Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty

 PC
User Score
8.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 3772 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,975 out of 3772
  2. Mixed: 410 out of 3772
  3. Negative: 387 out of 3772
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. YoloSwag4Doge
    Jul 12, 2018
    9
    I've never played the first StarCraft and judging by how the game was reviewed by some, it seems that's advantageous, because everything was fresh for me. I can definitely see why some people would be less than impressed with the gameplay. I haven't played a ton of MP, but it seems most of your attention is spent on building and teching properly. You're essentially just trying to amass aI've never played the first StarCraft and judging by how the game was reviewed by some, it seems that's advantageous, because everything was fresh for me. I can definitely see why some people would be less than impressed with the gameplay. I haven't played a ton of MP, but it seems most of your attention is spent on building and teching properly. You're essentially just trying to amass a blob quicker than your enemy so you can wipe them out in one sweep, with rushing being the sort of tactic that either wins or loses you the game. There's virtually no grand scale strategizing and the unit's overall low time to kill makes micro managing counterproductive unless done incredibly quickly.

    I've mainly just been playing the co-op modes and campaign, especially since most of the community at this point is god-tier. For being an 8 year old game at the time of writing, I'm actually really impressed with how much quality and content this game has. The graphics have held up well, though the units are all quite small, meaning you can't really see much in the way of detail anyways. The cut scenes are plentiful and are very high grade ascetically, giving them a distinct movie quality. These days devs, (due to cost cutting publisher execs), generally try to avoid cut scenes altogether. So getting really crisp, sci-fi cinema is a real treat.

    I understand that the campaign won't be for everyone, (especially if you find the SC gameplay boring), but they've done an objectively stellar job on fleshing out the campaign with quality content. As you'd expect, the story is built around the gameplay, meaning it's relatively generic and filled to the brim with tropes and cliches. (I found the main character's romanticized alcoholism pretty cringey, but again it's another trope). You'll notice the universe has a western vibe very similar to Firefly and sci-fi elements that parallel closely to Warhammer 40k, but I personally don't have an issue with this since SC undoubtedly maintains it's own creative spin. Characters, though fairly generic overall, are likable and fit well with the plot. What I really liked is how in between missions you can talk with the various characters you're working with, potentially giving you a more personal connection with them. Despite their noticeable lack of depth, I couldn't help enjoying them anyways because of how they're depicted with having flaws alongside their grit and comradry. I thought this conversation feature to be a really nice touch given how RTS's often cheap out on fleshing out their campaigns.

    If you find the gameplay enjoyable, then you'll notice how well done the missions are. Each map is distinguishable, being set in a wide range of worldly environments. Though the primary formula is usually to build a base and defeat X, each mission involves it's own set of narrative objectives that have their own twists to accomplish, with optional side objectives to complete if you want to keep things interesting. Some missions involve controlling heroes with special abilities and though I found these missions to be fairly easy, they were fun and memorable. While the plot certainly accommodates for the creative gameplay designs in ways that are extremely unrealistic, even for a sci-fi setting, the two still synergize really well. Overall, I was amazed with how effectively the devs were able to come up with different spins that make each mission it's own.

    Lastly, there's a lot of substance put into differentiating the three races. The terran have a combination of components seen in a plethora of other sci-fi universes, such as mechanical armor, mechanized walkers and troop drop pods. Their build elements mirror that seen in other RTS games. The protos, an alien race, remind me a lot of Halo's covenant or 40k's eldar, with their advanced technology, shielding and arrogant demeanor. Their units and build functions are in some cases considerably different from the terrans.

    The zerg though just blow me away. They're very similar to 40k's tyranids in their overall design, but the craftsmanship put into them is incredible. Each unit is distinct, and appropriately disgusting to look at with their insectoid appearances. A lot of their units have very unique functions and the way their build system works is not only inventive, but perfectly fitting for the bio-technological theme they have. I couldn't get over how much I enjoyed playing the zerg campaign, (additionally priced DLC), and how much their play style aligns with the game's horde focused functionality.

    The additional DLC campaigns feature the same content excellence and polish seen in the first. I bought them all at half price and they're all well worth it. If you didn't like the terran campaign, then you won't like them either, as it's really the exact same formula with new characters, a continuation of the plot and more of the ingenious level designs.

    Overall, SC2 is filled with grade A content and holds up well even today.    … Expand
  2. ThecriticGoD
    Mar 7, 2016
    9
    The proof that RTS games can still be good nowadays. It's not as good as Starcraft : broodwar, gameplay-wise or story-wise but it's definetely really cool visually, very entertaining and it's a lot of fun to learn to master all 3 races, also the multiplayer is extremely competitive.
  3. CaptainBounty
    Mar 9, 2016
    9
    If blizzard is good at anything, it surely is RTS. They used the old formular and applied it on another flagship-brands of their company. The outcome is a great competetive game, interesting campaign and vast loads of user created funmaps. They took what was good in SC, added some more good stuff, and pressed it into SC2. Hell, it about time!
  4. hpw182
    Apr 17, 2016
    9
    El videojuego contiene una historia que me encanta, la jugabilidad es muy buena, te deja tomar ciertas decisiones en la historia que cambian el curso de los acontecimientos, a pesar de que sólo tiene 3 facciones para elegir están las tres muy cuidadas y completas entrelazando entre sí una trama muy buena.

    La jugabilidad es bastante buena, y el modo campaña me resultó bastante bueno, a    El videojuego contiene una historia que me encanta, la jugabilidad es muy buena, te deja tomar ciertas decisiones en la historia que cambian el curso de los acontecimientos, a pesar de que sólo tiene 3 facciones para elegir están las tres muy cuidadas y completas entrelazando entre sí una trama muy buena.

    La jugabilidad es bastante buena, y el modo campaña me resultó bastante bueno, a parte de que la dificultad del juego te hará exprimir tu cerebro en las dificultades más altas, para mí el mejor juego de estrategia futurista.    … Expand
  5. Demon2017
    Jun 19, 2022
    9
    Самая лучшая стратегия. Единственная проблема, что игру поделили на 3 эпизода, они хоть и длинные и тянут на отдельные игры, но все равно, это немного сбивает понимание сюжета.
  6. Flemat
    Jul 27, 2020
    9
    9/10

    A very good game.
    Was a huge fan to the original Starcraft and Brood war. Was hyped when it was announced and came out. Solid story and campaign, and just as good multiplayer. Its almost starcraft 1 but with better graphics and sounds and some general changes.
  7. TBT
    Apr 6, 2019
    9
    The classic real time strategy franchise with incredibly well balanced factions, frenetic action. This is a game that can be played for years, like chess. It has redefined the genre and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future.

    Regarding the creative direction, it's a fine-tune sci-fi world, charming and brutal: beautiful aesthetics, charismatic units (something that's often    The classic real time strategy franchise with incredibly well balanced factions, frenetic action. This is a game that can be played for years, like chess. It has redefined the genre and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future.

    Regarding the creative direction, it's a fine-tune sci-fi world, charming and brutal: beautiful aesthetics, charismatic units (something that's often lacking in the RTA genre), great soundtrack. The player is transported into the future, whether you pick the Terrans, the Zergs or the Protoss.    … Expand
  8. Kotofon
    Nov 2, 2021
    9
    StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty — продолжение культовой StarCraft. В отличие от предыдущей игры серии, StarCraft II выполнен в трёхмерной графике. Как и в StarCraft, основной акцент в игре делается на добыче ресурсов и многочисленных сражениях. Добывая ресурсы, игрок получает средства для строительства зданий, которые могут производить боевые единицы и улучшать их. Главное назначениеStarCraft II: Wings of Liberty — продолжение культовой StarCraft. В отличие от предыдущей игры серии, StarCraft II выполнен в трёхмерной графике. Как и в StarCraft, основной акцент в игре делается на добыче ресурсов и многочисленных сражениях. Добывая ресурсы, игрок получает средства для строительства зданий, которые могут производить боевые единицы и улучшать их. Главное назначение боевых единиц — добыча ресурсов и атака противника. Цель игрока — уничтожить все здания противника (но необязательно все боевые единицы).… Expand
  9. Ruzaky
    Aug 6, 2020
    9
    Pretty much the best you can do out of Rts. Campaing is super fun. Finished it like 5 times at this point. And will comeback to it more in years :)
  10. Red_Spectre
    Jun 3, 2019
    9
    If you like Real Time Strategy, games this is one of the best ones.
    There are so many different ways to play Starcraft.
  11. GameJoin
    Mar 18, 2019
    9
    A great game, no doubt about it. Classic RTS's golden boy no1.
    Enjoyable campaign and great multiplayer. It's quite hard to get in to at the beginning though, and in my opinion the base building is too APM demanding.
  12. JesterTRT
    Jan 17, 2020
    9
    Such an old game now... And it still holds up. After playing other RTS, I still find myself returning to Starcraft. I've played this game to death back when it first launched, and every year I return to it.

    A lot of other RTS games always try to over complicate the games. So I like the simplicity, yet still huge variety that Starcraft offers. The campaign mode is actually good for an    Such an old game now... And it still holds up. After playing other RTS, I still find myself returning to Starcraft. I've played this game to death back when it first launched, and every year I return to it.

    A lot of other RTS games always try to over complicate the games. So I like the simplicity, yet still huge variety that Starcraft offers.

    The campaign mode is actually good for an RTS. Each three class, now with their own campaign as well. But main characters to follow their storylines. And of course, the many many custom maps and mods, arcade modes, and now the really fun co-op mode!

