Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo

The StarCraft II Website announces the demo for the real-time strategy sequel has been replaced with the StarCraft II: Starter Edition, which allows anyone with a Battle.net account and an internet connection to play the following content for free:

  • The first four missions of the StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty single-player campaign, including Mar Sara 1-3 and the choice to embark on Tychusís first mission or Dr. Hansenís first mission.
  • The first two Challenges: Tactical Command and Covert Ops.
  • Access to the terran race in Custom Games and Single-Player vs. AI.
  • Access to the following custom maps (map selection may rotate over time):
    • XelíNaga Caverns
    • Shattered Temple
    • Discord IV
    • High Orbit

Word is: "Any campaign progress and achievements you earn while playing StarCraft II: Starter Edition are automatically saved to your Battle.net account, and will carry over should you ever upgrade from the Starter Edition to the full version of StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty."

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

33. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 8, 2011, 13:32 MattyC
 
An update on people watching replays with this - it should work for all replays 1.3.5 and later. If you can't watch one it is likely because it is from an earlier version.

I didn't see any info on if they were planning to fix that or not.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 5, 2011, 12:43 Ant
 
nin wrote on Aug 5, 2011, 11:18:
You clearly haven't used Blizzard products lately, Ant.

Yeah, I am from old days. Get off my lawn, kids.
 
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 5, 2011, 11:33 Drayth
 
There's just no pleasing you.  
Avatar 36713
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 5, 2011, 11:18 nin
 

You clearly haven't used Blizzard products lately, Ant.

 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 5, 2011, 11:12 Ant
 
Drayth wrote on Aug 5, 2011, 11:07:
..?
StarCraft_2_NA_en-US.exe is 3 MB to download the game.
 
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 5, 2011, 11:07 Drayth
 
..?  
Avatar 36713
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 5, 2011, 09:25 Ant
 
Drayth wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 01:42:
There you go, Ant. This is your day!
Woohoo! Dang, stupid downloader. No full installer without it?
 
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 22:47 Creston
 
Thanks Matty

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 22:47 Tumbler
 
Update regarding replays, newer replays are working. I believe it's game version 1.3.6 and above. The majority of replays won't work in the Starter edition. Going forward I guess that will change as the uploaded replays start reflecting the newest versions of hte game. I'm so confused how ppl are uploading replays today that are version way below what appears to be current.  
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 15:13 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 14:20:
Bhruic wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 13:08:
Plus, what risks? Other than the final map, I never got anywhere near close to disaster on normal difficulty.

The maps were designed to be pretty easy on normal. That's why they had the two higher difficulties.

I played through on Hard, and there definitely were some points I had to restart because I muffed things up, and the timer meant I didn't have time to recover. I don't really enjoy the timed maps, as I said, so that was annoying. But more annoying was the fact that there was no longer a "normal" speed. You had the choice between "fast" and "faster". Awesome. Some of us don't have the control speed we used to. The final Protoss mission I ended up having to replay many frustrating times, just because I couldn't control the units fast enough to avoid losing them when I shouldn't have.

But what you should do is play through the SC1 campaign with SC2. They ported over the Terran and Zerg campaigns so far, not sure if they've finished the Protoss one or not. They're quite enjoyable, and the modern graphics and control systems keep them from feeling dated.

That sounds effing awesome. Where do I go to do that???

Creston


I think you can find both in this TL thread:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=208996

It is pretty well done though (at least when I played it) the camera glitched out in some of the third person shooter bits.

If you haven't you should really check out some of the SC2 mods and custom games. The SC2 editor is really a neat peace of software and people are already doing awesome things with it. E.g. http://www.starcraftuniverse.org/

This comment was edited on Aug 4, 2011, 15:22.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 14:20 Creston
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 13:08:
Plus, what risks? Other than the final map, I never got anywhere near close to disaster on normal difficulty.

The maps were designed to be pretty easy on normal. That's why they had the two higher difficulties.

I played through on Hard, and there definitely were some points I had to restart because I muffed things up, and the timer meant I didn't have time to recover. I don't really enjoy the timed maps, as I said, so that was annoying. But more annoying was the fact that there was no longer a "normal" speed. You had the choice between "fast" and "faster". Awesome. Some of us don't have the control speed we used to. The final Protoss mission I ended up having to replay many frustrating times, just because I couldn't control the units fast enough to avoid losing them when I shouldn't have.

But what you should do is play through the SC1 campaign with SC2. They ported over the Terran and Zerg campaigns so far, not sure if they've finished the Protoss one or not. They're quite enjoyable, and the modern graphics and control systems keep them from feeling dated.

That sounds effing awesome. Where do I go to do that???

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 13:08 Bhruic
 
Plus, what risks? Other than the final map, I never got anywhere near close to disaster on normal difficulty.

The maps were designed to be pretty easy on normal. That's why they had the two higher difficulties.

