Jul 31, 2010
I’ve been reading some blogs lately from various sites, including both personal and game reviewers. Some have mentioned that StarCraft II is the game of 2010, while some think the game is exaggerated. As an avid game player and previous StarCraft fan, I know that some of the negative comments made by the bloggers are… let just say, persuasive and memorable to me. I remember an article called “StarCraft II a disappointment: 7 reasons not to buy it” from SoftSailor, and it outlined the negative aspects of the game.
To me, StarCraft II is an awesome game for four major reasons:
1. Helps Copy-right issue problem
Frankly, there is too much of iso torrent and illegal downloading of games. I’ve known a lot of my friends using Virtual CD space to play StarCraft I. LAN capability is, of course, a great option to enjoy the games with your friends, but that technical part has caused many gamers to copy & illegally play the game. So I think you have to understand that these games are developed by millions of dollars, and with the devotion of high intense graphic artists and intensive creative works by both smart & artistic individuals, as well as game lovers+developers.
Plus, I think it’s about time a computer game company step-up and protect their propriety products. StarCraft II is unique, creative and artistic game. So it deserves to be protected and well-maintained by Blizzard. Wouldn’t you want to protect your art work & awesome stuff? I would.
2. Awesome Game at an affordable price
Some people think StarCraft II is excessively increasing their price for the game. Well, if you are looking for one of the best graphic RTS games and a unique character developing & challenging story-line game, then I think you know it will cost more to get the best. Plus, if you thought those game trailers are a realistic, high-definition story, then you will know that it costs tons of money creating the graphic effects, and voice acting. Maintaining million players online instantaneously and helping gamers enjoy their game are part of the game costs. Development of this game was estimated at $100 million dollars, and that is a statement given by Wall Street Journal from my previous blog.
Although you may think $60 is expensive at the moment, but if you can enjoy and play the same game for years, then that is a great game: It keeps you interested, and fun. That’s what matters in a computer game: you are entertained & having fun! Not just a year or months, but for years (most likely!)
Playing StarCraft II Terran Campaign
3. Terran Campaign Issue
Some gamers commented “StarCraft II is limited because it plays only the Terran campaign”. Well, think of it this way. The StarCraft has made it to top list in IGN best picked games and StarCraft I fans are demanding more intense game plays with harder, unique, and interesting features. So, in order to make their games more fun, you are playing from three different race perspective: Terran, Zerg, Protoss.
If you saw the StarCraft Game tournaments, you would know Terran is one of the best races. As matter of fact, several top StarCraft I pro-gamers in European StarCraft League played Terran as their main race. So, why not give it a try? What’s so bad about playing Terran (Human)?
But more importantly, StarCraft II- Wings of Liberty has 26 intensive campaign games to play while StarCraft I had only 10 campaigns for each race. It’s not 10 different race campaigns like StarCraft I, but a long chronologically developed Terran campaigns in StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty. Are 26 campaigns boring and not long enough for you to play?
4. Battlenet is logical & common-sense.
I don’t understand why it is annoying if you have to login and play StarCraft II. If you have played World of Warcraft and enjoyed some of free online MMORPG, then playing StarCraft II shouldn’t be a problem. It is really needless to say on this matter. After all, you have to admit that there are tons of free online games and you have to login to play them (either be single campaign(practice game) or multi-player game). It is point-less to say, “WTF? StarCraft II is making me go online every time I play”, when you are logining into Facebook everyday or twitting every other minutes.
Plus, Battlenet is adapting the current trend of various online games & keeping track of your individual achievements. So you can review your game scores, strategy and find old team-mates from the previous games. If the game is on internet, then you can play anywhere you are and save your progress. So you don’t need to pack-up your laptop to enjoy StarCraft II. Just play in your friend’s or cousin’s.
Voice Your Thoughts!
What’s your opinion on StarCraft II? Do you think it is a great game, or is there something you want it to be improved? Write & share your opinions!
I found this by coincidence but frankly I think it’s a little short sighted. Of your four “reasons” to play only one of them has to do with the game. I also say this as someone who has yet to buy the game, but does plan to at some point.
Starting at the top, your title is misleading. After having read your blog I’m forced to wonder what the article itself actually has to do with me playing the game. I’ll be honest, you’re article hasn’t done much to make me want to play StarCraft II. If anything it has me thinking about the bad things surrounding it that I’ll have to consider even more carefully.
Your first point is about Copyright Infringement which is a serious problem in the computer gaming industry, it has been for a long time and will be for sometime to come. As the protections become better so will the pirates. It’s just how things go. But is better protection for the developer a reason to play? Of course not, why should I play a game simply because fewer people will be playing pirated copies? What does it matter to the run-of-the-mill gamer whether their opponent is playing a genuine copy or a pirated one if their both having fun?
Your second point is decent, the problem with it is that only part of the information is correct. The Wall Street Journal was forced to retract that article. The 100 million figure was for the development and upkeep of World of Warcraft, not StarCraft II. I know that a lot of people looked at that number and the first thing that came to mind was that it was awfully large for any game. The WSJ reported that number on the 16th, it was retracted around the 24th, and this was posted the 31st… There is no excuse of posting false information.
Your third point is the only one that remotely has to do with the game and gameplay. Looking at the title you gave the blog I was expecting more points like this one. Even this point though is flawed. In the same sentence you try to address new and old players. The you talk about playing from three perspectives which is true, but veteran players like myself look at and will point out that the first game had that well. SC2 is just taking it to the next level by making three seperate games.
Your fourth point is the only one of them that I actually liked in it’s entirety. The only reason for that was that while I didn’t care much about mechanics of Battlenet and having to log in, I also didn’t know much about it. That being said, I don’t think that it is much of a reason to play the game.
In the end I recognize what you’re goal was and appauld you for it. Ultimately though I think you fell short of that goal. When you want to convince someone to do something the easiest way to do it is to minimalize the bad things, make them sound insignificant, and then, avoiding all the hype, expound on the good. If you go and point out the things that people dislike about the game and then try and tell them why it is a good thing the effects can be hit or miss. My recommendation for you, if you do any article like this again, is to talk about the mechanics of the game, the cool new units they can blow stuff up with, and how overcoming a zergling rush (if it’s still possible) has just as much of an adrenaline rush as it used to.
Good luck with your next blog and have a nice day.
M. Moore
Thanks for your detailed comment on my blog, M. Moore.
I am not a professional blogger, but am just an avid gamer and a fan of StarCraft II. I do try to make the StarCraft II most interesting as possible while playing StarCraft II games.
I understand what you are trying to say in your comment, but I just wanted to talk about why some gamers disliked the StarCraft II and focus on why those arguments are weak, or not agreed by many other players. Rather than having few negative opinions, I wanted to share some positive aspects of the game while logically try to disagree their arguments.
Regarding StarCraft II Price: The price of the game is reasonable, considering Blizzard included many of new features (including the java script on various physics aspects. Ex: During the game, if a mechanic or air units are destroyed, the debris of the machines damage the nearby units, regardless of ally or enemy. That’s something realistic and unique feature. Plus, in StarCraft II, there was no single unit that can instantly walk top of a cliff. Now, SC2 has the Protoss Colosus unit that canperform this unique task because of the new development in SC2 javascript/programming capability.) It also have more graphical storyline in the game if you keep playing into the fifth or sixth campaigns.
Development Cost: I apologize about the information on the StarCraft II development cost. I have been reading other StarCraft II blogs and didn’t realize the WSJ was retracted for inaccurate information. I will take note of other information when I post the information. Thank you for pointing it out.
StarCraft II Game Play: It’s true that StarCraft II is trying develop an improved perspective of each race, but I think SC2 is focusing more on each race. Previous StarCraft I had three perspective altogether, and it took awhile to understand what is going on since you can play all three race together in different levels. So the storyline can be confusing unless you study it carefully. So, rather than have three perspective all in one game, if you can play one race at a time, then the gamer has more clear image and idea of each race’s perspective.
Again, thanks for your in-depth comments.
-H. Kim-
This was… Terrible.
How about your “4 Good Reasons to Play Starcraft II” have something to do with gameplay?
You could’ve easily listed how amazing the campaign is, how it gets more and more interesting (both in story and in unit types, and so on) as you go along, how unique each and every mission is, from robbing trains to firing giant lasers.
I haven’t heard anyone complain about most of these things anyway.
Price? Starcraft II costs just as much as any new game. If anyone’s complaining about the price, then either they don’t buy new games so this wouldn’t be an issue, or they think Starcraft II isn’t a full game worthy of full price, which is incorrect.
I’m a little disappointed that StarcraftII.com would put this article on their homepage. As the previous commentor said, this, if anything, will remind people of the potential negative aspects of the game (not that you notice any once you play it).
I think StarCraft II is a great game. Maybe a little bit too expensive.. But I totally agree with you on the other reasons. Good article.
Read more of what I think in my blog post:
http://www.xodify.com/2010/07/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-first.html
Not really reasons to play.
More like
2 Reasons not to download it
&
2 Useless paragraphs
I don’t agree with everything you say. But I completely agree with the 2nd point you made. People should stop whining about the game not being complete. Just because they chose to have 24 missions for Terran and 5 for protoss instead of 10 mission for each race doesn’t make the game incomplete.
And I know lots of people are not happy with the trilogy releases, but they come out in 1 and a half year. $60 is not a lot of you get to play the game for that long… And the expansion will probably slightly cheaper as well.
With regards to BattleNet 2.0, I’m just upset that there’s lots of things missing, such as Chat Channels, Clan Support, Group Replay Watching, Custom Names for games, LAN(although I understand why for this one).
I have to agree with M. Moore, I stumbled upon this post and the title does not match the post. Great intentions but you need some work on your persuasive writing skills. M. Moore gave you several good pointers. The game is awesome, I can tell you that while it’s not the longest campaign in the world, it is a well crafted continuation from it’s predecessor. The story flows well, and the new system for leveling up your arsenal in the single player campaign work really well together. I don’t want to give away too much so I will just say to M. Moore, I would give it a buy recommendation. Oh, and one last word for M. Moore, there is nothing like the adrenaline rush from the final mission! WOW what a challenge on the harder difficulty levels. Have fun with it!
While we all know that the PC gaming industry has been the one with the best graphics, we also have known it has been the cheapest platform to play on as far as game price. The reason why xbox and PS3 games are 60 dollars is because they NEED permission from Microsoft and Sony to produce a game. This is not the case with a PC game. In my opinion the PC user has been screwed over because of the console. 60 dollars for a game is pretty ridiculous but yes I agree with you on if you play it who cares. Look at how much the Call of Duty series dropped the ball on MW2. I think as a PC gamer we will see many more games just consolized and we will be charged 60 bucks and that’s not fair at all. Anyways on to the article I think game developers need to make a game that people will not have to torrent because of the features it offers. Starcraft did a good job of integrating friends and a party chat just as Steam does for all it’s Valve games. The reason why we torrent is first of all a money issue. 50 bucks = higher sales. There will still be torrenting going on but I think a solid well made game should minimize that a lot just as Starcraft did. Thank you for your time and it’s early morning so if my thoughts didn’t come out as interpreted I apologize