Google+

StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty review

Back to Article

67 comments

  • Onepersonwithnoopinion - July 31, 2010 2:59 p.m.

    Wow, you guys sure are eating this up.
  • crumbdunky - July 31, 2010 1:03 p.m.

    Nothing against SC in general( not my favourite games but great at what they do for sure)but after a couple of nights sharing a game with my obsessive SC fan mate I also can't say I think it's a 10/10 game either. As a sequel it really doesn't move far enough along from last time or other games in the genre-a modern malaise I realise-and these perfect sxcores are getting me down now! Seriously, what the eff hapens if a perfect game actually arrives for review? Why are 90% of reviews stuck in the 7 to 10/10 range? My point is that a lot of games get 10/10 and really AREN'T all of the same exact qality and for smeone who might not have time to read the full pros and cons the scores are getting way too murky to rely on as a guide for buyers imn any meaningful way. I despise Meta for causing this and it's high time we either dropped review scores all together OR had a set method and range that everyone agrees to use to the full so a game can't get a seven just because the reviewer doesn't want Gerstmann soup and a P45 for brekkie after playing something mediocre. Great AND crap games gets 7/10 while decent and great games get 10/10 these days. It's broken as it gets, imho.
  • Austin_SJ - July 31, 2010 11:42 a.m.

    Played it, beat it, loved it. People who are moaning that there is no innovation should look at the mess that is C&C4, which is the perfect example of a game that moved too far from its roots and ended up sucking because of it. Even then it would still be unfair to say that there has been no innovation, because you only have to look at the Reapers and the Stalkers to see units that add a completely new dimension to the tactics of the game. My Laptop is by no means a top of the range piece of kit, but it runs Starcraft 2 smoothly and with enough detail for me to be impressed. As for those too tight fisted to shell out $60 for the game, well tough luck, Blizzard aren't your personal charity.
  • GG Gabby - July 31, 2010 10:14 a.m.

    oooohhhhhhhhhh 10 out of 10? No flaws? Blizzard worked hard for this decade. XD
  • Daggerstone - July 31, 2010 10:03 a.m.

    @Mastersword369, I dont think someone with the name "Mastersword" can say a comment like "Blowing the people at Blizzard who are taking a bath in silver dollars." Nintendo is just as bad with all of their rehashes. Look at the 3ds/ Wii/ anything they have done recent years. They have just as big a bath tub but they use the shiny gold coins with the indian on them.
  • mubobi7593 - July 31, 2010 8:08 a.m.

    Thank you very much, JohnnyMaverik, for being absolutely right. Words > Number, if you will Anyway, prolly won't play this, looks AWESOME, though. And what's this whining about $60? All the brand new games I ever bought were $60.
  • Gotxxrock - July 31, 2010 7:11 a.m.

    Wow, haven't posted anything in awhile. Here's my two cents. In terms of campaign and storyline, Star Craft II greatly outshines the Dawn of War series, but in terms of general lore and multiplayer, DOW totally wins in my opinion. I'm someone who gets very sentimental with his units, and enjoy watching them grow, expand and flourish. DOW II provides the goods in this department. Ihate pumping out monotonous horde armies just to watch another one of equal size crash into mine and have some arbitrary, random outcome. Starcraft II delivers here. Not to mention a squad of Starcraft Marines/Zealots/Zerglings can easily kill tanks and heavy walkers, which I think is just ludicrous. Sheesh!
  • Spybreak8 - July 31, 2010 5:26 a.m.

    As I was a little bummed I couldn't walk around Hyperon aka Mass Effect's Normandy the different areas of the ship and their correlation to Raynor's options are cool. I gotta say each mission feels like it belongs and it's not just go out and destroy this guy's base. One thing C&C could learn is not always having it be take out all the opponent's buildings. I plan on playing the campaign at least three times due to the different varieties of player choice/upgrades/research/mission selections! I also love that they have a mission archive where we can play missions over again anytime we want.
  • Gahmah - July 31, 2010 4:59 a.m.

    I'm curious to see what relic does next, or massive entertainment, been playing sc2 still all build order and strat, tactics seem lacking to me, though it is a strategy game after all! win every battle but always lose the war.
  • Cwf2008 - July 31, 2010 4:46 a.m.

    10...what a surprise
  • JohnnyMaverik - July 31, 2010 3:56 a.m.

    I'm not a massive RTS fan and will probably never play this, I'm sure it's great and I'm sure it deserves the scores but my best mate at high school was Korean and forced me to play the first Starcraft AGAINST him, and now I'm scared for life. But, it'd be fucking awesome if an RTS got a ton of GOTY awards ^_^ Also @ all the people saying this a 9... seriously this is GR (no real disrespect meant GR), a game doesn't have to evolve a genre to get a 10 , or even be something everybody would like. I mean Halo 3 got a fking 10, so shh. Also, 9/10, who gives a shit? You should read reviews for recommendations not just to analyse the score at the bottom of the page.
  • Phantasmagorical - July 31, 2010 3:43 a.m.

    I'd give this game a 9. It's fun to play, it's got a lot of depth for an RTS game, and the nostalgia is huge. While the campaign has huge production value, it just didn't invigorate me as much as the campaigns in the original. There's just a lot of fluff, it's more light-hearted - while it adds more to the depth of the characters and universe that is Starcraft, it just doesn't have the same feeling of "end of the universe", "we're all screwed if you don't succeed in your mission", "you're our only hope." The story in this just never takes off. When it seems like it's about to take off, you're left with a cliffhanger; and the knowledge that you're going to have to fork out 60 bucks or more if you want to continue the adventure (albeit the fact it's going to be a year to way helps with the wallet). In any case, this campaign is definitely just a setup - the prologue, so to speak - of what's to come in the future. Multiplayer is multiplayer. It's Starcraft. It's good.
  • user151 - July 31, 2010 3:23 a.m.

    @Onepersonwithnoopinion Yes, as someone had pointed out earlier, contrary to your user name, you really got loads of opinions. But I beg to differ. According to Metacritic, this is on its way to becoming the best game of the year. Or it might even become one of the best RTS games of all time. I have no qualms about LAN being dropped, people rarely play on LAN these days. I only worry about how are they going to handle the tourneys. And this is a FULL game with full multi-player capability and 30 missions. Not a third of a game that you have pointed out. So I don't think 60 is overpriced. Btw, I'm no fanboy either. I just think you're one of those haters.
  • Onepersonwithnoopinion - July 31, 2010 2:36 a.m.

    Let me explain that. This is on third of a full game. You'll have to pay 30$ each for the other two parts, plus online. Also, no LAN, you can't play against people that are out of the country, if your level gets picked for being part of a large scale community-based DLC program that they will be running in the future you won't make much of a profit off of it, and pretty much anything else that is wrong with Battle.net/Blizzard gets tagged along with this. Have fun.
  • DrillurSimpson - July 31, 2010 2:02 a.m.

    And what the fuck, this is not $120??? lol
  • DrillurSimpson - July 31, 2010 2:01 a.m.

    I'll stick to my old shitty ass RTS games while the rest of the world plays StarCraft II. Dude, GamesRadar readers are hardcore anti RTS players. lol I love the "You'll hate" section at the end, got me laughing
  • Hobojedi - July 31, 2010 2 a.m.

    You weren't payed by blizzard to give it a 10, were you? 'cause I've been hearing rumors that blizzard did that to a few other review sites.
  • FriendlyFire - July 31, 2010 1:40 a.m.

    I'll stick to my Company of Heroes, thanks. Apart from gimmicks and the story, I haven't read anything in this review that sounds interesting. Nothing new or fresh; "SC1 with more units and better graphics". Woopdeedoo. Just as I had expected.
  • Onepersonwithnoopinion - July 31, 2010 12:12 a.m.

    Another thing: Do you guys really want to spend 120$ on one PC game? If you want to buy this, wait for the battlechest to come out.
  • Onepersonwithnoopinion - July 31, 2010 12:10 a.m.

    Exactly Matt. I could run this on a 500$ prebuilt Dell if I wanted to. I don't. Also thank you weker. There is no way that this is the best game for the year. Best RTS maybe, but not best overall.

Showing 21-40 of 67 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

More Info

Available Platforms: PC
Genre: Strategy
Published by: Blizzard
Developed by: Blizzard
Franchise: StarCraft
ESRB Rating:
Rating Pending