I played through on Hard, and there definitely were some points I had to restart because I muffed things up, and the timer meant I didn't have time to recover. I don't really enjoy the timed maps, as I said, so that was annoying. But more annoying was the fact that there was no longer a "normal" speed. You had the choice between "fast" and "faster". Awesome. Some of us don't have the control speed we used to. The final Protoss mission I ended up having to replay many frustrating times, just because I couldn't control the units fast enough to avoid losing them when I shouldn't have.

But what you should do is play through the SC1 campaign with SC2. They ported over the Terran and Zerg campaigns so far, not sure if they've finished the Protoss one or not. They're quite enjoyable, and the modern graphics and control systems keep them from feeling dated.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:30 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 11:25:
MattyC wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 11:13:
I played the SP for both SC1 and SC2 and I liked both, but I am not sure that much of the praise showered on either was for the single player. I think it was always more the multiplayer aspects of StarCraft (both 1 and 2) that were the big deal.

I'm talking about MY preferences, not those of the gaming audience at large. 20 million people think Call of Duty is the tits too.

That said are you sure you don't have on some rose tinted goggles? I replayed SC1's single player right before 2 came out and I have to say that while the story was kinda meh 2's missions were a lot more varied and fun.

They were? "We're dumping you in area A. You only have x amount of time to go to area B / achieve goal C, because of

- Lava swamping your camp
- a laser drilling down a door
- enemy units taking control over "shrines"
- massive enemy fleet showing up to wipe you out

It's all just a time limit. The large majority of missions are "Land here, quickly build a small base, pump out units like a motherfucker, then charge and take over the next area. Rinse, repeat."

I am also not too sure what you mean 'artificial' timers or that attacking lacks strategy.

See above. Also, because on every map, the enemy is weak enough that literally any combination of units will wipe them out, as long as there's enough of them, and you can get them out before the artificial timer fucks you over. That's not strategy. That's "click fast enough to feed the grinder."

Now remember SC1, where you had maps where the enemy bases were set up to specifically counter a particular type of attack, which you usually didn't find out until you'd sent 50 land units and got wiped out (for example.)


Micro is indeed a part of SC2, but it isn't the crazy mechanical 1.

There's Micro in SC2? Really? Maybe my definition of Micro is different than yours, but to me, having 5 minutes to pump up a random variety of units before you HAVE to be at area X to take over / defend random object M isn't Micro.

Again, to each their own. I'm not saying it was a bad game, it's just that because every map was basically the same, in a style that I personally hate, it was a HUGE disappointment to me.

The APM requirement also isn't that high in SC2. Some pros even have fairly low actions per minute.

I'd say that 100 APM is still really really really frakking fast.

Creston

I guess its largely because we look at it differently. I mostly got it for the MP, whereas I am guessing you got it for the SP. I viewed the campaign more as a bonus than an integral part of the game. I had fun with it.

100 APM isn't that fast compared to say StarCraft 1 where you didn't have automining and had horrid AI pathing and no massive control groups or multiple building select.

As for the micro StarCraft 2 has plenty. Spreading marines out to avoid banelings, blinking damaged stalkers to the back in an engagement to keep overall DPS up, stutterstepping marines, getting surrounds with speedlings etc.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:25 Creston
 
MattyC wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 11:13:
I played the SP for both SC1 and SC2 and I liked both, but I am not sure that much of the praise showered on either was for the single player. I think it was always more the multiplayer aspects of StarCraft (both 1 and 2) that were the big deal.

I'm talking about MY preferences, not those of the gaming audience at large. 20 million people think Call of Duty is the tits too.

That said are you sure you don't have on some rose tinted goggles? I replayed SC1's single player right before 2 came out and I have to say that while the story was kinda meh 2's missions were a lot more varied and fun.

They were? "We're dumping you in area A. You only have x amount of time to go to area B / achieve goal C, because of

- Lava swamping your camp
- a laser drilling down a door
- enemy units taking control over "shrines"
- massive enemy fleet showing up to wipe you out

It's all just a time limit. The large majority of missions are "Land here, quickly build a small base, pump out units like a motherfucker, then charge and take over the next area. Rinse, repeat."

I am also not too sure what you mean 'artificial' timers or that attacking lacks strategy.

See above. Also, because on every map, the enemy is weak enough that literally any combination of units will wipe them out, as long as there's enough of them, and you can get them out before the artificial timer fucks you over. That's not strategy. That's "click fast enough to feed the grinder."

Now remember SC1, where you had maps where the enemy bases were set up to specifically counter a particular type of attack, which you usually didn't find out until you'd sent 50 land units and got wiped out (for example.)


Micro is indeed a part of SC2, but it isn't the crazy mechanical 1.

There's Micro in SC2? Really? Maybe my definition of Micro is different than yours, but to me, having 5 minutes to pump up a random variety of units before you HAVE to be at area X to take over / defend random object M isn't Micro.

