StarCraft II Performance

[Jul 19, 2010, 10:50 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments

There's a StarCraft II GPU Performance Comparison on Hardware Canucks where they take Blizzard's imminent real-time strategy sequel for a test run on a number of graphics cards. The game's DirectX 9 graphics do not require the most advanced hardware, but they determine what it will take to get proper performance from the game at various resolutions and detail levels. There's also a StarCraft II Beta Performance Preview on Overclockers Club testing with a smaller set of hardware, and a similar article on PC Perspective, where they say: "Even your mom can play."

View

34 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

34.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 21, 2010, 08:27

LightAssassin

Okay went a bit overboard there, but alrighty. I'm not fussed, yeah it seems awful to give up a great game over an issue but it is the only way I can make a difference (however small). Rather than be a person who says they will boycott something then doesn't I tend to stand by my position. That being said, I'm not completely stubborn, if they even just gave me a lipservice version with a offline mode like Valve does with its games then it would be a different story. I'm not completely unreasonable, but you gotta do what ya gotta do.

33.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 22:17

Yifes

Edit Pretty much unnecessary to point out the obvious. I don't have to edit and fake your posts to make you look like an idiot. Just quoting you does that for me. This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2010, 22:49.

32.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 22:14

The PC Warrior

Yifes wrote on Jul 20, 2010, 22:08: I love blizzard so much you guys, they can do no wrong in my books and youre all dumb. This is consistent with the quality and content of his other posts. Quite a vivid imagination.

31.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 22:08

Yifes

whats that? youll have to speak up, we cant hear you with your head so far up blizzards ass you apologist piece of scum. i think blizzard removed singleplayer, quick yifes to the postmobile, its time to defend their ridiculous actions! This is consistent with the quality and content of his other posts. Quite a vivid imagination.

30.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 22:04

The PC Warrior

whats that? youll have to speak up, we cant hear you with your head so far up blizzards ass you apologist piece of scum. i think blizzard removed singleplayer, quick yifes to the postmobile, its time to defend their ridiculous actions!

29.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 21:53

Yifes

dont mind yifes, hes a blizz fanboy. look at every sc2 topic and you will see him there defending everything blizz does because hes a chump just waiting to get burned. Don't mind ThePCWarrior. He's just an idiot who can't muster up a coherent argument. Judging from his liberal usage of terms like "fanboy" and "owning", it's a disgrace he's even associated with PC gaming, as his ilk is more fit bitching about which console is better on youtube. "Yo dude, you're just a M$ fanboi. PS3 totally OWNZ j00!!!!" This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2010, 22:02.

28.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 21:31

The PC Warrior

dont mind yifes, hes a blizz fanboy. look at every sc2 topic and you will see him there defending everything blizz does because hes a chump just waiting to get burned.

27.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 13:33

Yifes

Nothing to do with net access, I'm just opposed to LAN requiring a net connection. Hence I'll vote with my money, as I have done with any game/service that doesn't do it right in my opinion (IE MW2 with it's P2P crap and Xbox 360 charging for online multiplayer). Protesting against MW2 is totally different since the lack of dedicated servers and mod support negatively affects everyone who plays multiplayer. With SCII, you and your brother can play just as well together online. SO now with SCII, you're still going to play it (the single player) anyways, just not pay for it. It seems like a sad excuse to avoid paying for something, especially since the missing feature you're protesting against does not impact on your enjoyment of the game at all 99% of the time. This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2010, 13:41.

26.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 13:26

Yifes

Mr. Tact wrote on Jul 20, 2010, 00:32: Yifes wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 16:23: If you can win vs 3-4 AI you'd have no problem playing against people in the bronze/silver leagues. Well, remember -- I'm talking about the AI from the original game. My understanding is the new one is much better, I doubt I could beat it 1 vs 3-4. I am talking about the old AI. If you can beat the new AI 1v1 on hard then you'd prob do well on Gold. Of course, people online cheese, which can be frustrating the first few times when you don't know how to deal with it. This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2010, 13:43.

25.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 12:26

LightAssassin

Yifes wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 16:36: I'm going to borrow a friends copy, not interested in the online multi and the lack of lan option (proper lan) means I won't be getting it just for 1v1 with my brother who lives with me (we are both equally awful). I don't get that. I assume your internet connection can handle a total of 2 people. Nothing to do with net access, I'm just opposed to LAN requiring a net connection. Hence I'll vote with my money, as I have done with any game/service that doesn't do it right in my opinion (IE MW2 with it's P2P crap and Xbox 360 charging for online multiplayer).

