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. TheNoise
    Jul 31, 2010
    9
    With companies ruining the RTS genre by taking RTS elements out of gameplay a la Dawn of War or Company of Heroes (expansions), Blizzard comes out with what even the RTS purists would call a perfect strategy game. First and foremost this is a multilayer game, it is not for the weak as you will be crushed online. So be prepared to lose. But if you are prepared to learn and practice you With companies ruining the RTS genre by taking RTS elements out of gameplay a la Dawn of War or Company of Heroes (expansions), Blizzard comes out with what even the RTS purists would call a perfect strategy game. First and foremost this is a multilayer game, it is not for the weak as you will be crushed online. So be prepared to lose. But if you are prepared to learn and practice you will have the time of your life with this one. Multilayer retains all the qualities of the original Starcraft while polishing the interface even more. This is a perfect competitive RTS game. I have two gripes with the game though which is why it doesn't get the full 10 from me. Lack of LAN support may not be such a big issue except that because of the segregated region launch it is impossible to play the game with people from other continents. This limitation could have been resolved had blizzard included the LAN option (by use of a VPN or Ethernet bridge). For a game that is supposed to be the end all be all competitive RTS game it is a pretty serious omission to exclude LAN play. I understand the decision was motivated by the rampant piracy on PC but not including LAN does more to hurt paying legit customers then it will do to combat piracy. The other issue has to do with the privacy. Once you are on Battle.net there is no way to hide your gaming habits from your friends/family. If you invite someone to your battlenet messenger you can't go invisible. It is a pretty basic feature Blizzard failed to implement. Because you can only have one character on Battlenet you are pretty much forced to buy another game if you want to play ranked matches anonymously. I think $60 is a fair price for this game as it has a potential of providing countless hours of entertainment. Even the solid single player campaign, challenge system and achievements offer many hours of game play. The game lives up to the hype! For any RTS fan or a hard core gamer this game is a must have, despite it's issues which I hope will get resolved by Blizzard.… Expand
  2. OP
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Awesome game... digital download from battle.net and installation were flawless. The game itself is no disappointment. Battle.net 2.0 is much better than the original battle.net. A lot of the features have been very well thought out... The best feature would probably be the quick matchmaking feature... which works perfectly.
  3. TimD
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Anyone who rates this game lower than 9 clearly does not own it nor do they have any intention of every buying it. This game is fantastic, if you like strategy games, there is no reason not to buy this game.
  4. 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.
  5. DavidB
    Jul 31, 2010
    7
    In the past when asked for a release date for StarCraft II, Blizzard would proudly proclaim:
  6. 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.
  7. MaximB
    Jul 31, 2010
    3
    -not realy playable offline. -many crashes, battle net needed. -just remake of Starcraft 1 -comic graphics -end disappointing -no LAN modus -not playable worldwide Overall this game is pretty bad. I cant understand the scores from magazines. It is bad implementation of first part with better graphics. It can't reach Starcraft or WC3. There are also many better RTS. It is just hyped.
  8. DennisH
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    An absolutely perfect refinement of the classic RTS game. Yes, there's not much new in terms of types of gameplay but what the games does contain is near-perfect balance and polish polish and more polish. If you like RTS games it's literally impossible to not like Starcraft II.
  9. DylanC
    Jul 31, 2010
    3
    Let's get one thing straight. This game is good. However, playing this game feels like Starcraft crossed with Warcraft 3 more than an original game in its own right. From the first time I played the beta, there was a distinct feeling I'd been here before. For all the perfect scores this is getting, it's certainly not groundbreaking like the two games I just mentioned. The Let's get one thing straight. This game is good. However, playing this game feels like Starcraft crossed with Warcraft 3 more than an original game in its own right. From the first time I played the beta, there was a distinct feeling I'd been here before. For all the perfect scores this is getting, it's certainly not groundbreaking like the two games I just mentioned. The fact that there really isn't anything new is disappointing. This is a rehash of Starcraft 1 for the new generation and those nostalgic ones who can't handle a little pixelation. If making a more polished remake of old games was all there was to it, we'd have a top 10 list populated by EA sports games they churn out every year. Doing the same thing with more gloss is just not good enough. Starcraft II doesn't deserve a spot among the likes of Half-Life at the top of the PC heap.… Expand
  10. MatthiasF
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Extremely well done RTS. Worthy sequel to the original game which I blame for many lost nights and weekends. Performance is excellent too. The story is engaging and surprising altogether. First game in months which got me hooked on again. I don't mind the split into a trilogy myself and while some moves done by Blizzard are controversial (and as WoW player I'm used to their Extremely well done RTS. Worthy sequel to the original game which I blame for many lost nights and weekends. Performance is excellent too. The story is engaging and surprising altogether. First game in months which got me hooked on again. I don't mind the split into a trilogy myself and while some moves done by Blizzard are controversial (and as WoW player I'm used to their antics) they tend to be rather forthcoming as time goes by.… Expand
  11. JacobG
    Jul 31, 2010
    0
    Sc2, same crap, different day with shinier graphics. Gameplay from last decade that is extremely boring. Where are the tactics from the RTS's we have come to love like Company of Heroes. SC2 SP campaign is only interesting because of the story, you dont play it because the missions are engrossing, you play it to get to the next cutscene.
  12. JonL
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Definitely took everything from the first game and made it much better. The balance vital to multiplayer is still there. Granted, you only have a terran campaign, but it's just as long as the combined campaigns of the three races from SC1. Worth the money by far, and can't wait for the expansions!
  13. NicoS
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Simply a masterpiece and will start a revolution for casual RTS Games - just give it a month and most of the players are correctly rated. Then you will have mostly even matches only, already worked this in the beta. And the campain is absolutely awesome. Downside: got less sleep last few days.
  14. LincolnL
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Best game to be released in years. The campaign story while somewhat cliche is great. (What story isn't cliche these days?) People complaining about the single player only including 1/3 of the game obviously haven't played it, since it's easily longer and has more content than most recent games I've played barring long RPGs with 20+ hour storylines. The multiplayer is Best game to be released in years. The campaign story while somewhat cliche is great. (What story isn't cliche these days?) People complaining about the single player only including 1/3 of the game obviously haven't played it, since it's easily longer and has more content than most recent games I've played barring long RPGs with 20+ hour storylines. The multiplayer is awesome (if you like that kind of thing) and while maybe not perfectly balanced, it's as close as can be expected. Overall must buy.… Expand
  15. RogerB
    Jul 31, 2010
    1
    An utterly terrible game. The AI is atrocious even on the hardest setting. The graphics are very poor apart from the overused CGI cutscenes. Only one race has its own storyline... save your money and get another game. This is a terrible excuse for a "game" and an insult the StarCraft legacy.
  16. JerryL
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Don't listen to the haters. Worth every penny The missions are detailed, interesting, and as difficult as you want to make them. The achievement system is challenging and drives you to jump in and explore the whole new system and world Blizzard has created. It has expanded from just building up an army and blowing things up, to following story lines, choosing your missions and Don't listen to the haters. Worth every penny The missions are detailed, interesting, and as difficult as you want to make them. The achievement system is challenging and drives you to jump in and explore the whole new system and world Blizzard has created. It has expanded from just building up an army and blowing things up, to following story lines, choosing your missions and unit/tech advancement that make the campaign a totally different experience than the multiplayer. Speaking of the multiplayer, the new [...] is incredible. The matching engine has been phenomenal. For me at least, it always finds a challenging yet equal leveled player. Even when you lose you think, "had I just done a couple things differently I could have won." Those kinds of experiences are great for learning and as you play you get better and try out and see