Again, to each their own. I'm not saying it was a bad game, it's just that because every map was basically the same, in a style that I personally hate, it was a HUGE disappointment to me.

The APM requirement also isn't that high in SC2. Some pros even have fairly low actions per minute.

I'd say that 100 APM is still really really really frakking fast.

And don't play it on normal! No wonder you didn't like it! Normal is wayyy too easy for my taste.

I usually play games on Normal for the first time. In SC2, I kept thinking "Okay, the stupid timed maps are going to be done now, and we're going to get some epic massive maps, with 3 enemy bases, and you have to hold out and slowly conquer them."
And those maps never showed up.

I went back and replayed on hard, and just got disgusted with the thought of going back through all the timed shit again.

It's no biggy. It saves me 80 dollars on the next two games.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:21 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 11:17:
Bhruic wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 11:07:
With SC2, they wanted to force players to take risks.

Especially in a campaign with Terrans, who are fucking DESIGNED to be a turtle race.

I always felt Terran was strongest midgame. Using mobility, drop play, and those nasty scary ghosts. If I had to pick a turtle race I would say Protoss. A toss on 3 bases after about 17 minutes of game time is a scary thing.


And don't play it on normal! No wonder you didn't like it! Normal is wayyy too easy for my taste.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:17 Creston
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 11:07:
With SC2, they wanted to force players to take risks.

So they just build every single map except the hero maps with an artificial timer. Yeah, it's awesome. Especially in a campaign with Terrans, who are fucking DESIGNED to be a turtle race.

Plus, what risks? Other than the final map, I never got anywhere near close to disaster on normal difficulty. Send 10 random units to a section of enemy territory, and it'll be succesful in wiping stuff out 90% of the time.

But, like I said, to each their own. I'm sure there were millions of people who loved the campaign, so :-shrug-: .

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:13 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 10:59:
It's a cool idea, especially the being able to upgrade it and just keep playing. (I LOVED that in the Torchlight demo.)

As for SC2, I found the SP campaign to be thoroughly underwhelming. Like 95% of the maps are on some sort of stupid time limit, artificial or real. I guess it's to "teach" you how to play MP, where you have to click 90000000000000000000000000000000 times per second in order to be marginally competitive, but I like the STRATEGY part of RTS, where I'm able to take my time, scout, and build the proper attack force to take out whatever enemy I'm attacking.

As opposed to SC2's "just build a shitload of random units and send them over there BEFORE YOUR TIMER RUNS OUT!"

Played it once, will likely never play it again. Compared to the original SC, which I've probably played through 15 or so times.

To each their own, but the thought that THIS took them ten fucking years to make was very disappointing.

Creston

I played the SP for both SC1 and SC2 and I liked both, but I am not sure that much of the praise showered on either was for the single player. I think it was always more the multiplayer aspects of StarCraft (both 1 and 2) that were the big deal.

That said are you sure you don't have on some rose tinted goggles? I replayed SC1's single player right before 2 came out and I have to say that while the story was kinda meh 2's missions were a lot more varied and fun.


I am also not too sure what you mean 'artificial' timers or that attacking lacks strategy. Micro is indeed a part of SC2, but it isn't the crazy mechanical 1. The APM requirement also isn't that high in SC2. Some pros even have fairly low actions per minute.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:07 Bhruic
 
It wasn't really to teach you MP, it was to avoid the turtling effect. Most of the Starcraft 1 campaigns consisted of "turtle up until you have overwhelming force, then move out". With SC2, they wanted to force players to take risks. Personally, as someone who enjoys turtling, I'm not really a fan of that style, but it can be enjoyable at times.

Oh, and some of the top players in the game have average APMs of less than 100, so you don't need to spam commands that fast.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 11:01 Creston
 
MattyC wrote on Aug 4, 2011, 09:30:
They could be totally lying, but they have said repeatedly that the two SC2 expansions would be priced as well... expansions.

True. I would like to point out, however, that nowadays an actual "expansion" seems to cost 40 bucks...

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 4, 2011, 10:59 Creston
 
It's a cool idea, especially the being able to upgrade it and just keep playing. (I LOVED that in the Torchlight demo.)

As for SC2, I found the SP campaign to be thoroughly underwhelming. Like 95% of the maps are on some sort of stupid time limit, artificial or real. I guess it's to "teach" you how to play MP, where you have to click 90000000000000000000000000000000 times per second in order to be marginally competitive, but I like the STRATEGY part of RTS, where I'm able to take my time, scout, and build the proper attack force to take out whatever enemy I'm attacking.

As opposed to SC2's "just build a shitload of random units and send them over there BEFORE YOUR TIMER RUNS OUT!"

Played it once, will likely never play it again. Compared to the original SC, which I've probably played through 15 or so times.

To each their own, but the thought that THIS took them ten fucking years to make was very disappointing.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo