Starcraft!

[Al B. Sure!]

The custom scenarios take time to develop. Some of the ones (like Parasite) are still in development but are fantastic games to play even before v1.0. Seriously, try Parasite. You'll be hooked.

Command and Conquer Generals was a terrible game. The only thing 'cool' about it (which was actually somewhat disturbing, actually), was that you could play as Al-Qaeda. It was ridiculous to have units like technicals, car bombers, hijackers, insurgents, protesters, IED's, etc. If you want to play terrorist, you're probably a douche. No wonder Sava likes that game.


As for another good RTS.... Company of Heroes is great as well.

[Guynemer]

Would someone with a more jaundiced eye for games (ie, Asher or Sava) recommend this for a player who is rather lukewarm towards RTS as a genre, but can get interested with certain quirks or twists in the formula? (ie, someone who quite enjoys a spot of RON or AOE once in a blue moon)

[Al B. Sure!]

I already explained, Guy... the beauty of Starcraft is the user-created multiplayer content which is not always RTS. In the past day, I've played Parasite which is a game I don't know what the genre would be (the game Clue? maybe?), a Double Dragon-style side scroller, a 1st person shooter, chess, an RPG, etc. It will take a while before the user-created content gets very good though.

However, if you're a single-player kind of guy, I don't know. The campaign is designed with stuff to keep it interesting but the game really isn't deep or long enough to warrant a purchase just for the single-player. The multiplayer is the real reason to want Starcraft. But be warned, ranked games are extremely competitive, rush-heavy, and cheese-heavy. I actually kind of get disgusted by some of the cheesy stuff people do. If you're not good at RTS, you won't like playing the normal game mode online.

What exactly do you like in an RTS? RON and AOE were historical and were (along with EE), the most Civ-like of RTS games. So I'm assuming you like something historical with a lot of technologies and stuff. SC isn't like that obviously.

What RTS games have you played? Which have you liked? Disliked? To say you are likewarm to the genre isn't meaningful. The genre is very varied and includes everything from Europa Universalis to Company of Heroes.

[Jon Miller]

I like some RTS, ok with others, Starcraft is awesome.

JM

[Al B. Sure!]

Anyone playing multiplayer? Anyone up for a game?

[Felch]

I liked how Generals did air power. Aircraft were fast and fragile, and would swoop in for a bombing run before returning to base. In the Craft series airpower has always hovered and been kind of goofy.

[Al B. Sure!]

I liked how Generals did air power. Aircraft were fast and fragile, and would swoop in for a bombing run before returning to base. In the Craft series airpower has always hovered and been kind of goofy.

Umm... that's because they're space ships

And Banshees are helicopters while Vikings are V/STOL. I could be wrong but I think you can see downward exhaust on Vikings. Never paid it enough attention though.

Regardless, we have helicopters and V/STOL now so it's not really goofy.

[N35t0r]

I liked how Generals did air power. Aircraft were fast and fragile, and would swoop in for a bombing run before returning to base. In the Craft series airpower has always hovered and been kind of goofy.

Aurora bombers

[vee4473]

I think it's ok. It isn't as evolved as you might expect for 10-12 years later. It's fun, the campaign has a new role play type of thing going on. Uses the same camera as Warcraft 3. Swapped a few old units for new ones and completely eliminated some favorites from mulitplayer.

To me anyway, it just felt like (in terms of the gameplay) I was still playing SC1. Meaning, you don't get the same type of "new game" feeling that you got going from warcraft 2 -3.

But, that isn't a bad thing I guess (why mess with the formula?). However, it just feels a little gimpy and underwhelming. Kinda like they gave SC1 a shot of graphical steroids (weak steroids) and swapped a unit here or there so it wouldn't be too similar. No really new or interesting gameplay mechanics or elements.

I know i'm probably in the minority feeling this way.

But, hey it's the latest SC, so you gotta play it,right?

[N35t0r]

I just beat the campaign, and will be starting the elective missions I didn't chose.

[Edit:]

I have to say though, brood lords have given me some headaches. Valkyries are horrendously slow, and the only effective option is to have a couple parked wherever you can expect them to strike, which is easy against the AI, but a bit more complicated against other humans..

[Garth Vader]

That's where I am too.

vee I don't think you are in the minority. I kind of feel that way too, but the gameplay is still good and I will get my money worth in the amount of time I spend on it, so I'd rather that then them trying to do a bunch of new crap that ends up sucking.

[vee4473]

That's where I am too.

vee I don't think you are in the minority. I kind of feel that way too, but the gameplay is still good and I will get my money worth in the amount of time I spend on it, so I'd rather that then them trying to do a bunch of new crap that ends up sucking.

I hear ya, I think i've already gotten a decent ride from the multiplayer elements. Got a little burnt out, but I will jump back in.

I guess I just feel like the release of this game in it's current state wasn't even really neccessary. Meaning, the amount of fun it dishes out can be had with firing up SC1.

In other words, I don't fire up SC2 and think "Damn, this is way better than Sc1!!, it's about time!". I think "Yeah this is fun, but so was SC1 and I could just as easily be having fun with that.".

Oh well.

Edit: As an analogy, it sorta feels like if Civ 5 released with the only changes being the UU's for each civ, detailed the visuals a bit more and called it a new game. I don't know. You have a point that changing the basic formula can mean disaster, but having token changes isn't much better.

[Adagio]

I haven't played the first starcraft game (except for like 30 minutes when it was newly released)

I have only played campaign in starcraft 2 and I didn't like it at all. I don't like SP games where the AI is non-existent, unfortunately that's how it is in starcraft 2 all the way through the campaign. I definitely prefer an AI that plays by the same rules as the human
I didn't finish the campaign and I'm not going to. As soon as I reached the mission where that guy in that fat blue costume got access to that HUGE unbeatable weapon, the campaign really went downhill

I'm not into MP, so I didn't try that...

The only positive thing I have to say about the game is the extra tech you can research throughout the game, specially the tech you get from the aliens where you have to decide between two good techs

So did anyone actually play it? I want to know if there are many stupid missions where you have no base, can't build stuff but need to run around just with a handfull of guys to fulfill some tasks - I don't like these at all.

I feel the same about this, and in my opinion there was too many of these... but then IMHO 1 is too many... I didn't count how many there was

[onodera]

I'm quite far into the campaign so far, and I'm annoyed by three things.
1) The gimmicky missions, like "the floor is lava" one. Some of them are fun, like Tosh's prison break one, but most are just annoying.
2) The adaptive storyline. Whatever choice you make, it's the right one. Help the colonists? Great, the good doctor cures them and you part ways. Kill them? Great, the doctor was an infested ***** anyway. I want to make bad/dumb/evil decisions, dammit!
3) The redrawn Kerrigan. Take a look at the original Kerrigan portrait. She's not beautiful at all with her bony narrow face and wide mouth, but still attractive. Now look at the picture Raynor carries with him. Who's this sweet little redhead with a ponytail? If you show it to someone with diabetes, they will die. I know Blizzard's always been liberal with this sort of stuff, changing the way their characters look even between the cinematics and the interface portraits in the same game, but this is too much.

[Al B. Sure!]

onodera, they re-imagined all the human characters except Mengsk. Mengsk is the only one that looks the same between sc1 and sc2.

Raynor used to look like a cracked out Bruce Willis:


Honestly, when I used to play sc1, I was amazed by just how ugly everyone was.

The SCV didn't even look human:


Vulture guy looked bizarre as hell:


The cinematics produced humans like these:




In sc1, due to limitations with graphics (this was 1996, after all) everyone looked like disgusting inbred hillbillies.