24.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 20, 2010, 00:32

Mr. Tact

Yifes wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 16:23:
If you can win vs 3-4 AI you'd have no problem playing against people in the bronze/silver leagues.

Well, remember -- I'm talking about the AI from the original game. My understanding is the new one is much better, I doubt I could beat it 1 vs 3-4.




Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.

23.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 18:13

eRe4s3r

Yeah.. thats just the first thing i remember from b.net back in the old days - that curbed my urge to play another sc1 public match pretty badly. Though i am really not the kind of guy who plays rts games online - i don't really know why but whenever i play a rts i have a sort of uneasiness and heavy handedness that no other genre causes. I rule racing games, FPS but rts i am complete failure , though not against the AI (i even can rush - but against Humans it usually ends up in me not microing anything and thus always losing - i hate microing - am just weird like that.

22.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 17:06

MattyC

eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 16:31: Nope The map preview looked exactly like official one - even placement of ore was identical - except his was 600000 and ours was 1. Granted in my first attempt at battle.net i had neither seen the custom map indicator nor thought it odd that it downloaded something I could see how that would happen, I was just curious. There can be some mean people on there :p Two adds a co-op feature vs the AI that can be pretty fun. The AI on the highest level could be a bit tougher if you ask me, but overall it leads to some fun vs computer with you and your buddies as a team if you don't want to deal with super competitive people. That said, after you have played a few games it usually does a good job of pairing you with similarly skilled players in vs.

21.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 16:36

Yifes

I'm going to borrow a friends copy, not interested in the online multi and the lack of lan option (proper lan) means I won't be getting it just for 1v1 with my brother who lives with me (we are both equally awful). I don't get that. I assume your internet connection can handle a total of 2 people.

20.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 16:31

eRe4s3r

Nope The map preview looked exactly like official one - even placement of ore was identical - except his was 600000 and ours was 1. Granted in my first attempt at battle.net i had neither seen the custom map indicator nor thought it odd that it downloaded something

19.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 16:23

Yifes

Mr. Tact wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 12:47: kanniballl wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 12:33: However, I don't recall how well I faired against the AI in the original in other maps. It's been way too long since I played a skirmish in that game. Well, if your experience matched mine, basically unless multiple AI armies attacked in series you could beat them 1 on 3-4. We usually were able to win 2 vs 6 without much trouble -- as long as we had choke points. If you can win vs 3-4 AI you'd have no problem playing against people in the bronze/silver leagues. Had a few placement matches where my opponents would have like 8 scvs and 2 production buildings all game. I think most people are just too intimidated by the idea of multiplayer. It's not like you're stepping into the Korean Brood war servers or something. This comment was edited on Jul 19, 2010, 16:34.

18.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 16:23

MattyC

eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 19, 2010, 15:24: My only attempt at playing starcraft seriously online was with a dude who named his own map an official one where i and my 3 team mates started without ore and he with infinite ore. You didn't notice a different map preview, different map text, the fact that you had to download the map to start, or the fact that you were playing a custom game?

17.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 15:24

eRe4s3r

My only attempt at playing starcraft seriously online was with a dude who named his own map an official one where i and my 3 team mates started without ore and he with infinite ore. Wc3 is riddled with map hacks so yeah, only TD

16.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 15:23

LightAssassin

Be interesting to see if there is a mod released that is like their own Counter-Strike which sells copies of the game just to play. Nobody has done that in a while, would be interesting to see. I'd imagine it would be the only way that people like us (those who think the multiplayer = getting their ass handed to them) would play the game long term, or even pick it up in the first place for anything but the single player. I'm going to borrow a friends copy, not interested in the online multi and the lack of lan option (proper lan) means I won't be getting it just for 1v1 with my brother who lives with me (we are both equally awful).

15.

Re: StarCraft II Performance

Jul 19, 2010, 14:21

Tom

A lot of people have been mentioning how poor they are or expect to be at SC multi. I feel the same way. I thought the most encouraging comments I've seen about this were 1) summing up the game as "chess in space" and 2) saying the ladder system works. I'm getting the game for single player and mods (esp. tower defense, can't wait!). But I wouldn't mind if it had something to offer me for stock multi as well. I'm going to try to go into it with an open mind and make an effort to learn, although certainly nowhere near Korean level. I just want to have fun. There must be more people out there who feel the same way.

34 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >