New short Q&A on battle.net forums - Page 6

On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote:
the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.

stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.

god you guys are idiots =(

On June 19 2007 23:40 HappyFeetO_O wrote:


.....yes, that's what a lot of people want.

I wouldn't go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...

On June 20 2007 00:13 lololol wrote:


Guess what...
It's Stacraft 2!
It's Starcraft TWO!
It's Starcraft II!

It's a NEW game and if you fucking want SC:BW, guess what... YOU ALREADY HAVE IT!

On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote:
No. I just want them to make starcraft players happy. They could make game with outstanding graphics, a easy gameplay and a noob-friendly interface which will attract a lot of players for those reasons and that will be played for 1-2 years OR they can make a game with an outstanding gameplay, that will follow the same strory and will have the same pace with BroodWar that will last as much or maybe more than it.

On June 20 2007 07:32 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:


if u want ez mode rts game go play WC3. we have that already.


Seriously. we have enough carebear easy rts games out there. shiny graphics stupid game mechanics and dumbed down controls so evry retarded 10 yr old can play them without having to try and learn the game.

bye Starcraft ,the most skilldependend and stratetic game ever made.

hi Starcraft ,carebear warcraft3 in space made for 10 year olds.



this killed evrything for me. i HATE warcarft3 (campaign was decent.rest sucked).if the gameplay feels even only a bit like warcraft i will never ever touch it.

there are masses of all those standart crap rts games out there. if they want to be different they remember their roots and what people love(d) about starcraft. and not copy what other games already did and all have.


but well blizzard isnt the same company anymore. they are on the best way to be like EA.look at WoW. Blizz is now bigger then ever before. but they lost their soul.

On June 20 2007 08:27 NatsuTerran wrote:
... What's important to me is ... the ability to beat noobs with superior apm smash alone.

If you are the competitive type, you can play the game for what it really is, a 'typing sport

On June 20 2007 08:59 Doctorasul wrote:
According to you the core principles would be 12 unit selection and single building selection, not strategic depth, racial diversity, unit diversity within the race, encouragement of thinking creatively, multitasking or pace.

Is that about right?

On June 18 2007 12:27 havok wrote:


You mean microing?

But if you have your cc rallied on a mineral field, when you want an scv/probe/drone to build with and you don't pay attention when you build a new one, it'll go gather some minerals, so you'll have to either grab it as it's en route to the minerals or grab it after it's started mining which will waste your time.

So the retards will just hurt themselves using auto gathering, it'll also be easier to hit their economy with a dropoff if all their scv's being built run straight into your units and they have to choose a new rally.

On June 19 2007 23:40 HappyFeetO_O wrote:


.....yes, that\'s what a lot of people want.

I wouldn\'t go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...

On June 20 2007 09:51 intrigue wrote:

yes, and they are the same people that bitched when starcraft was coming out. the same ones that were blown away years later, realizing that change (especially in the hands of a company like blizzard) can be amazing.

i'm not saying sc2 is absolutely guaranteed to be good, but look at it this way. how else can you classify a group of conservative people who immediately dismiss and write off a game that they know:

1) cannot be accurately judged yet with the limited information released (only one race has been illustrated for god's sake - from broodwar you should realize at least that without an understanding of all races, the beauty and intricate balance of the game is gone. in other words, knowing one race is not the equivalent of knowing 1/3 of the game)

2) is in the hands of one of the most successful gaming companies in history, the one that created the game on which you spend hours playing and posting on forums about, the one that has proudly described its express desire to create a 'competitive, fast-paced game' that will not disappoint starcraft fans, and the one that has released fifteen patches regularly for a ten-year-old game, following closely korean progaming and fan complaints. you have to be either completely insulting, ignorant, or incredibly short-sighted to not have a pretty solid faith in blizzard.

warcraft, wow, diablo, bw - having so many resounding successes in a row is not a fluke, and is only a testament to the company's quality control.

3) has not even reached alpha testing yet, and is apt to change drastically at every step along the way.



look at hawk's post - fine, it is somewhat reasonable (but still close-minded) to want a game that is basically identical to broodwar - but to say that a game is 'ruined' because of easier mechanics? i have nothing against constructive criticism, like complaints of gaudy graphics or repetitive attack types, but his thought was plain stupid, and unfortunately extremely prevalent in this forum.

and what are you trying to say about my post history? it's not stellar, but i'm pretty damn sure it's not worse than yours. don't try to play that card, you are going to embarrass yourself.

On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote:
Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone

On June 20 2007 10:16 intrigue wrote:
well yeah the way you put it now is a lot better compared to this


still, consider nydus worms, the protoss ability to warp in anywhere very quickly, and the units that transverse terrain. they all seem to point towards a game where speed is spent more on multitask and map-wide battles, instead of conventional ideas of simply microing, looking back, and macroing. it's pretty likely that any 'dumbing down' in an area will translate to a more challenging, evolved form of another aspect of the game (maybe even new aspects).

On June 20 2007 10:35 Hawk wrote:


hahaha, i elaborated on the first page i think after i realized the flaming id catch for that. =p

like i said, its all just opinions based on observations. cant really give a solid opinion til beta is out.
and god, i really cant wait to see the new zerg units