Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

Game Reviews

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

7. Re: Game Reviews Jul 30, 2010, 09:58 kanniballl
My loading times are fine. However, I installed the Digital-Download version on a Solid State hard drive so I'd *hope* the loading times would be fine.

A co-worker was saying that her big complaint is the load time on her old laptop, but didn't give any specs. Until I started reading this thread I thought maybe it was the laptop.

The game runs quite well, but I have a hefty rig (i7 quad 2.6, ATI HD5770, 4GB ram). It should be noted, SC2 only uses 2 cores, so quad-core users are overkill.

It automatically set up to run at my LCD's max res with just about every option set to highest (though I turned down the shadows). I'm not maxing out my FPS or anything, but it's more than smooth enough for an RTS (heck even for a slow-paced FPS).

I'm only a few missions into the single player campaign so far, and I like what I see. So far my favorite mission has been one that alternates between night and day: at night you're holding back the horde and during the day you're destroying them while they sleep.

The RP element is light, but nice. You can purchase upgrades for your units between missions, these are independent from the old armory/engineering upgrades. Example: Bunkers can house 6 units and increase the range of the occupants. Or FireBat attacks have 40% more AoE coverage.

You can also hire mercenaries and perform science research that buffs your units in a specific way.

So far so good. The cinematics are great, though so far it's mostly talking heads. But they're rendered incredibly and move the story along.

Since I'm probably only 10%-15% through the missions, I can't give it a real final score. But I'd say 8/10 or 9/10.

Then again, if I encountered the save-file loss or poor load times I might give it something lower.

This comment was edited on Jul 30, 2010, 10:27.
"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you."
-Fry, Futurama
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
6. Re: Game Reviews Jul 29, 2010, 21:47 Eldaron Imotholin
I suggest never looking at scores in the first place. Reviews should always be objective. They should state facts and features. If a reviewer mentions his pros and cons, he should do so in detailed examples.

Like the long loading times you mentioned. If a reviewer would mention that, we the readers must know the following else it's worthless: What's his rig and what does he consider long?

In my opinion, reviews of late lack the above mentioned too much. If it was for reviews, I never would have bought and enjoyed Alpha Protocol as much as I did, for example.

A single gameplay video says more than the bla-bla reviews of late, I think.
Avatar 15836
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
5. Re: Game Reviews Jul 29, 2010, 21:37 Elf Shot The Food
Pretty much every review is going to reward it with nines and tens, so if you're waiting for one that gives a lower score than that you'll be waiting a long time.  
Avatar 13955
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
4. Re: Game Reviews Jul 29, 2010, 19:37 heroin
If you want a review I'd wait until Sunday when Ars Technica releases theirs. The reviewer has written a little about SC2 in a column on AT titled, "SC2 is a Full Game No Matter What Whiners Say".
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
3. Re: Game Reviews Jul 29, 2010, 13:00 JohnBirshire
No, not yet. Those usually come after all the major publications have had their turn.

My only real gripes so far is that the load times are hefty, and the difficulty scale for the single player campaign is terrible. With the second hardest difficulty the missions are so easy I'm bored, but when I bump it up to the hardest difficulty I find them to be impossible. Then again, the single player campaign might keep me busy for a week, but I might be playing multiplayer for years, so the single player is almost irrelevant in the grand scheme. Otherwise, I haven't put in enough time to give it a full review as of yet, and neither has anybody else that wants to give it an *honest* review.

Anybody who has posted a review so far just wants to be one of the first to do so for reader traffic, they couldn't possibly have played it long enough single player/online to give it an accurate assessment.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
2. Re: Game Reviews Jul 29, 2010, 12:55 Verno
BobBob wrote on Jul 29, 2010, 12:08:
Are there any non-hyped, non-over-rated, critical reviews of Starcraft 2?

Nope, wait a few days. There were no early review copies so anyone putting out one this quickly isn't going to be comprehensive or reputable imho.
Playing: Pillars of Eternity 2, Far Cry 5, Persona 5
Watching: Safe, Game Night, Last Flag Flying
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
1. Re: Game Reviews Jul 29, 2010, 12:08 BobBob
Are there any non-hyped, non-over-rated, critical reviews of Starcraft 2?  
Don't like my post? Submit a complaint
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
7 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


Blue's News logo