PDA

View Full Version : starcraft 2



sandyd
July 26th, 2010, 09:59 PM
^its comming out tomorow! anyone excited? I played the beta, and although it was waayy too easy (beta only had the lowest difficulty) , I liked it.

CharlesA
July 26th, 2010, 10:06 PM
I'm semi excited about it, but I'll hold off on purchasing it.

donkyhotay
July 26th, 2010, 10:08 PM
<yawn>

Shompol
July 26th, 2010, 10:12 PM
^its comming out tomorow! anyone excited? I played the beta, and although it was waayy too easy (beta only had the lowest difficulty) , I liked it.

What do you mean the lowest difficulty? Beta was multiplayer-only, and I got my *** handed to me most of the time.

Already pre-ordered the release, but they say i could simply buy over download. It sucks that Blizzard supported MAC back when it was unpopular, but giving Linux a cold shoulder. I should start boycotting them in the near future.

collinp
July 26th, 2010, 10:18 PM
I might buy it, but I'll wait to see what the reviews online say about it before deciding.

sandyd
July 26th, 2010, 10:19 PM
What do you mean the lowest difficulty? Beta was multiplayer-only, and I got my *** handed to me most of the time.

Already pre-ordered the release, but they say i could simply buy over download. It sucks that Blizzard supported MAC back when it was unpopular, but giving Linux a cold shoulder. I should start boycotting them in the near future.

it ... isnt. but I dont feel like getting banned, so im not going to say any further.

Dustin2128
July 26th, 2010, 10:23 PM
looks pretty awesome, if it works with wine and is the right price, I'll probably get it.

BuffaloX
July 26th, 2010, 11:12 PM
I ordered mine back in November, I should get it tomorrow. :D
Shipment confirmed and all.

I didn't play the beta, because I wouldn't ruin the "real" gaming experience.

There haven't been a good RTS out since "Rise of Nations" IMO.
So I really really hope this is as good as Starcraft was when it came out.

sprocket10
July 26th, 2010, 11:16 PM
I played beta. I'm going tomorrow morning to pick up my copy. Wish I had a new laptop that could max out the graphics settings. My current machine only handles low settings. It's gonna be epic!!

JDShu
July 27th, 2010, 12:17 AM
As I've stated in every thread regarding this, I won't be getting it until one of the following happens: LAN support, Linux support, Whole Battlechest Edition comes out.

Anyway, its going to take a while for the game balancing to get sorted out, so I don't think you need to worry about "real gaming".

Yes
July 27th, 2010, 12:28 AM
It looks awesome, I'd buy it in a second if it wasn't $60. It's hard to justify spending that much money on a video game...

yester64
July 27th, 2010, 01:07 AM
It looks awesome, I'd buy it in a second if it wasn't $60. It's hard to justify spending that much money on a video game...

That's the curse of early adopters. ;)

Yes
July 27th, 2010, 01:20 AM
The problem is I'm not sure how much it'll really drop. MW2 has been out for awhile and it's still $51. It seems like the price doesn't significantly drop until the next version comes out. So, it looks like I'll be buying it sometime in 2020...

DeadSuperHero
July 27th, 2010, 01:21 AM
I'm torn personally. I might buy it either if:

1. It works really, really well in Wine, OR

2. I end up getting a Mac, which is a possibility.

But if it works badly in Wine, or I don't have money for a Mac, it will have to wait...

yester64
July 27th, 2010, 01:44 AM
The problem is I'm not sure how much it'll really drop. MW2 has been out for awhile and it's still $51. It seems like the price doesn't significantly drop until the next version comes out. So, it looks like I'll be buying it sometime in 2020...

Yeah, i think your estimation is correct. Takes about 6 years to have significant pricedrop.
If it runs in Linux it might be a good try. Got no money to spend right now. To bad. :(

sandyd
July 27th, 2010, 02:11 AM
I'm torn personally. I might buy it either if:

1. It works really, really well in Wine, OR

2. I end up getting a Mac, which is a possibility.

But if it works badly in Wine, or I don't have money for a Mac, it will have to wait...
dont worry, it works in wine. I was one of the testers that tested patches 24/7 until they worked... so it **will** work. Or at least the beta works fine. Since ill be grabbing a copy at midnight -_- ill likely be one of the first to screw around with it on WINE. Ill post back when I get it rolling...

infestor
July 27th, 2010, 02:30 AM
The problem is I'm not sure how much it'll really drop. MW2 has been out for awhile and it's still $51. It seems like the price doesn't significantly drop until the next version comes out. So, it looks like I'll be buying it sometime in 2020...

especially blizzard games hardly drop in short time period. does anyone have ant idea whether it is cheaper to download it from blizzard's site?

YuiDaoren
July 27th, 2010, 02:44 AM
It looks awesome, I'd buy it in a second if it wasn't $60. It's hard to justify spending that much money on a video game...
Easy to justify it, if you go to movies.

A 90 minute matinée costs $7.50, or about $5.00 per hour. If you play a $60.00 video game for 12 hours, you've gotten the same entertainment hour per dollar ratio as a matinée. If you play said game for an hour per day and it holds your attention for two weeks or more, the purchase was clearly worth it (assuming watching a matinée is worth it).

bigseb
July 27th, 2010, 06:56 AM
It looks awesome, I'd buy it in a second if it wasn't $60. It's hard to justify spending that much money on a video game...


The problem is I'm not sure how much it'll really drop. MW2 has been out for awhile and it's still $51. It seems like the price doesn't significantly drop until the next version comes out. So, it looks like I'll be buying it sometime in 2020...


Yeah, i think your estimation is correct. Takes about 6 years to have significant pricedrop.
If it runs in Linux it might be a good try. Got no money to spend right now. To bad. :(

LOL... I generally only buy games about 5-6 years after they're released. Usually by then they cost about R50.

I love money ;)

NightwishFan
July 27th, 2010, 07:20 AM
I might purchase it if it works in Wine. I was a big fan of SC1, I can give blizzard a chance to redeem themselves. Though granted they are pretty friendly with using things like OpenGL.

betrunkenaffe
July 27th, 2010, 08:27 AM
Most games don't give 12 hours of enjoyment, usually I get stuck with 5 before I'm off to a new game. Books provide probably the best bang for the buck (assuming softcover) depending on book.

That being said, I'm on hour 40 of Borderlands and it only cost 10 bucks. Mount and Blade was 60+ hours and only cost 5... some games are worthwhile.

I'm probably going to hold off on SC 2 until I get my motherboard for my desktop :)

NightwishFan
July 27th, 2010, 08:34 AM
True, but SC1 gave me a good 10+ years of entertainment. Most flexible competitive games can do that. It is what modern games are missing is replay value. They did so well with the first I am willing to give them a go.

VH-BIL
July 27th, 2010, 08:35 AM
It works in wine, check the Wine AppDB (http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=20882)

Chibi-Tatsu
July 29th, 2010, 10:37 AM
You know, at first, as I told someone, "It's been a decade since I've played an RTS, but I'd play this... if I didn't run ubuntu and had the specs for it."

Then I actually looked at my specs, and found out that it DOES function with wine...

And now I need to budget another sixty bucks ASAP. Damn you, Blizzard! ](*,)

earthpigg
July 29th, 2010, 10:46 AM
i loved Starcraft, but do not intend to install Windows for a video game.

For SC2:

how much does performence suffer due to WINE?

anyone want to post system specs and FPS?

any wine tweaks needed for it to run? using winetricks or vanilla wine?

i really don't give a damn how it looks (within reason), i just need to be confident i can get 35 or greater frames per second before i purchase.

sandyd
July 31st, 2010, 04:10 AM
i loved Starcraft, but do not intend to install Windows for a video game.

For SC2:

how much does performence suffer due to WINE?
Runs a bit slower of course, but it gives a good fps at the highest settings

anyone want to post system specs and FPS?
8GB RAM, Intel Xenon Quad Core X2, Nvidia 285 SLI. Getting 70+ fps at highest settings. However, this varries, and can be inaccurate at times due to SLI, so I turned the FPS down.

This is my gaming machine, and what I use for testing/patching WINE games, which is why its not a good indicator of wether ill run or not.

any wine tweaks needed for it to run? using winetricks or vanilla wine?
You will have to change the openal stuff if you don't have sound. Also used are some opengl hacks. However, im using it live from the git tree, so I don't know how the latest release of wine runs it.

i really don't give a damn how it looks (within reason), i just need to be confident i can get 35 or greater frames per second before i purchase.
.

Legendary_Bibo
July 31st, 2010, 04:13 AM
My brother bought it, and I played on a mix of medium and easy enemies, and my team won while I was still setting up my base. It's a great RTS, and it was easy to learn, fun to play, but I don't see what all the hype about it was.

sandyd
July 31st, 2010, 04:18 AM
My brother bought it, and I played on a mix of medium and easy enemies, and my team won while I was still setting up my base. It's a great RTS, and it was easy to learn, fun to play, but I don't see what all the hype about it was.
it was because version 1 was awesome. Oh, the anticipation....

and I can play cod on veteran difficulty too, so I don't see why everyone says its impossible :D

betrunkenaffe
July 31st, 2010, 08:57 PM
Regardless of my motherboard not arriving yet, bought SC2 and have been playing on lappy. I think I've burned almost 12 hours on the campaign so far. I take things slow :)

Legendary_Bibo
July 31st, 2010, 09:59 PM
Most games don't give 12 hours of enjoyment, usually I get stuck with 5 before I'm off to a new game. Books provide probably the best bang for the buck (assuming softcover) depending on book.

That being said, I'm on hour 40 of Borderlands and it only cost 10 bucks. Mount and Blade was 60+ hours and only cost 5... some games are worthwhile.

I'm probably going to hold off on SC 2 until I get my motherboard for my desktop :)

Section 8 had subpar reviews, but I bought it on the Playstation Store yesterday because they were literally selling it for like 5 or 10 dollars when it was a full 60 dollar game just a few months ago. A game can be crappy, but if it's only a few bucks then it's worth its price.

I hate games that somehow manage to keep your attention but you're not having fun, i.e. FFXIII, and FFXII was so much fun too.

I like how Starcraft II can run on older lower end graphics cards and still run fine. Take a review from someone who doesn't even like RTS's, SCII is fun. I recommend it.

Has anyone else besides me wondered this? Okay so have you ever wondered why you can take a five or six year old game, max out its settings on a lower end current graphics card, and it looks really amazing especially compared to the current gaming console generation. Then you try a newer game and on that same graphics card you have to lower all settings just to make it run, and it looks like garbage, especially compared to that old game. Why is that?

_h_
July 31st, 2010, 10:03 PM
Most games don't give 12 hours of enjoyment, usually I get stuck with 5 before I'm off to a new game. Books provide probably the best bang for the buck (assuming softcover) depending on book.

That being said, I'm on hour 40 of Borderlands and it only cost 10 bucks. Mount and Blade was 60+ hours and only cost 5... some games are worthwhile.

I'm probably going to hold off on SC 2 until I get my motherboard for my desktop :)

Man oh man....only 5 hours?

I've played WoW since day 1 of beta. LOL

BuffaloX
July 31st, 2010, 11:14 PM
I just finished the campaign on average earlier today.
I must say I'm very happy it's every bit as good as Broodwar.
The missions are maybe slightly easier, and I need to make a completely new strategy for multiplayer, but gameplay is really good, and the graphics are of course much better now.

yester64
August 1st, 2010, 04:30 AM
Blizzard proofs that they went on the bandwagon like all others too.
Release a game with only one fraction. Wow.. if you can charge for the other fractions again. A genius plan.
I am not discredit the game as such, as i am sure it is good, but the scheme smells like treason to the customer base.
Also, not sure why they did not have any LAN option anymore. Is that out now? No Lan Parties? mm...
We are now accustomed to purchase addons for our games for consoles and PC/MAC. But this is the big next step i have seen from a big name in the industry.

I had the first iteration of the game and i was i awe since it was so awesome. But i think it may be somewhat over-hyped.

Zorgoth
August 2nd, 2010, 03:53 PM
Could I play Starcraft 2 in low settings at 20 fps with my mousy 1GB DDR3 ATI Mobility Radeon 5470 and my core i7-720-QM?

(under wine, no Windows here)

betrunkenaffe
August 2nd, 2010, 05:40 PM
Man oh man....only 5 hours?

I've played WoW since day 1 of beta. LOL

Considering the number of games released, the time available to play per week and all other life factors. Pretty much yes. Most games will garner 5 hours, some exceptional ones will heavily exceed that time and some won't even see 1 hour.

I can't get into WoW, the very graphics disgusted me. Just couldn't get past that.

aklo
August 6th, 2010, 01:09 PM
Alright I got my copy of starcraft 2 yesterday and yes SC2 is playable in linux (I used playonlinux) however the performance is not that great I think I need to upgrade my drivers but I'm really not confident of doing that since it involves commands and i've read the thread on upgrading drivers and there are people who messes up their config.

So

SC2 in windows = perfect
SC2 in linux = works with some tweaking and following tutorials but for me performance is bad. I can run in winxp with high or ultra smoothly but in linux I have to set it to low to play comfortably.

Overally I think sc2 is a good buy, there are LOTS of things to do in the campaign and there is also the mini game of a scrolling shooter which makes it a bonus!

I think my money is well spent.

BuffaloX
August 6th, 2010, 05:26 PM
Anyone playing the leagues?

Seems I'm not too good at it, I only qualified for bronze league, and even there I found the competition to be surprisingly hard.
I'm usually a pretty good rts gamer, so I thought lower levels would be a breeze.
I studied some of my loosing games, learned about some pretty cool features that aren't mentioned anywhere I can find, so now I'm advanced to silver.
Doesn't seem to be much difference in the competition level IMO.

My microing really suck, every time I try to micro a battle, I loose big time.
Anyone know of a "beginners guide to microing" for Starcraft 2?

I have a lot of fun, when I loose it's just bad luck. ;)
When I win it's my superior strategy. :p

legolas_w
August 6th, 2010, 05:30 PM
I have a lenovo t400 with the following specs, do I need to install windows or it is sufficient to play?

CPU: T9400 core Due 2, 2.4 GHz
Graphic: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
RAM: 4 GB, DDR 3.

Has anyone been able to play the game with such slow machine?

Thanks.

Milos_SD
August 6th, 2010, 07:03 PM
Well, I play it on Intel Core2Duo E6550 2.33 Ghz and old Nvidia 7600GT. So I think you can play it, maybe on low/medium details, but still play it.

Zorgoth
August 6th, 2010, 07:26 PM
@Milos_SD: Windows or linux?

aklo
August 7th, 2010, 12:57 AM
I have a lenovo t400 with the following specs, do I need to install windows or it is sufficient to play?

CPU: T9400 core Due 2, 2.4 GHz
Graphic: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
RAM: 4 GB, DDR 3.

Has anyone been able to play the game with such slow machine?

Thanks.


You can definitely play ULTRA on this specs in WINDOWS
I have a slightly lower spec computer than yours and I can play in high /ultra in windows XP BUT in linux it is quite laggy even in medium settings. You probably have to spend time tweaking stuff in linux if you want to play at high/ultra.

sprocket10
August 7th, 2010, 02:34 AM
I'm using 4-yr old laptop hardware and it can run on "Low" settings:

Dual Core @ 1.66GHz
2GB DDR2 RAM
320GB Hard Drive @ 7200rpm
128MB ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 card

These are in my Dell E1505 laptop. I get about 0-5 fps during the high-def cinematics in single player, 5-15 fps in game, 5-20 fps during the pre and post-mission stuff in single player. It is playable though. I'm not in a hurry to buy a new machine, although it'd be nice! ;)

gnomeuser
August 7th, 2010, 10:44 AM
Wait, I could swear a baby was just born, how do you even have time for a Starcraft sequel?

I didn't play the first one much but I recall it as a challenging game, I always loved RTS games but I have to admit I never quite found the same level of enjoyment in Starcraft as other people tend to. My game was always Ground Control.

In that vein, I have recently discovered Achron (http://achrongame.com/), a meta-time RTS game with Linux support (64bit only for the moment as it is in alpha). It's an indie game so one even gets the sense of helping the little guy and at the price one gets to see an interesting idea unfold.

Milos_SD
August 7th, 2010, 12:27 PM
@Milos_SD: Windows or linux?

On Ubuntu ofcourse. :)

razorboy5
August 7th, 2010, 08:54 PM
Hey
I'm ranked usually in the top 20 of my Gold league was wondering if anyone wanna team up? If there's anyone in the higher leagues I'd love some help and advice, can't seem to make it to the top 10 of my league (whenever i do make it i drop back down)

Would love to go 2v2s or if there's other players wanted to team up too make even make a 4v4 team. Name's Aerok on SC2

lee shore
August 7th, 2010, 10:31 PM
I have a lenovo t400 with the following specs, do I need to install windows or it is sufficient to play?

CPU: T9400 core Due 2, 2.4 GHz
Graphic: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
RAM: 4 GB, DDR 3.

Has anyone been able to play the game with such slow machine?

Thanks.


I don't think your card matters, now I read that you need a good cpu rather than a good card.

beastrace91
August 7th, 2010, 10:53 PM
This game is EPIC. And works well under Wine :)

Worth the buy, just like all of Blizzards non-MMO titles.

~Jeff

toupeiro
August 8th, 2010, 12:16 AM
It's a great game, runs good under wine. I'm currently playing in ultra for everything that can be ultra.

Core i7 940
6GB RAM
Geforce GTX260-OC

My biggest complaint, I run a 2 headed machine, and the game does not "grab" the mouse in the window its playing in which makes scrolling the map much more difficult.

Zorgoth
August 8th, 2010, 06:08 PM
Downloading now :D

- I think that CPU and not GPU must be the performance bottleneck here based on what I've been reading. So with my CPU I think I should be fine - I'll post here again when I've got it working and tell you how it goes!

BuffaloX
August 8th, 2010, 08:43 PM
Hey
I'm ranked usually in the top 20 of my Gold league was wondering if anyone wanna team up? If there's anyone in the higher leagues I'd love some help and advice, can't seem to make it to the top 10 of my league (whenever i do make it i drop back down)

Would love to go 2v2s or if there's other players wanted to team up too make even make a 4v4 team. Name's Aerok on SC2

Right now I'm top 10 silver, but thanks to Blizzard region restrictions we can't play.
I think my entire group is improving, because it gets harder and harder to improve my position in my league.

Zorgoth
August 10th, 2010, 03:18 AM
Preliminary performance report:

Starcraft 2 seems to work very well (on the computer in my sig). There were some initial graphics bugs - first there was a critically bad bug with text rendering, but that was fixed on the first restart - not sure whether that was just a one-time problem or whether it was switching from fullscreen to windowed mode. There was also a bug where the talking heads were messed up black and white flashy things, which was fixed when I set graphics to low. Also there are some issues with mouse scroll which hopefully I'll find a kludge for.

I played through the tutorial and the first campaign mission. I imagine things might get harder on my poor little graphics card in higher levels.

I was getting pretty playable framerates on max graphics for low shaders at 1920x1080. I don't know how to record the exact framerate - could someone help me with that?

Also the installer had no text at some points, so I just guessed where the right buttons were from the sounds.

EDIT: Confirming that it is only really possible to play the game at low shader settings. Anything higher causes bizarre effects, which increase with each step. Medium is technically playable but the talking heads are too annoying (they are basically flashing black and white wire frames), high has the bugs of medium plus areas of the screen the mouse hovers get whited out, and ultra is just nuts with funny colors and everything. Anyone have similar problems w/or w/o an ATI card, and anyone have a fix?

It would be nice to at least be able to play with medium shaders since my computer is clearly capable.

sprocket10
August 10th, 2010, 06:05 AM
^ Your CPU should be good for running at higher graphics. Still, if you really wanna try to up the graphics, check these out first: http://starcraft.incgamers.com/blog/comments/ati-beta-drivers-with-starcraft-2-anti-aliasing-released/ I've heard some success stories with those drivers.

Zorgoth
August 10th, 2010, 01:03 PM
Is there a Linux equivalent to those drivers? They seemed to be talking about Windows. I am using Catalyst 10.7 if that is what you are tlaking about.

Desti
August 21st, 2010, 05:00 PM
Hi, any1 interesting in setting up some teams to blow up some windows? I'm in us.battle.net, pm me.