter in the StarCraft II trilogy focuses on the struggles of the Terran race, as seen through the eyes of Commander Jim Raynor, leader of the rebel group Raynor's Raiders.

    How modular are the graphics?

    Avatar image for deactivated-6281db536cb1d
    deactivated-6281db536cb1d

    928

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    I gotta admit it, Starcraft II is starting to beckon to me. I haven't played an RTS in a looong long time, and I do have fond memories of the first Starcraft.

    The issue, is that my laptop sucks. It doesn't super suck, but its a pretty junky integrated gfx card, which requires me to keep a lot of visual settings on low.

    For example, I can play Mount and Blade with little trouble, but I need the graphics to be just a bit under the medium range.

    Starcraft, though, looks pretty technically involving. I'm worried that it wouldn't even work on my system.

    So my question is, how well do the gfx scale down in Starcraft? Would it be playable at a lower level?

    Avatar image for spoonman671
    Spoonman671

    5874

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #2  Edited By Spoonman671

    I can't tell you that the game will definitely perform adequately for you, but I can tell you that Starcraft 2 does scale pretty damn well.

    Avatar image for raikohblade
    RaikohBlade

    603

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #3  Edited By RaikohBlade

    Yeah, you'll be able to run it on the lowest settings. It won't look too nice, though.

    Avatar image for ryno9881
    ryno9881

    652

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #4  Edited By ryno9881

    Yeah, SC2 is optimized really well and I think most computers that have come out in the past 5-8 years can run it fine.

    Avatar image for deactivated-6281db536cb1d
    deactivated-6281db536cb1d

    928

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    Alright I'll probably give it a shot then.

    Thanks guys.

    Avatar image for spoonman671
    Spoonman671

    5874

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #6  Edited By Spoonman671
    @allworkandlowpay: Oh, I just remembered that I just read on GameInformer that Blizzard is releasing some kind of trial version of Starcraft 2.  You might want to look into that so you can see how it runs before purchasing.
    Avatar image for brainspecialist
    BrainSpecialist

    574

    Forum Posts

    1613

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #7  Edited By BrainSpecialist
    @allworkandlowpay: Starcraft works well with slower computers, at which point the graphics start to look like WoW.
    Avatar image for deactivated-5f17af3f88819
    deactivated-5f17af3f88819

    605

    Forum Posts

    17

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 3

    I play on low setting even though I can run it on high. Idk, I just like the low setting better. It is about the game not graphics, man.

    Avatar image for green_incarnate
    Green_Incarnate

    1789

    Forum Posts

    124

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 7

    #9  Edited By Green_Incarnate

    I saw someone was playing this game on the shitty computers at my school in the library once.

    Avatar image for salad10203
    salad10203

    684

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #10  Edited By salad10203

    THere are like a thousand benchmarks out there, but short version: if you have 4 cores, then you are fine.

    Avatar image for aus_azn
    Aus_azn

    2272

    Forum Posts

    16

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #11  Edited By Aus_azn
    https://us.battle.net/account/sc2/starter-edition/
     
    @Spoonman671 said:

    @allworkandlowpay: Oh, I just remembered that I just read on GameInformer that Blizzard is releasing some kind of trial version of Starcraft 2.  You might want to look into that so you can see how it runs before purchasing.

    That's the link to this. It's free, so you might as well just give it a shot.
    Avatar image for tobbrobb
    TobbRobb

    6616

    Forum Posts

    49

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 13

    #12  Edited By TobbRobb

    There is a LOT of difference between ultra settings and lowest, you should be able to run it. And there is a lot of options of what you want to lower or increase.

    Avatar image for kermity
    Kermity

    78

    Forum Posts

    1303

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 6

    #13  Edited By Kermity

    Try the free version mentioned earlier and judge for yourself.  I tried the demo on my crappy laptop and decided to hold off until I got a decent computer that can run it above the lowest settings.  The game is looks waaay better and is much more enjoyable to me now that it's installed on my desktop.
    Avatar image for csl316
    csl316

    17001

    Forum Posts

    765

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 10

    #14  Edited By csl316

    My old laptop only ran it on lowest settings, and even though the detail was mostly gone, everything ran quite smoothly. The game's perfectly playable on low settings, and the simplicity might even be a benefit at times.

    Now I play on ultra, but it's not like I shudder to my old laptop days.

    Avatar image for sreya92
    sreya92

    229

    Forum Posts

    85

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 0

    #15  Edited By sreya92

    I run it on low on my computer and honestly it's the only way i can play. I tried playing on medium the other day on someone's desktop and it's just too distracting. Too much fancy stuff going on screen for me to concentrate haha

    Avatar image for ben_h
    Ben_H

    4812

    Forum Posts

    1628

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #16  Edited By Ben_H

    It looks fine on low.  I can run it on ultra but I find it too distracting.  Instead I compromise and run it on low with ultra textures.  It looks really cool and cartoony (especially drones and corrupters) and cloaked units are easier to see.

    Avatar image for mordeaniischaos
    MordeaniisChaos

    5904

    Forum Posts

    -1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 5

    User Lists: 5

    #17  Edited By MordeaniisChaos

    @BrainSpecialist said:

    @allworkandlowpay: Starcraft works well with slower computers, at which point the graphics start to look like WoW.

    It goes much lower than WoW does, honestly.

    Avatar image for killboyy777
    Killboyy777

    117

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #18  Edited By Killboyy777

    if you get serious about sc2. you'll probably only want to play on the lowest settings. less distracting that way

    Avatar image for andrewb
    AndrewB

    7816

    Forum Posts

    82

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 16

    #19  Edited By AndrewB

    It scales, but it looks horrid in the process. I'm not joking when I say the graphics feel similar to the original Starcraft with a resolution boost. Even then, it's a bit sluggish on my 9400m. The biggest problem is that I have to compare performance with my desktop computer, which can run it maxed out at a solid framerate. It's hard to step down after that.

    Avatar image for ntm
    NTM

    12222

    Forum Posts

    38

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #20  Edited By NTM

    If your laptop isn't a gaming laptop, and it's more than a two years old, don't get it. Personally, I'm trying to remember if I even tried it on my own laptop, now that I think about it, I don't think I did. I may have to now.

    Avatar image for dg991
    DG991

    1435

    Forum Posts

    6

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #21  Edited By DG991

    @salad10203: It doesn't even take advantage of 4 cores, only 2. Or at least that was how it was on release.

    They did that to make it work on the lowest of computers.

    Avatar image for amir90
    amir90

    2243

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 0

    #22  Edited By amir90

    I think it looks fine on low, high resolution. 
     
    BUt I am able to play it on max,well not as well on 200 vs 200 armies, but who does?

    Avatar image for amomjc
    amomjc

    978

    Forum Posts

    80

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 0

    Avatar image for enchantedecho
    EnchantedEcho

    810

    Forum Posts

    659

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 17

    User Lists: 6

    #24  Edited By EnchantedEcho

    go low or go home

    This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.