    I wish they'd expand upon the co-op mode and make some 4 player co-op modes. And then redo an entire full campaign with a co-op mode. I'd love to go through the campaign, gaining gas and mats and money, just like the normal campaign. But only with a friend. Upgrading our units differently as we go. And take on a full co-op campaign.    … Expand
  13. Genek13
    Nov 20, 2019
    9
    Sequel on of the best RTS games in history, which I never played.
    That's why I give a chance to this one and I was not disappointed.
    Great gameplay, MP and campaign.
    What more do you want :)
  14. Rimpy1996
    May 23, 2020
    9
    Meticulously designed, balanced effects, ineffable storyline and an egregious supervillan!
  15. DaPonti
    Mar 20, 2021
    9
    My only complaint about Wings of Liberty is the scale of the campaign story. In Starcraft and Brood war, 3 races were fighting for supremacy of the sector. Here, you're a small rebellion fighting for scraps.
    Apart from that, the campaign is actually great, with a lot of variations and a good progress mechanism.
    Blizzard tried hard for both single and multiplayer to make the game    My only complaint about Wings of Liberty is the scale of the campaign story. In Starcraft and Brood war, 3 races were fighting for supremacy of the sector. Here, you're a small rebellion fighting for scraps.
    Apart from that, the campaign is actually great, with a lot of variations and a good progress mechanism.
    Blizzard tried hard for both single and multiplayer to make the game approachable, but it remains very challenging to master. It is definitely varied and more challenging than the original Starcraft.    … Expand
  16. zzz_DeV1L_zzz
    Jun 7, 2020
    9
    Great, great story. The game is addictive, worry about the main characters. Definitely 9 points.
  17. Sal1k
    Jul 7, 2020
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Nice game, but 9 is the best that I can give because of rank system. And, I think that this game can have third part! (Hope it will be!)… Expand
  18. Torgall
    Dec 13, 2020
    9
    Very good real-time strategy, one of the real-time strategies that I played the most. Fans of the original game seem to be very divided in their score, but all I can say it was worth the money.
  19. SauceBox6
    Nov 26, 2022
    9
    10 - Masterpiece
    9 - Amazing
    8 - Great
    7 - Good
    6 - Okay
    5 - Mediocre
    4 - Bad
    3 - Awful
    2 - Painful
    1 - Unbearable
  20. brenty
    Aug 5, 2010
    8
    one point away for the price of the game, another point for the combination of making us wait for so long and bringing very little new to the table. also the fact thats it 1/3 of a game, but im fine with that since it works on its own. everything else is fun tho, the game play is well balanced and it seems like they spent more time on the story this time (its always nice even when the one point away for the price of the game, another point for the combination of making us wait for so long and bringing very little new to the table. also the fact thats it 1/3 of a game, but im fine with that since it works on its own. everything else is fun tho, the game play is well balanced and it seems like they spent more time on the story this time (its always nice even when the story has been done many times). all in all, starcraft fans have to buy it, everyone else, wait till the price goes down.… Expand
  21. RandallO.
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    I would love to give this game less than an eight, because that is what it deserves. However when looking at the bigger picture I realize i thoroughly enjoy the game itself so it warrants an eight. However, Blizzard F'ed up big time in many departments. 1) Battle.net 2.0 sucks horribly. 2) Blizzard tried to innovate and the UI (User Interface) is horribly like Dawn of War 2 and XBOX I would love to give this game less than an eight, because that is what it deserves. However when looking at the bigger picture I realize i thoroughly enjoy the game itself so it warrants an eight. However, Blizzard F'ed up big time in many departments. 1) Battle.net 2.0 sucks horribly. 2) Blizzard tried to innovate and the UI (User Interface) is horribly like Dawn of War 2 and XBOX Live. (Both Suck) 3) I can't add my Mexican friend because he plays in a different realm. 4)There's no chat channels. (OKAY????) 5) I played the BETA (thousands of complaints went unheard. 6) Custom games are joined by map title basis (Example. I join a popular custom game i. e. Dota. Host is afk. I leave and rejoin and it auto puts me back with that host. You can't specify custom game names like no rush, all random ettc..) and many other problems with StarCraft 2 besides the gameplay itself. I could rant on and on about more things that are messed up. Like the clan system in warcraft 3 was brilliant and the Tournaments were awesome. So far the Campaign is fun but i'm not that far into it. It is utterly better than any other rts i've played in terms of the game itself and will be a great E Sport. Blizzard needs to fix the UI.… Expand
  22. ConstantineP
    Aug 1, 2010
    8
    Actually I'd give it 85%. It's a great game, but the hype was so big it just couldn't live up to the expectations. All that talk about EPIC story and such - never happened. Story is weak and derivative: ALL of it we already have read/watched/played before in some other book/movie/game. Starcraft got lots of nice touches and fun things and perks and tweaks and so on, but Actually I'd give it 85%. It's a great game, but the hype was so big it just couldn't live up to the expectations. All that talk about EPIC story and such - never happened. Story is weak and derivative: ALL of it we already have read/watched/played before in some other book/movie/game. Starcraft got lots of nice touches and fun things and perks and tweaks and so on, but truth be told it's not as fun second time. Blizzard just took way too long with the release.… Expand
  23. Derek
    Aug 2, 2010
    8
    Felt that the game lost some of it's draw over the decade in-between sequels. A lot has happened since then, making it tough to go back and play an old school RTS without some disappointment. The game does what it wants to do with excellence, but falls short of the greatness that the original achieved.
  24. Erik
    Aug 6, 2010
    8
    It ain't perfect but nothing really is. I do really enjoy this reborn version of one of my favorit game, the campaign might be a bit cliché but still I feel hooked into it. The thing about being connected to Bnet all time is annoying but works very well and so does the matching system inside the game. But I would also like to point out that anything that is but into the game It ain't perfect but nothing really is. I do really enjoy this reborn version of one of my favorit game, the campaign might be a bit cliché but still I feel hooked into it. The thing about being connected to Bnet all time is annoying but works very well and so does the matching system inside the game. But I would also like to point out that anything that is but into the game Blizzard has approved of which is why they only get a 8 from me. Dropping LAN ain't ok Blizz!… Expand
  25. LarryF
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    A few nice features but overall the single player was underwhelming. The script felt lacking in places and in others thrown together, some voice acting wasn't on par with what I was expecting from a game developed by Blizzard, not to mention all the sub-plots just seemed tacked on with no real dept. Also, the game as a whole felt like it was taking me by the hand, step-by-step, A few nice features but overall the single player was underwhelming. The script felt lacking in places and in others thrown together, some voice acting wasn't on par with what I was expecting from a game developed by Blizzard, not to mention all the sub-plots just seemed tacked on with no real dept. Also, the game as a whole felt like it was taking me by the hand, step-by-step, leaving little to the imagination. Even parts in the campaign made me feel like the game was made with eight year olds in mind where the protagonist(Jim Raynor) would repeat what objective he had to do and exactly how he was going to do it. Great animations, great quality overall but, again, the single player could have had more of a story to tell and felt more "epic", more "complete" without tacked on side quests with no real value other than to contribute to gimmicks such as aquiring cash for armour or new units. I'm hopeful the community will put together some good custom maps ala WarCraft III in due time, however. Single Player gets an 8/10 from me. Story just wasn't all that and some parts simply felt thrown together. Multiplayer, in time, should prove to be a good experience but i'm not liking the popularity listings of custom maps. Honestly, if you want to play it for custom maps stick with WarCraft III for now, if the SC2 competitive RTS is what you're realling looking into then go for it(WC3 and SC are very different). Again, single player could have been better.… Expand
  26. JensJ
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    While this game certainly is well made, I still can't understand why it took so long to make. There really is no big difference between the old StarCraft and the new StarCraft. Graphics is better, there is a new storyline with beautyful cutscenes, but still the gameplay is exactly the same as the first one. Not much new has been added and that is why I can't give this more than an 8.
  27. DaveC
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    Love the graphics. The plot is interesting enough to keep me playing. The missions are split in such a way that I can play one or two, and feel like I accomplished something, while also knowing there's a long way to go. Unit and Tech upgrades are a nice addition that allows you to cater to you playstyle. Multi matchmaking is quick and painless. Achievements are a great addition that Love the graphics. The plot is interesting enough to keep me playing. The missions are split in such a way that I can play one or two, and feel like I accomplished something, while also knowing there's a long way to go. Unit and Tech upgrades are a nice addition that allows you to cater to you playstyle. Multi matchmaking is quick and painless. Achievements are a great addition that makes you pay attenion to details you might otherwise ignore. Autosave is intelligent, and the interface is beautifully polished. Only a couple of complaints. I don't feel like I'm playing a new game much as replaying something I've beat before. I guess that's one way to create a sequel, and it was probably the safest path for Blizz, but I was hoping for a bit more innovation. Rumor has it that each races single player campaign will be sold seperately? I'm not sure I believe it, but that would fall in line with past decisions by Blizz, and the general trend of the modern market. Shipping without campaigns for multiple races lost it a point though. Last complaint is mostly concern about multiplayer micro. Either you've mastered it, or you lose. That's it. It's razor-fine balance that makes multi unenjoyable for casuals. Overall, worth $50. $60 seems a bit much, but I bought it so it must be close.… Expand
  28. IanH
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    Well looks like im going against the grain, i dont think its either perfect (score of 10) or worthless (score of 0). Its a very polished RTS, if you didnt like starcraft 1, you wont like this one either. Its bascially the same game. Its an 'old-fashioned' RTS in the same vein as command and conquer. Nothing wrong with that, but dont expect anything different, like the cover Well looks like im going against the grain, i dont think its either perfect (score of 10) or worthless (score of 0). Its a very polished RTS, if you didnt like starcraft 1, you wont like this one either. Its bascially the same game. Its an 'old-fashioned' RTS in the same vein as command and conquer. Nothing wrong with that, but dont expect anything different, like the cover system in Company of Heroes, or the trading system in Battleforge etc. This is a traditional very polished RTS. Multiplayer seems stable, the single player story line is excellent. But as an overall game there are better RTS's in my opinion.… Expand
  29. ShaneB
    Jul 29, 2010
    8
    Fantastic game, great single player campaign and excellent multiplayer gameplay. My only issue with the game is that it does feel incomplete once you beat the Terran Campaign. Blizzard should have waited to complete the entire game and it does feel like a money grab on their part.
  30. JoshN
    Jul 30, 2010
    8
    It's been roughly 10 years since the release of the original Starcraft, and since then, Blizzard has definitely took their time to create a magnificent game. That being said, the amount of effort they put into the game has definitely shown, however, there are still flaws. The multiplayer for Starcraft is the core of the game, and as usual, Blizzard has done a fantastic job on it, It's been roughly 10 years since the release of the original Starcraft, and since then, Blizzard has definitely took their time to create a magnificent game. That being said, the amount of effort they put into the game has definitely shown, however, there are still flaws. The multiplayer for Starcraft is the core of the game, and as usual, Blizzard has done a fantastic job on it, adding hundreds of hours on replay value. Though the game itself is good, it just isn't that magnificent as a whole. The lack of social communication between the Starcraft community is very lacking, given that there are no chatrooms, it is very difficult for others to interact with eachother. The single player itself is great, but that does not mean it does not need improvement. The missions are relatively similar, and is usually the same song and dance. Their attempt to use the in-game engine for the cinematics to replace the CGI was a terrible decision, and though it is not completely horrible - more could have been done to improve this aspect. Fans of the series will definitely enjoy this sequel , but will be dissappointed with the social aspect of the game.… Expand
  31. SchlistaS
    Jul 30, 2010
    8
    This is the hardest game to review for me. It's a great great game; however, it really is just Starcraft reskinned. I loved starcraft, one of the best games ever made and deserves a 10. But this is just more of the same which isn't a bad thing, but I also loved crackdown and was a bit let down when crackdown 2 was pretty much more of the same. So from a review standpoint while This is the hardest game to review for me. It's a great great game; however, it really is just Starcraft reskinned. I loved starcraft, one of the best games ever made and deserves a 10. But this is just more of the same which isn't a bad thing, but I also loved crackdown and was a bit let down when crackdown 2 was pretty much more of the same. So from a review standpoint while Starcraft is a fantastic game it is pretty much Starcraft with 2008 graphics.… Expand
  32. AgarwelI
    Aug 1, 2010
    8
    It is a very good game. But nothing more. Very similar to other RTS games and nothing more. So is it worth buying? Definetly? It is some extraordinary game that should be praised and call best game ever? Not at all. Release of this game is nothing more than release of Uncahrted2, Halo3, Deus Ex3 etc. Just another very good game. But there is like 10 of such games each year. So there is no It is a very good game. But nothing more. Very similar to other RTS games and nothing more. So is it worth buying? Definetly? It is some extraordinary game that should be praised and call best game ever? Not at all. Release of this game is nothing more than release of Uncahrted2, Halo3, Deus Ex3 etc. Just another very good game. But there is like 10 of such games each year. So there is no reason to make a special celebration for this one.… Expand
  33. alexandreP
    Aug 2, 2010
    8
    Strip the cutscenes away and you have a kind of booring RTS in single player. Multi-player it's another thing, but playing the campaign it's not quite fun, it's ok but not what I expected.
  34. Jim
    Aug 2, 2010
    8
    I loved the original Starcraft, but seriously, fanboi hat off for this. Yes, it's an amazing game. Graphics are very good, system reqs reasonable, cinematics are incredible, multiplayer was beta tested to death (and boy does it show with the amazing balance of gameplay), and the Terran campaign is decent. It's more than just a new coat of paint on the old game, but you can see I loved the original Starcraft, but seriously, fanboi hat off for this. Yes, it's an amazing game. Graphics are very good, system reqs reasonable, cinematics are incredible, multiplayer was beta tested to death (and boy does it show with the amazing balance of gameplay), and the Terran campaign is decent. It's more than just a new coat of paint on the old game, but you can see though that the gameplay is evolutionary of the original game, not revolutionary. Blizzard had to do this so the game would find instant favour with the legions of Starcraft 1 fans. However, you just know that Blizzard held back Protoss and Zerg campaigns so they can wring more cash out of people buying this game. And you can be guaranteed that those 'expansions' will contain new branches to the existing tech trees for multiplayer, so you will have to buy them, even if you're not interested in the campaigns. Let's face it, multiplayer is the core of this game - but no LAN play is a slap in the face, forcing you onto Battle.net. An obvious ploy to deter piracy at the expense of people who buy the game, and forcing people into their realm for buying their retarded horse DLC. You can be sure there will be a "complete" battle chest edition in the future, with all the content that should have been there from the start. Then if they add LAN play back in, this game would be a perfect 10.… Expand
  35. PeterC
    Aug 4, 2010
    8
    I've heard all the arguments against this game, and it always, always, always comes down to one of 4 things 1) Its not as innovative as I thought it would be This is usually in reference to things associated with older RTS's, like base building. Well, its the second game in a series, if it were completely different, people would complain that they're simply trying to ride I've heard all the arguments against this game, and it always, always, always comes down to one of 4 things 1) Its not as innovative as I thought it would be This is usually in reference to things associated with older RTS's, like base building. Well, its the second game in a series, if it were completely different, people would complain that they're simply trying to ride the Starcraft name. The way I see this, it would be like people complaining that diablo 3 has too many dungeons. 2) There's no LAN play. Yes, this is a problem. This is also the reason I dropped the score a bit. I hope they come out with a patch that corrects this particular decision at some point. 3) battlenet is too hard Either you're really, really terrible at the game, or you haven't gotten through the placement matches. I find the game is quite good at putting you into somewhere you're competitive, neither dominating nor dominated. The lowest brackets allow people to start slowly and still have a good chance at winning the match, even without a clear strategy 4) Its only 1/3 of a game No, its not. Most non-rpg games run about 20-30 hours. Thats about what the story mode in starcraft 2 runs. Then there's the multiplayer on top of that. If this were the first game in the series, and blizzard simply announced 2 planned expansions for the other races, I doubt many people would complain about this at all. The other 2 games will be expansions, and so sold at a cheaper price (my guess would be somewhere around $30), and they'll be the same length Overall, I found the story engaging, the gameplay is challenging in the story mode and competitive in multiplayer. There are enough changes from the first game that it feels like a new game, but retains enough similarity that it feels somewhat familiar. A lot of the original strategies are still there, but i see a lot of room for new ones too.… Expand
  36. NicholasB
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    Okay everyone shut up, this game is decent. The gameplay is similar to the first one, the graphics are great by today's standards, the campaign has a nice length to it(about 8 hours worth of playtime), and the multiplayer is top notch. However, the story isn't that great, it might be hard for newer players to get in and win, and the fact that this is only 1/3rd of a game pushes Okay everyone shut up, this game is decent. The gameplay is similar to the first one, the graphics are great by today's standards, the campaign has a nice length to it(about 8 hours worth of playtime), and the multiplayer is top notch. However, the story isn't that great, it might be hard for newer players to get in and win, and the fact that this is only 1/3rd of a game pushes the score down to an 8. Wait for more scores to come in to decide if this is a good purchase.… Expand
  37. richardh.
    Jul 28, 2010
    8
    Looks like a 5 year old game,plays like a 10 year old game but that is not so bad a thing,after all some may have missed it back then,iget the feeling it sould be released as an xbox arcade type game and wonder where the 10 years of development wentthat is until i tried the hard setting,it brings thought and tacticts into an otherwise paint by numbers game,however it seems the levels are Looks like a 5 year old game,plays like a 10 year old game but that is not so bad a thing,after all some may have missed it back then,iget the feeling it sould be released as an xbox arcade type game and wonder where the 10 years of development wentthat is until i tried the hard setting,it brings thought and tacticts into an otherwise paint by numbers game,however it seems the levels are so polished by the designers it becomes linear at times.… Expand
  38. TrojA
    Jul 31, 2010
    8
    Good game, decent graphics, great design, good story (people call it cliché but come on, it's a RTS, not a movie) awesome multiplayer. It's Starcraft 1 with updated graphics, which is how it should be. While some people here give it a 1 for that reason, I don't, I wouldn't even want it changed. It's Starcraft, and it should stay that way. Look at C&C's Good game, decent graphics, great design, good story (people call it cliché but come on, it's a RTS, not a movie) awesome multiplayer. It's Starcraft 1 with updated graphics, which is how it should be. While some people here give it a 1 for that reason, I don't, I wouldn't even want it changed. It's Starcraft, and it should stay that way. Look at C&C's last episode, dissapointed most casual gamers and hardcore fans of the game. Also, don't be scared away by people saying it has horrible framerate, those people should either buy a new rig or update their drivers, because my laptop with a mobile hd 4850 runs it fine on settings on ultra.… Expand
  39. PepeM
    Jul 31, 2010
    8
    Why does everyone on metacritic vote games either 1 or 10? Everyone here is a fanboy or a hater. You guys are stupid. A 1 would mean its a horrible game thats not worth a dollar. A 10 would mean it's absolute perfection. Starcraft 2 is neither. It's a good game. It's well above average, but not perfect. Therefore i'm giving it an 8.
  40. Galenmereth
    Aug 13, 2010
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Gameplay:

    The gameplay of SC2 is superb. While some lament its decision to stay true to its old-school RTS roots invented back in the nineties, I cherish Blizzard for being bold enough to let it bask in its own simplistic-but-hard-to-master roots. StarCraft 2 feels like the Tetris of fast-paced strategy games. It's not the World of Warcraft of strategy games like a lot of people seemed to expect it to be, but it's the best fast-paced hardcore strategy game you'll find. And the campaign does these mechanics a great justice; it plays with the mechanics, easing you into the finer aspects of multitasking and micro-management over time, all the while keeping the gameplay interesting by changing the playing field and the rules constantly. The story supports the gameplay perfectly, giving you an intellectual reason to keep on playing.

    You can change the difficulty any time you want in between missions, meaning you're never locked into a tight spot if you find a mission is too hard for you on your current difficulty.

    It's great fun while it lasts, and it can last quite a while if you want to get all the achievements and unlock all the extra portraits. Not to mention the fact that the multiplayer aspect is a potentially endless hobby, one that will provide hundreds upon hundreds of hours if you're into the competitive aspects of multiplayer gaming.

    Story:

    There is a problem with the StarCraft II that you won't be aware of if you haven't read a lot about it beforehand, filtering out the preconceptions from the legitimate complaints, which is that the game is not a complete single player game. Although most of us know Wings of Liberty is the first part of a trilogy, I believe few of us were prepared for what this actually means. You see, the campaign ends so abruptly, there isn't even a cliffhanger to get you psyched up for the next installment. When the last and severely short cinematic faded into black and the credits started rolling, it felt like a fluke. As if watching a movie from a scratched disc that suddenly skipped to the ending, leaving out the essential last minutes of dialogue. My gripe is not that Wings of Liberty does not complete the story, but rather that it doesn't even try to wrap up its own part of it. It was a tremendous disappointment, even for me, who bought the game mostly for the multiplayer aspects.

    Summary:

    First of all, if you plan to buy Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty for the multiplayer, you don't really need a reason. This is StarCraft, and it's better than ever.

    However, if you plan to buy it purely for the single player experience, you need to ask yourself what's most important; the story or the gameplay. If you buy it for the former, you will be very disappointed. But if you buy it either purely for the gameplay experience or at least for both gameplay and story, you'll feel content even despite its somewhat amputated ending.    … Expand
  41. Chupwn
    Sep 4, 2010
    8
    It's a prettier starcraft, you play it just like the 1st one, only you can have unit groupings as big as you like. Oh, and terrans get very different equipment in Campaign mode, so when you switch over to multiplayer, you've got to rethink all your strategies.

    Love the music and the new layout of in-between mission area.
  42. Honkeymagoo
    Aug 26, 2010
    8
    This is Starcraft 2, if you're not an RTS fan this probably won't turn you into one, but if you're a Starcraft/ Warcraft player it won't disappoint. STORY: Eh, I wasn't wowed by it, but it wasn't a turn off either, it kept me playing but won't win any awards for the plot either, voice acting is decent, but again not award winning. GRAPHICS: A very good looking RTS no doubt, the Zerg lookThis is Starcraft 2, if you're not an RTS fan this probably won't turn you into one, but if you're a Starcraft/ Warcraft player it won't disappoint. STORY: Eh, I wasn't wowed by it, but it wasn't a turn off either, it kept me playing but won't win any awards for the plot either, voice acting is decent, but again not award winning. GRAPHICS: A very good looking RTS no doubt, the Zerg look creepy, the Protoss look shiny, and Terran look gritty, overall I think the graphics will hold up well and it's a very pretty game to look ing. SOUND: Pretty decent sound, each race is distinctive in the way it sounds you're not going to mistake the Zerg for the Terrans, also the swooshes and blips of the menus are nicely done. GAMEPLAY: This is where most people get divided, if you're a HUGE Supcom fan you're probably not going to like the gameplay as Starcraft is much more oriented with the Macro style gameplay, it's fast paced with most matches end in less than 15 minutes, but CAN last over an hour. VALUE: This is a high value game, the custom maps and mods are going to make this game into a game that is played for years to come. Overall it's definitely worth the money if you're an RTS fan. OVERALL: I'd say Starcraft 2 is not the 2nd coming that the hype would lead most people to believe, but it's going to revolutionize e-sports within 2 years, the custom maps and mod scene will be HUGE, so if you're a fan of RTS games pick it up, but if you're not, then it's probably not going to convert you.… Expand
  43. justinscustoms
    Aug 25, 2010
    8
    As already mentioned Starcraft II indeed delivers on the same game play mechanics of its predecessor which as before was very easy to jump in and play, I also enjoyed a more serious look into the Starcraft universe offering a storyline that allows that keeps the single player interesting and offers moral choices that effect future game play. I also have to complement Blizzard on makingAs already mentioned Starcraft II indeed delivers on the same game play mechanics of its predecessor which as before was very easy to jump in and play, I also enjoyed a more serious look into the Starcraft universe offering a storyline that allows that keeps the single player interesting and offers moral choices that effect future game play. I also have to complement Blizzard on making the game scalable which indeed seems to be a corporate goal of theirs and the game runs amicably on systems much lesser than mine with tolerable settings. Where I was left a little aback on was how little upwardly the graphics scaled, having a more than capable system seemed to offer little difference than much lower rigs and at the hefty 60$ dollar tag and 12 years of possible development, it did leave me wanting a little more. I also was less than happy with the lack of campaigns available for the Protoss and Zerg. All in all it is a solid game and worth picking up, it will consume your time and it is definitely challenging.… Expand
  44. Alucard
    Aug 26, 2010
    8
    Starcraft II is a GREAT game. It has quite possibly the best graphics i have ever seen in an RTS and the gameplay is great and I only have a few problems with the game. Problem 1) the need to be logged in to play singleplayer that is seriously just a pain in the ass. Problem 2) The fact that the majority of units you can get in the campaign and lots of classic Starcraft Units cannot beStarcraft II is a GREAT game. It has quite possibly the best graphics i have ever seen in an RTS and the gameplay is great and I only have a few problems with the game. Problem 1) the need to be logged in to play singleplayer that is seriously just a pain in the ass. Problem 2) The fact that the majority of units you can get in the campaign and lots of classic Starcraft Units cannot be used in the multiplayer (Firebats, Medics, Vultures, Diamondbacks, wraiths, Science Vessels, and Goliaths) and other units from the original starcraft are not even included (dark archons, Valkyries, Scouts, Corsairs, Reavers, Gaurdians, Arbiters, Devourers, Scourge, Defielers, and flying queens) like is there really a reason you need to take out a ton of the original units? 3) The protoss have been incredibly weakened to the point where they're almost not worth playing im not a great player but i am pretty decent but the loss of scouts, corsairs and arbiters has destroyed the protoss air forces void rays are good for destroying buildings and tanks and stuff but when they come up against another large force of air the specializes in anti air they will get destroyed, pheonix's are useless and carriers have had their build time increased. Reavers have been completly taken out meaning the protoss no longer have a long ranged anti building unit/defence unit (though i must admit the colossi are pretty good at holding back waves of ground units) and immortals while powerfull really dont have the punch or the range siege tanks do or the massive damage of ultralisks. No more dark archons means that you can no longer steal units from enemies which im sure that terran and zerg players are thankfull about but i always loved being able to branch out into other races and just in general if im low on minerals steal enemy units to bolster my own forces. as for defending your base Photon Cannons have had a huge range reduction and have had some damage reduction this makes defending your base from reapers incredibly hard as they can just hop cliffs anywhere and take out your buildings fast and always seem to stay just outside your cannon range while they hit your pylons. Despite all these flaws i still consider starcraft II to be a great game the terrain mechanics are just great small eye candy things you may not notice like the fact that when you blow up something if the wreckage is on a ramp it will slide down it (i just found that to be a cool thing in sc2) so obviously alot of work went into this game (10 freaking years of work) but its here now and hopefully through balancing and patches the races will be balanced because as it is protoss are waaaaaay underpowered… Expand
  45. Kassdhal
    Aug 28, 2010
    8
    By large the best STR done so far. The campaign is great and innovative. Pure Blizzard game in many respects: extremely polished and thought-through, great realization, perfect balance. The best studio of the last 17 years has not lost its touch.
    The big issue for me, as it was for the first Starcraft is Multiplayer. Very balanced gameplay but it is always Rush, Rush, Rush and having no    By large the best STR done so far. The campaign is great and innovative. Pure Blizzard game in many respects: extremely polished and thought-through, great realization, perfect balance. The best studio of the last 17 years has not lost its touch.
    The big issue for me, as it was for the first Starcraft is Multiplayer. Very balanced gameplay but it is always Rush, Rush, Rush and having no other choice than either stop multiplayer or being forced into always the same kind os strategy is depressing. There should be a way to play on maps allowing long term development instead of being forced to rush all the time. Maybe it is only wishful thinking.    … Expand
  46. swampfox357
    Sep 7, 2010
    8
    SC2 is all about the online multiplayer. It was a disappointing campaign compared to previous Blizzard games. The matchmaking system is okay, but overly simplistic. A brand new player may end up playing against veterans of hundreds of games in the Platinum league simply by winning all their placement matches.

    The races are not yet balanced. In 1v1 terran > zerg, zerg > protoss. Zerg has    SC2 is all about the online multiplayer. It was a disappointing campaign compared to previous Blizzard games. The matchmaking system is okay, but overly simplistic. A brand new player may end up playing against veterans of hundreds of games in the Platinum league simply by winning all their placement matches.

    The races are not yet balanced. In 1v1 terran > zerg, zerg > protoss. Zerg has a definite disadvantage in team games as well. Hopefully this will change when the expansion comes out. The game gets an 8 because of the terran imbalance, the lack of LAN play, and the lack of many battlenet 1 features that they stripped out.    … Expand
  47. DRUNKCANADIAN
    Sep 15, 2010
    8
    It honestly deserves less, but when pieces of garbage like the entire Halo franchise (ok the first one was original) get 9s this game deserves at least an 8. The game has a solid single player experience, albeit brief and severely disjointed if you want it to be (I can literally do the missions in some messed up orders). Still a bold style for the RTS genre. The online is terrible thanksIt honestly deserves less, but when pieces of garbage like the entire Halo franchise (ok the first one was original) get 9s this game deserves at least an 8. The game has a solid single player experience, albeit brief and severely disjointed if you want it to be (I can literally do the missions in some messed up orders). Still a bold style for the RTS genre. The online is terrible thanks to Bnet 2.0 which even the biggest fans must concede is terrible, thinking Xboxlive-ish junk is an improvement over previous Battlenet is just sad. Support for the game itself is poor, still no free name changes nor the much needed patch 1.1 to nerf siege tanks (I'm top tier diamond so please be quiet). When players like IdrA who play this game say no self respecting player would play terran something is up. Although overall the races are pretty balanced at top tier of play. The game itself is the same core SC with more emphasis on hard counters and some radically changed combat mechanics to bring the game into the modern RTS era. Its not a bad game, and its certainly better than a lot of the crap on the market, but its sub-par for Blizzard which has done much better with their RTS titles in the past.… Expand
  48. derpderpderp
    Sep 24, 2010
    8
    The criticism is from most people is understandable. Battle.net 2.0 is nothing but restrictive, the campaign was okay (in an old-school rts type of way) but had a terrible plot, and you get the chance to pay for two expansions with similar, lacking content. But the multiplayer in SC2 is just really, really solid and fun. New players may find it a bit daunting, and rts fans may complainThe criticism is from most people is understandable. Battle.net 2.0 is nothing but restrictive, the campaign was okay (in an old-school rts type of way) but had a terrible plot, and you get the chance to pay for two expansions with similar, lacking content. But the multiplayer in SC2 is just really, really solid and fun. New players may find it a bit daunting, and rts fans may complain that the little change in 12 years is nothing but a rehash, it is still a great multiplayer game. The strategies in 1v1s are very diverse, and the old school system may be hard to learn, but really interesting once you've mastered it. The new unit additions add more depth, or revamp some of the lacking choices and opportunities of the factions that occured in Brood War.… Expand
  49. Tubie
    Oct 11, 2010
    8
    This game is not as good or at least it did not have the same impact Starcraft had on me and my friends when it came out. Still, this game is a must buy if you are a fan of the genre. Single player is fun and the achievements might keep you hooked for a while. Multipayer is great, blizzard made sure to make battle.net work well for it, at least to try and compensate for no LAN support.
  50. TheStranger
    Sep 20, 2012
    8
    This is the serious competitive electronic game to play. Disregard the cheesy action movie campaign, online multiplayer... online multiplayer - this is what Starcraft is all about. If you like any sort of strategy in your video games Starcraft 2 is the cream of the crop of it's genre. One of the best games ever made with infinite replayability.
  51. Junk
    Oct 11, 2010
    8
    The thing that makes this game great is the fact that it is an old school RTS game, they did not jump on the no base building hero unit trend which is great. Overall a good game. No problems running the game at all even on ultra.
  52. Gr33nF00t
    Oct 18, 2010
    8
    Good things:
    1. It's a StarCraft game. Blizzard did an excellent job of staying with the tried and true formula that made the first SC so legendary, and while the game isn't going to revolutionize RTS gameplay, it is incredibly entertaining and effective as it is.
    2. It has very addictive gameplay. You could very well find yourself losing some sleep with this one. 3. The competitive    Good things:
    1. It's a StarCraft game. Blizzard did an excellent job of staying with the tried and true formula that made the first SC so legendary, and while the game isn't going to revolutionize RTS gameplay, it is incredibly entertaining and effective as it is.
    2. It has very addictive gameplay. You could very well find yourself losing some sleep with this one.
    3. The competitive online matchmaking is wonderful. Other games have tried implementing matchmaking systems with varying success, but SC2 is the first game that I feel "got it right." It makes sure that no matter your skill level, you will always have a good and close game.
    4. Gameplay is very streamlined. The controls make sense and are relatively easy to pick up, even if you've never played an RTS before.

    Bad things:
    1. The single-player campaign is rather lackluster. The story isn't bad, but it isn't gonna turn any heads either. If you're looking for superb storytelling of Mass Effect proportions, you will be disappointed.
    2. The graphics aren't the greatest. While this isn't all that important to me since I generally don't judge a game by how shiny it looks, I still have noticed that I was never really impressed by the visual and aesthetic style in general.
    3. While the new matchmaking part of the new Battle.Net is a real achievement, there really isn't all that much else going on online. The lack of a lobby where players not in a game could chat it up made the system feel rather incomplete. There is a friend list and you can chat with people, but the new Bnet is light on the social aspect.

    Closing remarks:
    Let's face it; if this wasn't a StarCraft game, it would not have been all that noteworthy. It would have been viewed as a solid entry in the RTS genre, but it still would have been brushed off for failing to bring anything new to the table. However, it IS StarCraft, so it gets special dispensation. Indeed, people would even get mad if they changed anything major. While certain things are holding it back from being "The Greatest Game Ever Made," it provides an excellent form of entertainment, which is what SC is about at its core, and as such, Blizzard did exactly what they needed to do.    … Expand
  53. C4K3
    Oct 26, 2010
    8
    It's an alright game, it's not as perfect as some would describe it, but still definitely one of the better games in existence. Singleplayer is dull. Multiplayer is pretty nice. Custom multiplayer is just great.
  54. Egoecro
    Dec 23, 2010
    8
    Very nice game, a worthy successor to the previous chapter.
    A game that has been adapted to modern needs but with the same parameters as the old one, a lot of news even if the game remains the same as it was, so nothing new or particularly innovative.
    Excellent graphics.
    Beautiful sound.
    Gameplay almost identical to the previous chapter.
  55. rev0lutions
    Dec 18, 2010
    8
    First off to all the idiots giving the game a "1" your idiots. I have been gaming for most of my life and while the storyline in sc2 has so far left me completely bored the graphics are good, the music awesome and fitting to the mood of the game and the online gameplay intense. you could never change a classic game like sc too much as the MILLIONS of hardcore fans would spit the dummy soFirst off to all the idiots giving the game a "1" your idiots. I have been gaming for most of my life and while the storyline in sc2 has so far left me completely bored the graphics are good, the music awesome and fitting to the mood of the game and the online gameplay intense. you could never change a classic game like sc too much as the MILLIONS of hardcore fans would spit the dummy so blizzard had a limited range as to what they could actually do with the game. Considering that little fact blizzard has done an amazing job. To all the idiots crying about not having new races... this is because sc1 was the best rts ever made because of the unique balance presented by having 3 different races, introducing any more races would have thrown in sc2 with the million other dime a dozen unbalanced rts games all over the market. those saying the the graphics arnt amazing probably dont have computers capable of running the game on "ultra" and thus miss out on the clean cut, beautiful graphics that keep sc2 a step above the competition.

    I am a diamond player on battle net and the new interface is great in many ways although i dislike not having chat channels or rooms in which to simply discuss things with other players, the chat in sc2 in general is not very good. all round its a quality game and is vastly superior to most other rts games on the market, however it does still have room for improvement, but then, what game doesn't? All up i give sc2 an 8.    … Expand
  56. Templar19
    Jan 13, 2011
    8
    Starcraft was one of the only games i played years ago, i have been waiting for Starcraft 2 for a LONG time. I ended up spending $60 on the game the day after it came out. Now i was greatly satisfied at first, i really liked the storyline, the cinematics were awesome, the graphics and gameplay were great, but SC2 was lacking in a few different areas, First off, LAN, i love playing LAN andStarcraft was one of the only games i played years ago, i have been waiting for Starcraft 2 for a LONG time. I ended up spending $60 on the game the day after it came out. Now i was greatly satisfied at first, i really liked the storyline, the cinematics were awesome, the graphics and gameplay were great, but SC2 was lacking in a few different areas, First off, LAN, i love playing LAN and just hanging out in a room playing PC games with my friends, But i was extremely dissapointed when i found out that for me and 2 of my friends to play LAN we would have to pay $180, on top of that, i am not able to play singleplayer on my laptop unless i make sure to sign in online on my laptop before i take it somewhere (i play SC2 mostly on my desktop), now i understand the need for anti-piracy, but it is getting to the point where it is pissing me off so much that i almost want to go pirate the game, put it on a CD and give it out to all my friends. Because we all know these protections are easily bipassed. Other than that, the multiplayer is great, lots of good custom maps (a lot are very similar to the first Starcraft) The game has almost all the same units, plays almost exactly the same as the first SC but with better graphics and more features for units and buildings, (some of the units look the same as original ones, just renamed example:Dragoon=Stalker) Fun trying to get all the achievments, this game can last hours if you are really into competative RTS games!… Expand
  57. cory2704
    Feb 8, 2011
    8
    Starcraft 2 was my first game within the starcraft or even warcraft series, and I have to say it instantly became a favorite of mine in the rts genre. Infact after playing countless command and conquer, and supreme commander games you begin to see where other series have tried building upon starcrafts success by using similar gameplay niches. What these other games failed to do in my eyesStarcraft 2 was my first game within the starcraft or even warcraft series, and I have to say it instantly became a favorite of mine in the rts genre. Infact after playing countless command and conquer, and supreme commander games you begin to see where other series have tried building upon starcrafts success by using similar gameplay niches. What these other games failed to do in my eyes was to be daring and escape from standardized gameplay ( yes I understand games like supreme commander are player on a much larger scale but the idea of resource collection and macroing is pretty much identical)

    however after trialling the original starcraft in the aid of this blog I found that the core mechanics of the game hasnâ    … Expand
  58. pro7otype
    Mar 7, 2011
    8
    This game is solid throughout. Good storyline and great cutscenes in the single player, a good feel to the game in the multiplayer. Great soundtrack and effects. Graphics are reasonably good, but they lack the style and panache of Warhammer 40K's Dawn of War series in my opinion. If you are a Starcraft fanboy you are going to love this, especially all the matchmaking options built into theThis game is solid throughout. Good storyline and great cutscenes in the single player, a good feel to the game in the multiplayer. Great soundtrack and effects. Graphics are reasonably good, but they lack the style and panache of Warhammer 40K's Dawn of War series in my opinion. If you are a Starcraft fanboy you are going to love this, especially all the matchmaking options built into the game, but if you are merely someone who loves good RTS games, you will enjoy this, but you will also see some of its flaws as well, namely: Confused, somewhat messy looking unit models (especially for Terrans) and very little in the way of sense of humour or gimmicks to keep you interested. This is a Solid RTS game through and through.… Expand
  59. Bohdan
    Mar 10, 2011
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. CelkovÄ… Expand
  60. KTcraft
    Apr 13, 2011
    8
    Starcraft 2 doesn't embody the future of gaming, nor does it try anything revolutionary. Instead, it focuses on the strengths of the past, much like Blizzard's other titles. The first place to look is the story and single player campaign. For this, Blizzard has in fact created a new style of campaign interface, a persistent base of operations that you can upgrade and improve as you beatStarcraft 2 doesn't embody the future of gaming, nor does it try anything revolutionary. Instead, it focuses on the strengths of the past, much like Blizzard's other titles. The first place to look is the story and single player campaign. For this, Blizzard has in fact created a new style of campaign interface, a persistent base of operations that you can upgrade and improve as you beat missions, and complete objectives that while limited, offers a fundamentally different approach to a single player campaign then most other RTS. The story follows the character James Raynor who, for fans of the original game, will remember as a daring soldier and revolutionary. As the story progresses you meet new characters who will continue to fight alongside you during your campaign against the Dominion. Although frequently predictable, the story is compelling, and the cinematics and dialogue help build the gritty atmosphere of the Starcraft universe.

    The AI has seen many improvements over the original game. It is far more responsive and in many ways, plays like a real opponent would. Alas, it is still limited by technology, and things like cannon rushing can catch the AI off guard time and again. Unit pathing and individual AI is much improved as well, you won't be waiting for ten minutes while your goliaths try to squeeze up a ramp at the same time, and as a result, run across the map. UI and controls are also a huge improvement. Waypoints are much easier to access, hotkeys work in an extremely efficient manner with most keybindings set around the "wasd" keys for very easy access. Multiple buildings may be selected and hotkeyed simultaneously and unit ability control is fine tuned to precision.

    While single player is entertaining and has limited replay value, the competitive multiplayer is where Blizzard truly chose to focus. In an intuitive, and persistent matchmaking system, you can test your skill against other players nation wide. While there were some initial networking issues, Blizzard has smoothed most if not all of the lag issues and has worked tirelessly on balancing(I will discuss in the next paragraph). Social networking has taken a hit for the worse however, and local play is non-existent. One of the greatest features of the original Starcraft was the ability to share and watch game replays together. Currently it is not available in Starcraft 2, however Blizzard has made clear an interest in bringing it back.

    A common gripe among many seems to be game balance. That this unit is overpowered, this race is bad, this ability doesn't work. As a high-intermediate level player, I have the capacity to understand both high and low levels of game play, even if i cannot match it myself. Those criticizing the balance often have little experience of their own, and the experience they had was often relatively poor. It is clear in Starcraft 2, that Blizzard chose to emphasize the playstyles of each of the races, and can be summed up relatively simply. The Zerg are a macro and economic intensive race, who focus on very large numbers of relatively inexpensive troops. A Zerg player must be constantly managing multiple bases at once as well as being able to constantly build units almost rhythmically. Zerg requires lower level of tactical control.

    The Protoss is an extremely tactically oriented race. Its units are expensive-particularly gas intensive. A Protoss player must conserve troops, and learn not to throw them away. The key to winning as Protoss is learning how to use abilities wisely. Because Protoss armies are often outnumbered, a Protoss player must learn to create his own advantages. Using storms, force fields and hallucinations are all keys to success as a Protoss player.

    Terran is a versatile race. Terran has the ability to make relatively quick tech changes early game, allowing for many varied army compositions. Terran also features a high capacity for harassment and hit and run tactics. Terran relies very heavily on unit placement, using high ground, taking advantage of ramps and choke points, spacing and kiting. While this sums up the basis of each races gameplay, it does not represent a definitive guideline. As time goes, new strategies and builds will be created, and playstyles will change. Learning and adapting to these playstyles is an important part of the multiplayer experience, something many people lack the patience and understanding for.


    In summary, Starcraft 2 is a game that offers a very competitive multiplayer scene, with a good(if short) single player campaign. While it does nothing new or revolutionary, it reestablishes what made Starcraft Brood War so great.    … Expand
  61. ColdHardTruth
    May 26, 2012
    8
    Starcraft 2 is a refreshing sequel with tons of action to enjoy! To start Blizzard this time added relationships between the main characters which is fun to follow. I personally like all the new units in the game and new features to go with (example: Thor unit which is like a Mech Warrior and more variety of flying units for all races). If your a strategy action fan you'll love the newStarcraft 2 is a refreshing sequel with tons of action to enjoy! To start Blizzard this time added relationships between the main characters which is fun to follow. I personally like all the new units in the game and new features to go with (example: Thor unit which is like a Mech Warrior and more variety of flying units for all races). If your a strategy action fan you'll love the new take. Blizzard also added some roll playing elements to the game. You can select which mission to do next, interact with objects on your ship and talk to your crew on your ship between missions. The ship your stationed on has 4 sections to browse through (lab, armory, lounge and control room). You can upgrade your units, hire mercenaries, and even upgrade your overall tech while on your ship between missions. There is the main story and side missions where you gain funds to improve your force. The interface of the game has similar characteristics as its previous predecessor. Simple controls makes for a fun experience and 5 different difficulties for everyone to try. While I didn't experience multi-player this time I know that Battle.net is world class for gamers. The only reason why I didn't give Starcraft 2 a 9 or better is because personally I don't like all the timed missions (race against time to complete goals). This doesn't mean that those specific missions didn't have same excitement. But for me the frustration was sometime at its peak. That's the only major negative I can report at this time. There is some reputation, but that is said for most things in life. Reputation is not always bad especially when it's a Blizzard created game.This one is a buy. Enjoy this one!… Expand
  62. MrFpeas
    Jul 16, 2011
    8
    A very great multiplayer game, only lacking a few elements in singleplayer. With a lot more emphasis on macro play and consistent patches to keep balance issues addressed, the multiplayer, which many people bought the game for, is very well drawn out. However, I felt that despite being at least 12 years since the first Starcraft, they would have implemented a 3-d scale environment (such asA very great multiplayer game, only lacking a few elements in singleplayer. With a lot more emphasis on macro play and consistent patches to keep balance issues addressed, the multiplayer, which many people bought the game for, is very well drawn out. However, I felt that despite being at least 12 years since the first Starcraft, they would have implemented a 3-d scale environment (such as Total Annihilation) but they decided to stick with the 2-tier + ramps design. Whether it was for balancing issues or not, that left me a little disappointed. The singleplayer is nicely designed, but the plot and characters were not very compelling. Some people have noted that the dialogue in Starcraft 1 was better written than Starcraft 2 and I have to agree with them. But, like I said earlier, this game is very big on the multiplayer and, seeing as it's been a year and many successful tournaments have been held, accomplished in being a very good multiplayer RTS. Only time will tell if they can improve the storytelling in Heart of the Swarm.… Expand
  63. Acidosis
    Jun 19, 2011
    8
    Despite the game looking identical to Starcraft when graphics are turned to the lowest settings, just so you know. The development of race's units in this game disappoint me, this is because the lore and race feeling doesn't match at all. Protoss is suppose to be an advance alien race with unmatched technology and yes blizzard did follow the whole Protoss is expensive, slow and powerful inDespite the game looking identical to Starcraft when graphics are turned to the lowest settings, just so you know. The development of race's units in this game disappoint me, this is because the lore and race feeling doesn't match at all. Protoss is suppose to be an advance alien race with unmatched technology and yes blizzard did follow the whole Protoss is expensive, slow and powerful in the first Starcraft but in Starcraft 2 Protoss races seems to be having some sort of recession. Its grand highly advance technological ships are the worst among the three races as it does average damage and doesn't tank well due to the whole rock, paper, scissors armor system implemented. For the Zerg, in Starcraft 2 Zerg has lost its evil feeling and that drones and overlord looks damn pretty cute and its trademark unit their Hydralisk unit has become nothing more than worthless, Terran in Starcraft 2 seems to have when crazy on their research and remove units which are not suppose to remove and adding units which will never be used. Also constant "nerfing" of siege tank makes a tank firepower as powerful as a alien claw....like come on, a tank fire as good as an alien scratch? As much as i enjoy Starcraft 2, i do feel that the whole rock, paper, scissors armor system did spoil the game. It isn't no longer about strategy and attacking but instead it is about waiting and defending then countering back with enemies weakness which could turn veteran's off like me. Starcraft 2 has also became so user friendly that even four old can play it which is a joke. Despite all the criticism, i would say i do still enjoy playing the game because after all, i waited for also 10 years for the game.… Expand
  64. davenbettridge
    Jul 19, 2011
    8
    Overall the longevity of SC2 is as good as it ever will get, millions will be playing this game for years to come which is a stupendous achievement and makes Blizzard a master video game company. The multiplayer side of Starcraft 2 is almost flawless (perhaps only for the lack of LAN support). More than any other recent release, Starcraft 2 is incredibly fun and is both easy to play butOverall the longevity of SC2 is as good as it ever will get, millions will be playing this game for years to come which is a stupendous achievement and makes Blizzard a master video game company. The multiplayer side of Starcraft 2 is almost flawless (perhaps only for the lack of LAN support). More than any other recent release, Starcraft 2 is incredibly fun and is both easy to play but hard (very hard) to master and is continuing the momentum of E-sports. The custom maps as always are brilliant, provide endless amounts of content for pros and the noobs and will likely continue to evolve in the years to come. The art and sound design of SC2 are fantastic. Blizzard has some of the best artists in the industry and it really shows in its visuals. The UI and gameplay are also next to flawless. And for the singleplayer side of SC2, Blizzards decision to split the Starcraft racial campaigns across 2 expansions is a tricky divided one. On the one hand I certainly want a lot of content for Starcraft 2 and the promised two expansions are great and exciting, the idea of having long Terran, Zerg and Protoss stories are great, solely focusing on the Terran story for SC1 provides an awesome opportunity to REALLY get a good satisfying, memorable story rather than the short 10 mission Terran campaign in SC1. However the execution of Starcraft 2s single player is a mix. Dont get me wrong the gameplay is great, production values are outstanding, many levels are memorable and awesome, and the characters at times are interesting but the overall story that holds it all together, while not too bad, lacks the captivating and satisfying awesome factor that made up Starcraft 1. The story does have some moments; the upgrade system is a good idea but not truly realised and by the end feels a bit empty. It will take the promised 2 expansions to reveal Starcraft 2s true worth, but as it stands in The Wings of Liberty, the game is great in all accounts but for its lacking story.… Expand
  65. appabend
    Feb 10, 2012
    8
    STARCRAFT II: Where do I start? Oh, I'm reviewing this game before the next expansion came out. I think when you really love the original StarCraft, then this one is a great recommendation. I'm not a big fan of RTS genre, but I do love some of their games like AoE, Rise of Nations, Empire Earth, and now this. StarCraft II is one of the best modern RTS game. Well, there are some RTS gamesSTARCRAFT II: Where do I start? Oh, I'm reviewing this game before the next expansion came out. I think when you really love the original StarCraft, then this one is a great recommendation. I'm not a big fan of RTS genre, but I do love some of their games like AoE, Rise of Nations, Empire Earth, and now this. StarCraft II is one of the best modern RTS game. Well, there are some RTS games that can top up StarCraft II, but it's great on it's own. All the things that I have to note are probably the most awesome cut scenes on a Real Time Strategy game, realistic graphics and sound effects with great music too, great voice acting, and most importantly, great gameplay. Maybe because I'm not a big fan of the genre, I can't enjoy the game that much. So far, I haven't tried multiplayer yet probably because I played this game on my Uncle's PC.… Expand
  66. grandpajoe6191
    Nov 8, 2011
    8
    "StarCraft 2" is a blast. Despite the fact that you need a damn membership, the game is slick with awesome graphics. The gameplay's the same thing, but its managaeble. They really didn't fix or improve anything necessary (except for adding in several more units to the game) but still it's impressive and addictive just like the first one.
  67. YeshuaAgapao
    Nov 2, 2011
    8
    Worthy of a 10, but it don't get a 10 because of the itelletual property tyranny (Battle.net runs like steam does) and especially the poor ability to independently publish and prmote mods outside of battle.net. StarCraft2 (along with Civ5) are a nice beginning welcome of the worsening police state in America. AWESOME game otherwise. The best single player. Conventional multiplayer isWorthy of a 10, but it don't get a 10 because of the itelletual property tyranny (Battle.net runs like steam does) and especially the poor ability to independently publish and prmote mods outside of battle.net. StarCraft2 (along with Civ5) are a nice beginning welcome of the worsening police state in America. AWESOME game otherwise. The best single player. Conventional multiplayer is good also. UMS multiplayer is so-so. Only maps that 'get with the program' are easily findable. Blizzard controls your map and will take it down if people white and people will never find it unless it is immensely popular. UMS or melee. People are engineered to find maps only through blizzard and I've never figured out to use a map dispensed outside of battle.net (downloaded thorugh web) in multiplayer. Totally 'please don't sue me'. Great game outside of those police state / lawsuite paranoia issues.… Expand
  68. dobserver
    Nov 8, 2011
    8
    Starcraft was one of the first games I've ever played next to Final Fantasy which brought me into the world of gaming. So I had high expectations for Starcraft II - especially since it took so long to release. Starcraft II is not a bad game, but definitely has room for improvement. In terms of the Single Player, they have made it a lot more interesting - taking multiple routes, upgradesStarcraft was one of the first games I've ever played next to Final Fantasy which brought me into the world of gaming. So I had high expectations for Starcraft II - especially since it took so long to release. Starcraft II is not a bad game, but definitely has room for improvement. In terms of the Single Player, they have made it a lot more interesting - taking multiple routes, upgrades and achievements - which all help enhance the playability of the Single Player. The original story was interesting and the Starcraft II story doesn't disappoint. (Not surprising since there is an entire series of novels...) The voice acting was pretty good and I didn't expect much character development for an RTS so it was a bit lacking in that area. They also assume that you're familiar with Starcraft lore and have played the first game. Single player was nicely done, especially for an RTS with a predecessor. The efforts to make it original paid off. Lots of new units, new buildings, new functions and a completely new balance. Which allows for new strategies to be created. This brings us into the multiplayer. I actually liked the single player more because of the customization, and it would have been cool to move this aspect over to the multiplayer but I guess that would complicate the balance of team games rather drastically. The difference in units from the original Starcraft made the multiplayer experience brand new. They seem to have upped the pace of the game so that it wouldn't take as long but the fundamentals of building a sound economy are still there. I played a lot of the multiplayer during Beta and found the existence of some balancing issues still there, but I know they'll be fixing these with patches. The matching and ranking system are a nice addition as well as the improved co-op vs. AI. Achievements made playing SC2 more fun and less of a chore. I found the game to be a bit newbie centered, as in some newbies were able to beat some veteran RTS players because of unit composition, even though the veteran had superior micro and macro management. I noticed this trend to decrease over time through the patches Blizzard has been periodically implementing. Overall a very solid game, but perhaps lacks some of the innovative features of new RTS games that make it exceptional. Splitting the game into 3 games (one for each race) is also very annoying. I don't like that way of marketing even though it increases sales. But I will wait till the other two parts are released and reserve my judgement. Depending on the price tag and the changes it might be justified.… Expand
  69. Vio
    Nov 20, 2011
    8
    The Good: SC1 + graphics upgrade + a dash of innovation. The Bad: No LAN support, learning curv/required playing ability. I love this game I really do, I love the way it plays, the way it looks its story, its sounds, I really love it. I just wish I could play as insanely fast with all the insane amounts of knowledge necessarily to play competitively in the back of my head. In short thisThe Good: SC1 + graphics upgrade + a dash of innovation. The Bad: No LAN support, learning curv/required playing ability. I love this game I really do, I love the way it plays, the way it looks its story, its sounds, I really love it. I just wish I could play as insanely fast with all the insane amounts of knowledge necessarily to play competitively in the back of my head. In short this game's ultimate problem is it's 'professional success'. As a casual player I find it hard to enjoy this game due to the amount of things you need to be able to do per second in order to fill the minimum requirements to enter into the lowest ranked multiplayer legues. On the other hand watching people play this game and having good commentry on whats happening (aka day9) is awesome. For me at least it seems this game I will be delegated to spectator/fan rather than player. Ok - tacticaly the battles in this game are intense with any mistake meaning winning or losing, strategicaly you need to have your story together with options or you will just be out played. Is it a good strategy game? YES. Did I like it? Yes!!!!!!(and No ;) - I got rushed too much)… Expand
  70. BladeFlare
    Dec 5, 2011
    8
    this game is pretty good. ITS great. but bad enough to get an 8. this game was awesome when i first got it. i loved it and had a blast with my friends about the custom maps and how great the game was. but there are so many ways to break the game its ridiculous. im looking at you zerg. the game was boring i felt without friends with you and when they stopped i tried to continue but it justthis game is pretty good. ITS great. but bad enough to get an 8. this game was awesome when i first got it. i loved it and had a blast with my friends about the custom maps and how great the game was. but there are so many ways to break the game its ridiculous. im looking at you zerg. the game was boring i felt without friends with you and when they stopped i tried to continue but it just wasnt that fun anymore. dont get me wrong but this game just became a game that didnt last long at all. still a great game, just not the best in my opinion. but when i see people saying that this game is like a copy of the origonal, i think to myself and say that the game fixed some things that needed to be done. 1. The game needed a remake, all of the games minor details that at the time were good, are ridiculously outdated now and just need to be fixed because that was the big flaw of the game, not game play but that its outdated.

    2. A game becomes less and less popular as it gets older and more outdated. what better way to fix that then to hype a sequel and boost its popularity. starcraft is not an old game anymore.

    3. Their actually were some major changes in the game, units were added, modified, and removed, and in a game like starcraft that massively changes the game. they can't add too much because they still want starcraft. and keep in mind that if you dont want a sequel to be the same or similiar, that it brakes the game because its supposed to be similiar. jut play another game if you want a different game, they kept it starcraft, but added a 2. Cod has no excuse though because they have don this like 3 times now.
    Overall starcraft 2 was made exactly how and when it was made.    … Expand
  71. Yogi1001
    Dec 10, 2011
    8
    This game is great. It's addictive as hell if you one vs one ladder and a whole bucket load of amazing custom games too. So much content- like 100 games in one. Hide and seek style games or Starbattles in space with massive space ships. Plus you get a satisfying campaign. Worth the money it is. It's a blizzard game and they never dissapoint. But they lose two points for lack of clanThis game is great. It's addictive as hell if you one vs one ladder and a whole bucket load of amazing custom games too. So much content- like 100 games in one. Hide and seek style games or Starbattles in space with massive space ships. Plus you get a satisfying campaign. Worth the money it is. It's a blizzard game and they never dissapoint. But they lose two points for lack of clan support and LAN options.… Expand
  72. Ztride
    Jan 20, 2012
    8
    A very well balanced, fast-paced RTS game with a whole lot of depth. Too bad that the multiplayer side of the game focuses so much on remembering build orders and multitasking, instead of real strategy. The singleplayer campaign is quite fun too, mostly because of the variations in the map design. Overall, I'd say that the game is more fun to watch than to play though.
  73. MercilessMonkey
    Feb 11, 2012
    8
    Fairly obviously the best RTS out there at the moment, especially in a competitive context. Campaign is good as to be expected from blizz, gameplay is fun and polished. The only knock would be for their constant failure to balance the game in a reasonable time frame.
  74. Ideclarewar901
    Mar 7, 2012
    8
    Very good game! Since the First Warcraft, Starcraft also, these two games has been my favourite Strategy Games. There is also games like Warhammer, which are good Strat games.. The Starcraft Lore was awesome, and they did not break it with Starcraft II. I think it stays true to what was originally being Starcraft, the new Units are awesome! Atleast for Terrans! (As we did not see much ofVery good game! Since the First Warcraft, Starcraft also, these two games has been my favourite Strategy Games. There is also games like Warhammer, which are good Strat games.. The Starcraft Lore was awesome, and they did not break it with Starcraft II. I think it stays true to what was originally being Starcraft, the new Units are awesome! Atleast for Terrans! (As we did not see much of Zerg/Protoss yet.). The Campaign is wonderful! Can take a LONG time to get done when you are Legitly playing it! As for Multiplayer, it is incredibly HARD! Players are good, some players are offensive, but that is what are Kids. The game overall would have a 8/10 for me, because the Game is not yet complete. Still missing PROTOSS, ZERG campaigns, and i want to wait to see how much more i will give this game, i think Blizzard did not fail their Starcraft Franchise. Thanks Blizzard, as always, Quality game made. Thanks for taking the time to create quality games, and not listening to people telling you to rush them. Blizzard is one of my favourite Game Developpers including EA Games. Thanks!… Expand
  75. billtheturnip
    Mar 7, 2012
    8
    Most of the problems I have with this game are the way that Blizzard implements patches and fixes. It is an amazing game and the mini games that you can find on the custom game list are worth the price of this game by themselves. I would pay money to play nexus wars as a stand alone game. SC2 may not be for everyone, but it is an amazing game none the less.
  76. LilD
    Mar 17, 2013
    8
    I was introduced into the gaming world when I was very young with the original Command and Conquer and have been casually playing RTSs for the past 20 or so years. With so much hype, I got S2 Day-One as I had never played the original. To be honest, I thought it was slightly above mediocre. I had more fun with the single player than playing competitive multiplayer. The graphics are nice,I was introduced into the gaming world when I was very young with the original Command and Conquer and have been casually playing RTSs for the past 20 or so years. With so much hype, I got S2 Day-One as I had never played the original. To be honest, I thought it was slightly above mediocre. I had more fun with the single player than playing competitive multiplayer. The graphics are nice, menus are slick, and the three classes are very distinct and balanced. There's no one obviously 'better' class, which is something I cannot say for just about every game out there. Overall, the game feels polished. The menus and game have been updated for added intuitiveness. Despite this, I just couldn't play it for long hours. There was just no 'hook' for me to get sucked in and want to learn all the strengths and weaknesses of all the units, etc.

    The DRM with Blizzard games really don't bother me. The games have such a good community surrounding them that I think I may even prefer it. I can log in anywhere that has the game downloaded and play my account. For less than $40, I think it is well worth a try. RTSs and this game in general has a very wide demographic. It is widely loved, so I think just about anyone can get some enjoyment out of it.    … Expand
  77. blackbrrd
    Jul 11, 2012
    8
    Starcraft 2 is the best of it's genre, but the focus is relatively narrow. It's more or less entirely skill based when it comes to online 1v1 play which is very impressive. I didn't think the campaign was that good though.
  78. Marmalade
    Sep 29, 2012
    8
    I played the original Starcraft and spent many late nights playing, only to be made aware of how long I was playing by the sun coming in through the window. LOL! I was very impressed with the quality of this game. The updated graphics retain the quality and feel of the original and the addition of achievements and portraits give you some added incentive to keep playing in Multiplayer.I played the original Starcraft and spent many late nights playing, only to be made aware of how long I was playing by the sun coming in through the window. LOL! I was very impressed with the quality of this game. The updated graphics retain the quality and feel of the original and the addition of achievements and portraits give you some added incentive to keep playing in Multiplayer. Fortunately, Blizzard gives new players of the franchise several flashbacks of what happened in the original game, so you won't be completely lost. If you get bored with multiplayer, there are many player-made arcade versions of the game that are high quality and ingeniously made. My only gripe is the cheating in the multiplayer leagues - diamond/platinum players who play professionally deliberately qualify for lower leagues so they can farm portraits and achievements, so it makes it more difficult for people in the bronze/silver leagues to progress as far as standings/achievements go, but hopefully that will end once these players with insane talent get their achievements and move on. LOL! Overall, a fantastic game.… Expand
  79. Toffenuff
    Dec 7, 2012
    8
    First and foremost, I am an avid Starcraft fan and have played the original Starcraft as well as Brood War countless times for many days worth of hours played. That said, I was also a little skeptical at first about how the new Starcraft game would turn out. The campaign was... not as great as I thought it would be. The story was somewhat blah and predictable. As far as presentation andFirst and foremost, I am an avid Starcraft fan and have played the original Starcraft as well as Brood War countless times for many days worth of hours played. That said, I was also a little skeptical at first about how the new Starcraft game would turn out. The campaign was... not as great as I thought it would be. The story was somewhat blah and predictable. As far as presentation and graphics, the game gets an A+ (at least compared to the old Starcraft; in terms of comparisons to other games today, it's about average I'd say). Multiplayer is still fun, but one thing I really did not like was the inability to have local LAN play instead of having to connect to the Blizzard servers all the time. The greatest thing about Starcraft's continued replayability all these years was that you could get a bunch of your buddies together or go to an internet gaming cafe (anywhere besides the US) and play Starcraft on a local network without having to deal with lag or server downtimes or malfunctions. You used to be able to play offline, even though it was supposed to be a online-only experience. Now it appears they've taken away offline play, so that docks more points from the rating. You shouldn't need an internet connection in order to play the game, it's that simple.
    To conclude, I am happy with the game but not as happy as I expected to be. Still would recommend getting this game, and hopefully with Heart of the Swarm they will have made a better game.    … Expand
  80. pavilion76
    Feb 26, 2013
    8
    I love Starcraft, I have played the first one and the expansion for many years. That game was great and ran like a charm. Then (after much long awaited anticipation) this game got released. Expecting such greatness, there was no way they could reach it. but despite that it is still a good game. This game is so similar to the original, it felt like a waste. The only changes is 3 changedI love Starcraft, I have played the first one and the expansion for many years. That game was great and ran like a charm. Then (after much long awaited anticipation) this game got released. Expecting such greatness, there was no way they could reach it. but despite that it is still a good game. This game is so similar to the original, it felt like a waste. The only changes is 3 changed units on every side, some not replaced, a HUGE graphics update, and revised terrain (the landscape) properties, such as high ground, and tall grass. Then, unlike the original and the expansion, there was only one story-line; instead they are selling each as their own separate game.… Expand
  81. Sean-M
    May 27, 2020
    8
    Great strategy game, great story and level design. I give it an 8 out of 10.
  82. max1c
    Apr 14, 2013
    8
    Good game, but falls short in comparison to legendary StarCraft: Brood War. Even though Blizzard improved a lot of things from their original title, they failed to make a great competitive great Brood War was.
  83. DeusXCom
    Jul 11, 2016
    8
    Original Starcraft is legendary and to this day one of the best RTS games of all time, combining 3 completely different, yet perfectly balanced races. SC2 is a nice revival of this classic for younger generations, in case of Wings of Liberty with very nice terran story campaign. Every single mission is fun and with different flavour, intermissions on Hyperion, research, interacting withOriginal Starcraft is legendary and to this day one of the best RTS games of all time, combining 3 completely different, yet perfectly balanced races. SC2 is a nice revival of this classic for younger generations, in case of Wings of Liberty with very nice terran story campaign. Every single mission is fun and with different flavour, intermissions on Hyperion, research, interacting with other crew members etc. is a cool addition. I'm looking forward to other chapters and I hope they will keep or even improve on this quality. The only complaint is separation into 3 parts, forcing you to buy main game and 2 DLCs, there were times in history when this wasn't needed, SC1 had all 3 campaigns from the start, so it's just a sad observation of where the gaming industry went. 8/10… Expand
  84. whatever523
    Mar 28, 2015
    8
    I bought this game for the single player and wasn't disappointed. Story is decent enough, the combat is really fun and it's technically well made all around.
  85. VidyaBum
    Mar 22, 2014
    8
    An all-around great game that is also the poorest strategy game I ever played.

    Wonderful cutscenes, characters, voice acting, clearly above what the gaming industry gives, make it a game that I love to watch as much as I should love to play it. Fine graphics and somewhat lame sounds(I can't recall a single non-cutscene song of the game, but the sounds and noises are fine with nothing    An all-around great game that is also the poorest strategy game I ever played.

    Wonderful cutscenes, characters, voice acting, clearly above what the gaming industry gives, make it a game that I love to watch as much as I should love to play it.

    Fine graphics and somewhat lame sounds(I can't recall a single non-cutscene song of the game, but the sounds and noises are fine with nothing special) make it a very, very acceptable game despite its lack of memorable music in any way.

    The problem is with the gameplay.
    Fast-paced as all hell, it gives no defenses because it wants to keep being at top speed.
    It has a very tiny, if existent at all, growth curve and you can beat a super-army with basic units, since the game works on a painfully simplistic principle of "this unit kills that unit".
    Almost no consequential use is made of the terrain or the size of units or the size of armies: you can turn around an entire 150 population army instantly, no movement jams or slowdowns when you have 50 tanks turning around together at the same time. You can get to a high vantage point to shoot enemies and it can be proven useless in less than 5 seconds as enemies will just rush to you from an easily-accessible way up...

    The complexity of the game is quickly shown to be about knowing what units to use and where to send them. While sufficient to make Starcraft II a fun game, it makes its complexity suffer terribly and come off as a simplistic, almost boring RTS. Actually, it IS a boring RTS.
    The element that saves it is the incredibly fast pace it has.

    You will spend all your time micromanaging units cause the AI is too dumb and things such as formations, lines, organisations, or the like, simply don't exist in this very poor RTS. But micromanaging does keep you busy and you're never idle.
    You will have to constantly go back and forth between bases and front lines to direct every unit or group of units and constantly spend time changing your units or forces to fight the enemy with its current weak point. Again, poor and simplistic, but it keeps you busy.
    You will have to keep trying to amass all the resources you can and spend them in units and tech, but you will almost never decide of a good offensive or defensive position as even the hugest possible army can be wiped out in less than a minute and your main job is not to strategise or fool the foe but to keep mashing buttons so that you get all your units in their spots where you need them for attack or defense...

    Every unit's capacity has to be micromanaged and you'll have to shift between them to use them all, adding even more stuff to do, which keeps you busy, but taking away even more capacity for complex thinking or setting up intricate strategies as AGAIN, this game isn't, and doesn't even try to be, a strategy game, as much as it tries to be the fastest-paced "unit creation and control" game there can be.

    Best example I can find to define this game's problem as a strategy game is the missions: you'll have tons of varied and fun objectives and some nice bonuses in all of them, but in almost every single mission without exception, your strategy will be: learn their units, get the units that kill them, keep getting resources and don't stop till victory.
    All the missions are nice and varied, but all the strategies are the same, save a few very rare cases.

    While indiscutably fun and memorable thanks to its great cutscenes and characters, SCII WoL is also the poorest strategy game I've played in my life, and compared to the Command and Conquer series, the Total War series, or other non-"Blizzard RTSes", this is truly the worst strategy game I've played.

    Still loved the cutscenes and effort, still finished it several times, still think it's an all-around very fun game. But it has sucked the soul out of strategy to become another look-at-me-I'm-so-fast-I'm-so-fun game, with simplistic gameplay and functionalities, way less elements of growth or complexity, and way less long-term value than many real strategy games.    … Expand
  86. Jimbles
    Sep 10, 2014
    8
    I haven't really played this game a lot, only on my cousins computer for three days when I visited him. I'm not an expert in this type of games and have never played such before, but it was awesome to play it. Even as a noob in this genre this game was fun every minute I played it (SP) and I really do recommend playing this even if you don't like this type of games.
  87. sgtdegrandis
    Oct 20, 2014
    8
    Well first I think this is the best RTS game we have currently however there are some major problems.
    1. No Lan (It’s pathetic that hackers have made it available but blizzard has not)
    2. Selling each game separately for more $$$ is Bull**** Now for the good in Wings of Liberty the story is epic the maps and units are as always amazing and the upgrade systems is very easy to use and    Well first I think this is the best RTS game we have currently however there are some major problems.
    1. No Lan (It’s pathetic that hackers have made it available but blizzard has not)
    2. Selling each game separately for more $$$ is Bull****

    Now for the good in Wings of Liberty the story is epic the maps and units are as always amazing and the upgrade systems is very easy to use and it shows you what your actually getting before you make the upgrade with a video at least in story mode.

    I don’t really do MP all that much but it works every time I use it.    … Expand
  88. angelss_13
    May 11, 2017
    8
    Grandioso juego de estrategia en tiempo real. La jugabilidad estratégica y la historia son bastante buenas, sobre todo la primera, que fue perfeccionada; pero perdió el tono oscuro y crudo, casi de terror espacial que caracterizaba a su progenitor, quien también le supera en su banda sonora.
  89. auditbadger
    Jul 30, 2017
    8
    I think that this is truly a unique game and I would recommend that if you are a fan of this type of genre then I think you should give this game a try.
  90. Amorph0us
    Jan 9, 2022
    8
    Probably the Blizzard's game with the most quality. Despite being Blizzard's answer to 40k, the design, story and world setting is really interesting. Complex mechanics make you enjoy the game after some time of training. This is not actually bad, but a matter of taste.
  91. res0nancer
    Jun 5, 2023
    8
    Отличный заход на что-то приземленное, хоть и в космическом сеттинге. Персонажи, их взаимодействия, вопросы возникающие по мере продвижения по сюжету - не оставляют равнодушным. Первое дополнение имеет отличный старт, но к сожалению, по моим личным ощущениям, планка быстро падает с каждым дополнением.
    Геймплей на любителя жанра, коим я давно не являюсь. Если хочется сюжета и ваши игровые    Отличный заход на что-то приземленное, хоть и в космическом сеттинге. Персонажи, их взаимодействия, вопросы возникающие по мере продвижения по сюжету - не оставляют равнодушным. Первое дополнение имеет отличный старт, но к сожалению, по моим личным ощущениям, планка быстро падает с каждым дополнением.
    Геймплей на любителя жанра, коим я давно не являюсь. Если хочется сюжета и ваши игровые сессии оттого будут долгими - готовьтесь по 50 раз строить одно и тоже каждый раз, когда начинается миссия, что в какой-то момент стало невыносимым для меня.    … Expand
  92. Vanco
    Jun 4, 2019
    8
    Great RTS with a good story. Each faction plays in a unique while still being balanced.
  93. laertan
    Feb 7, 2020
    8
    Awesome cinematic, great balance, various missions, decent plot, return of loved characters, nice management of the troops. Also I like ideas with achievments & icons. God damn it, I wrote it and now I want to play it again :)
  94. PanMrkvicka
    Feb 12, 2020
    8
    The game suprised me with how interesting and good the story was. Multiplayer is also great.
  95. JBWSpieletester
    Mar 9, 2020
    8
    Erstelle deine Basis!

    • Am besten gefallen hat mir, dass ich mit meinem Mutterschiff andere belästigen konnte. • Ich habe entdeckt, dass das Game sehr viel Spaß macht, wenn man zusammen durch alle durchrusht. • Ich hatte viel Spaß beim Craften und Verbessern des Mutterschiffs. • Wenn ich etwas ändern könnte, würde ich mehr Fahrzeuge hinzufügen. • Zum ersten Mal habe ich fiese Aliens    Erstelle deine Basis!

    • Am besten gefallen hat mir, dass ich mit meinem Mutterschiff andere belästigen konnte.
    • Ich habe entdeckt, dass das Game sehr viel Spaß macht, wenn man zusammen durch alle durchrusht.
    • Ich hatte viel Spaß beim Craften und Verbessern des Mutterschiffs.
    • Wenn ich etwas ändern könnte, würde ich mehr Fahrzeuge hinzufügen.
    • Zum ersten Mal habe ich fiese Aliens gespielt.
    • Ich habe nicht verstanden, wie das Spiel funktioniert.
    • Besonders mies war, als ich überraschend in der Base gekillt wurde.    … Expand
  96. nazarkin123
    Mar 10, 2021
    8
    We were waiting for it for so long. Such an amazing continuation of the story.
  97. CharlieL
    Jul 31, 2010
    7
    While the graphics have improved vastly, the gameplay remained mostly the same as the original game over a decade ago. The genre have moved beyond since then. And in some ways this is reflected from the changes seen in single player campaign. But if Blizzard is going to take some aspects of Relic games, then they should have took more instead of sticking to the confine of the original. While the graphics have improved vastly, the gameplay remained mostly the same as the original game over a decade ago. The genre have moved beyond since then. And in some ways this is reflected from the changes seen in single player campaign. But if Blizzard is going to take some aspects of Relic games, then they should have took more instead of sticking to the confine of the original. Starcraft was a great game when it was released, now people just need to get over it.… Expand
  98. ScottK
    Jul 29, 2010
    7
    The game is undoubtedly awesome, and coming to the end of the campaign here shortly, it did not let me down! The online side on the other hand has a lot to be desired. Lack of chat rooms, lack of Lan, lack of cross region play, something that has been pabundant in previous titles has been removed from this game. With thousands of users asking for the ability to chat "in game" and being The game is undoubtedly awesome, and coming to the end of the campaign here shortly, it did not let me down! The online side on the other hand has a lot to be desired. Lack of chat rooms, lack of Lan, lack of cross region play, something that has been pabundant in previous titles has been removed from this game. With thousands of users asking for the ability to chat "in game" and being ignored, thats why im giving this a 7. Though to be fair, a 9 for the gameplay/story, a 3 for their failed battle.net experience...it really brings it down.… Expand
  99. MarcelN
    Jul 31, 2010
    7
    Poor sequel, overhyped and DRM-infested. Why, oh why, did I fell for the marketing BS and bought this?! I'm totally UNHAPPY with no LAN, no custom matchmaking, no custom map naming, 'premium content you'll need to pay for' and so on. Suck ass.
  100. PeterR
    Aug 2, 2010
    7
    What this game does well is its story. If that's all the game is about it should get a perfect 10. But RTS's are in part about commanding large armies and creating a feeling of being a general. It's in this regard that SC2 gets a 5. The game plays exactly as it was 12 years ago with the addition of a badly executed order queuing ability (bad because if you mess up order 4 What this game does well is its story. If that's all the game is about it should get a perfect 10. But RTS's are in part about commanding large armies and creating a feeling of being a general. It's in this regard that SC2 gets a 5. The game plays exactly as it was 12 years ago with the addition of a badly executed order queuing ability (bad because if you mess up order 4 or 5 you need to re-issue all orders). Without changing the core gameplay Blizzard could have added any number of features that truly make modern RTS's very fun and engaging. Some such features would be: Zoom engines, Dual monitor support, group attack commands (being able to issue a command to attack an entire group and not just 1 individual in a group), formations, a low profile UI, etc. This is why this game gets a 7. While the gameplay isn't bad, it sure isn't good. It's simply antiquated. So if you're looking for story absolutely buy this game. If you're an RTS fan you may want to look elsewhere.… Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

2
#2 Best PC Game of 2010
2
#2 Most Discussed PC Game of 2010
5
#5 Most Shared PC Game of 2010

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
93

Universal acclaim - based on 82 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 82 out of 82
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 82
  3. Negative: 0 out of 82
  1. PC Zone UK
    Jan 18, 2011
    95
    "Quotation Forthcoming"
  2. Video Game Talk
    Jan 18, 2011
    90
    If you are into real time strategy in any form, it's hard to ignore Starcraft II.
    Read full review
  3. PC Format
    Dec 24, 2010
    93
    Perfectly balanced multiplayer with old school elements intact, and rich and dynamic single player campaigns. [Issue#244, p.102]
See all critic reviews »