different techniques. The leagues and ladder system is an incentive to play and get better and is fun to watch yourself climb the latter and join higher leagues. I love to view and compare my opponent's statistics and see their achievements. The built in replay system is another major improvement. It's extremely helpful to have replays of all your matches and be able to review them to study the timing and tactics. The changes in [...] would have been worth the $60 alone. I've only heard 3 complaints: no LAN, lack of chat rooms (there are lots of personal and party chat features), and the game feels incomplete without equal campaigns for Zerg and Protoss. How many LAN games have you played in the last 5 years where you didn't have access to the internet? I can personally think of 3 and when you recognize the benefits of having everything connected to an online system that tradeoff isn't even a question. To invest tons of more time and effort into supporting that you lose time and energy to put into the game details itself. I say leave it out. 2. Lack of chat room in [...]. I personally found the chat rooms to be annoying, but others liked them, I'd be willing to bet it gets a patch to include them before years end. The last item is one I read a lot about and can't understand and that's people feel somehow ripped off by not having the other 2 campaigns. It's simple there is enough material and experience in this one game than both SC and Brood Wars combined. We have no idea what Blizzard is going to release with the next 2 games, I'm confident though that if it's the same cost, they will include enough to make it worth it, if they don't, it won't cost as much as the current one does. I don't think even Blizzard knows how much it's going to cost or include. So why freak out about it now? Bottom line, the campaign is enough to cover a stand alone game. Expecting that kind of detail X3 would be like asking someone to build you a house and then ask if they can build it 3X larger for the same amount of time and money. When you figure people spend $10 for 2 hours at the movie theater, $60 is a small price to pay for the hours, days, and years of entertainment this game will offer. Worth every penny and I'm excited to see what Blizzard has up their sleeve for the next 2 installments.… Expand
  17. 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
  18. TimothyJ
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    The RTS game I've been waiting for since the Warcraft 2 / Startcraft / Red Alert days! Awesome campaign. Visually amazing. A soundtrack that retains elements from the original game while not being exactly the same. And a nice smooth transition into multi-player that even the noobest of noobs will be able to cope with.
  19. BoB
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    The best game I've played to this date. Re-playability is the keyword here. Both multiplayer (mp) and singleplayer (sp) wise. Great core game mechanics make sure that foundation is solid to build the most epic game upon. SP has a great storyline and the achievements mixed with difficulty settings makes it worth replaying tons of times for me. MP has it all: clever rankings which The best game I've played to this date. Re-playability is the keyword here. Both multiplayer (mp) and singleplayer (sp) wise. Great core game mechanics make sure that foundation is solid to build the most epic game upon. SP has a great storyline and the achievements mixed with difficulty settings makes it worth replaying tons of times for me. MP has it all: clever rankings which enhances the online experience and gives me the incentive to become a better player. Custom games made possible by an awesome world editor, which makes sure that are always new playable challenges and makes the community thrive. 10/10… Expand
  20. JSewell
    Jul 31, 2010
    6
    Basically more of the same. Updated graphics from the original, however gameplay remains largely unchanged. Blizzard must not realize that there have been improvements to RTS games in the past decade. I'll take Supreme Commander any day over this game.
  21. RichardA
    Jul 31, 2010
    9
    It's not groundbreaking, but it doesn't need to be and (perhaps most importantly) it doesn't TRY to be. It is faithful to it's source material and an example of a PROPER sequel. Prospective owners of this excellent piece should take no heed of those who naysay the fact that there is only a Terran campaign and that it crawls on a modern system: The "Terran" campaign is It's not groundbreaking, but it doesn't need to be and (perhaps most importantly) it doesn't TRY to be. It is faithful to it's source material and an example of a PROPER sequel. Prospective owners of this excellent piece should take no heed of those who naysay the fact that there is only a Terran campaign and that it crawls on a modern system: The "Terran" campaign is 30 missions long, which is all three of the campaigns from the first game put together. The missions are shorter but much more varied, and thus the entertainment value is increased. And though it does look great on my system (e6300 and a radeon 4870) it will run on damn near anything that was built in the last half-decade when settings are tuned correctly. And all that without mentioning the multiplayer! Battle.net 2.0 is an amazing thing. No more lobbies to sit in, no more spam with comments from your friends mixed in. On the fly matchmaking that is quick and actually works! True the units do need some balancing, but Blizz spent 10 years perfecting the original, and it shows - the balance isn't terrible, it just needs some tweaking. The game isn't broken by any stretch of the word.… Expand
  22. JohnP
    Jul 31, 2010
    0
    Its an rts that was outdated 10 years ago... I can't fathom why any of these reviewers are giving this above a 5, the graphics are sub-par, the mechanics are boring, the units are boring and uninventive. (Not to mention the whole franchise is a ripoff of 40k) This game is a 10 year step backwards in the rts genre. There is no new mechanics, nothing groundbreaking, the single player Its an rts that was outdated 10 years ago... I can't fathom why any of these reviewers are giving this above a 5, the graphics are sub-par, the mechanics are boring, the units are boring and uninventive. (Not to mention the whole franchise is a ripoff of 40k) This game is a 10 year step backwards in the rts genre. There is no new mechanics, nothing groundbreaking, the single player feels like questing in world of warcraft, and the campaign ending was uneventful. Not to mention that you need to pay another 120 bucks(?) to see the other 2 campaigns. Yay? Starcraft 1 was better. I'd rather play the eye rape that was cnc4 than this pile of blizzard ****.… Expand
  23. csonkab
    Jul 31, 2010
    0
    It's not just the Warcraft 3 quality graphics that would have been embarrassing 5 years ago, not just the terrible clichéd story in single player, nor just the fact that online hasn't even made an attempt at being anything but SC1 with some new units. No, it's the fact that activision dare ask you 60 bucks for this junk and it's REGIONLOCKED, a PC game that is It's not just the Warcraft 3 quality graphics that would have been embarrassing 5 years ago, not just the terrible clichéd story in single player, nor just the fact that online hasn't even made an attempt at being anything but SC1 with some new units. No, it's the fact that activision dare ask you 60 bucks for this junk and it's REGIONLOCKED, a PC game that is regionlocked. You can only install this to ONE computer 3 times. That's it. It doesn't have any LAN either, which means you will never play this without lag. There is no excuse for buying this other than the hype machine behind it.… Expand
  24. FarSpace
    Jul 31, 2010
    5
    imo it is build real fast and attack or the same and defend then attacvk if that's more fun for you, so really it is not a great stratagy game. not allot to it if you want some real stratagy game play, but the graphics and story are good if that's what you like. personaly this makes me want to go back to the WWII board games, now that uses some real thaught. I'm so sick of imo it is build real fast and attack or the same and defend then attacvk if that's more fun for you, so really it is not a great stratagy game. not allot to it if you want some real stratagy game play, but the graphics and story are good if that's what you like. personaly this makes me want to go back to the WWII board games, now that uses some real thaught. I'm so sick of Blizzard so called going with what so called works but I guess other don't want there game to get any more interesting but just have more options and better graphics is fine but lets some some big time stratagy that really getsmore interest, chess is way better even. sorry.… Expand
  25. DonL
    Jul 31, 2010
    9
    Power overwhelming! This game rocks. Rather than attempting some kind of high-concept, new style of RTS, Blizzard has stuck to their roots and changed virtually nil from the original Starcraft. Just added a few new units, a much improved campaign, and one extra dimension. The third one, that is. As in 3D. I don't mean we get to visit another dimension. Don't let me give you that Power overwhelming! This game rocks. Rather than attempting some kind of high-concept, new style of RTS, Blizzard has stuck to their roots and changed virtually nil from the original Starcraft. Just added a few new units, a much improved campaign, and one extra dimension. The third one, that is. As in 3D. I don't mean we get to visit another dimension. Don't let me give you that impression. Because we don't. And talk about beautiful! It's gorgeous and gritty. I was afraid, and I'm sure many of you have shared the same apprehension, that the Blizfags in all their stupid wisdom would adopt Warcraft's cartoony visuals for the Starcraft sequel. But let me assure you: not really. I mean, it's sort of cartoony. Like, the medics have these huge medic shields that don't really make any sense, but for the most part it's perfectly fine and adult-looking. If your girlfriend looks over your shoulder, you won't be embarrassed. That is, if you have a girlfriend. Which you don't. Anyways. Great game! What happened to the Sunken Colonies and Lurkers? I mean seriously. . . WTF happened to the Sunken Colonies and the Lurkers? Instead of the Sunken Colonies, the Zerg get some kind of huge, giant, flapping dildo-tentacle that snaps ground units in the face. You heard correctly. Ground units. . . get bludgeoned in the face. . . with a giant peeney-weeney. I guess that is kind of an incentive to stay away from their base, though, isn't it? Who wants to rush the Zerg base only to get cock-slapped? Fuck that dildo-slapping tentacle bitch. Great game, though! Dark Templars have Darth Maul scythes. There's a unit called the Omegalisk which is basically four-and a half Ultrulisks in one. You can't make it. There's a Jamaican Witch Doct. . . I mean, Ghost. Raynor shoots a huge, beautiful plasma TV that probably cost a few grand with his revolver like a dumbass. The Xel-Naga are a playable race. Just kidding.… Expand
  26. JonathanL
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Another excellent game from Blizzard, Starcraft II brings along a tour de force of gameplay, with excellent cutscenes, a wide variety of missions, and a gripping story line. The two more announced expansions only mean better things for the single player campaign, and nay-saying to the contrary, the new Battle.net remains an engaging and easy to use interface, making gaming online a breeze.
  27. tp
    Jul 31, 2010
    10
    Best freakin RTS game ever made. If theres one game thats worth 60$, is this. Hell, i'd pay full price for this game even if it only had online multiplayer because thats where all the meat and all the content are at. Multiplayer is where millions will still be playing 10 years from now. For me, the story mode was a bonus. One epic hell of a bonus indeed. And remember, before saying Best freakin RTS game ever made. If theres one game thats worth 60$, is this. Hell, i'd pay full price for this game even if it only had online multiplayer because thats where all the meat and all the content are at. Multiplayer is where millions will still be playing 10 years from now. For me, the story mode was a bonus. One epic hell of a bonus indeed. And remember, before saying this is just 1/3 of a game, 1) blizzard has always made expansion packs. No one complained that blizzard was making a half of a game when they released brood war and the frozen throne and lord of destruction did they? The only difference is that they announced the expansions ahead of time. Complaining that wings of liberty is 1/3 of a game is like telling Lucas that starwars episode I is 1/3 of a movie. 2) This game has 30 missions, the same amount as starcraft 1, so it has as much if not more content than the first game 3) starcraft 1 when it came out was 60$. It cost blizzard a tiny fraction of what it cost to make starcraft 2 today which some say was about 100 million. 4) people who say the expansions are going to cost 60$ each are morons who should be ignored.… Expand
  28. Mike
    Jul 31, 2010
    5
    Pretty meh, all over. Western setting with a cowboy jukebox mixed with boring conversations written by 10 year olds... what just happened to my Sci-Fi war story? There is nothing new to this, since the first. Just shinier and cheesier. I guess it plays well enough, but good lord there are some awful design choices with the characters and story. I guess they really did only care about Pretty meh, all over. Western setting with a cowboy jukebox mixed with boring conversations written by 10 year olds... what just happened to my Sci-Fi war story? There is nothing new to this, since the first. Just shinier and cheesier. I guess it plays well enough, but good lord there are some awful design choices with the characters and story. I guess they really did only care about multiplayer and the millions of Koreans.… Expand
  29. 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
  30. MichaelB
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Incredibly fun, in every aspect. Matchmaking in multiplayer keeps those of use in the mid-range skill level from being stomped too often, and from being bored to tears fighting opponents with no chance of competing. I can't begin to applaud the single player campaigns as well as they deserve. One of those games that really makes you sit back and wonder, "Why is this just now being Incredibly fun, in every aspect. Matchmaking in multiplayer keeps those of use in the mid-range skill level from being stomped too often, and from being bored to tears fighting opponents with no chance of competing. I can't begin to applaud the single player campaigns as well as they deserve. One of those games that really makes you sit back and wonder, "Why is this just now being included in these games?" The campaign truly lets you play your way, upgrading your units and building to customize the things you personally choose to use most often. I'd give it an 11 if I could, I strongly advise anyone who likes RTS games or has wanted to try one to play this game.… Expand
  31. JoelM
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Starcraft II is just what the RTS genre needed. A shining example of how sequels need not be worse than the original. The polish and attention to detail in this game is apparant and Blizzard has managed to add so many features that even the most content starved gamer will be kept satisfied for months to come.
  32. JHumes
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Blizzard knows what works, and in Starcraft 2, it shows. The fact that the single player has many units that are not available in the multi-player for balance issues, highlights the great effort that Blizzard made to make the different races balanced. Once again, Blizzard has released a game that will addict millions of people for years to come.
  33. ZaneB
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Awesome game!! So addictive! My advice to those of you that are new to RTSs' and Starcraft's uber competitive multiplayer: Keep playing and you will get pretty good. Watch pro gamers on youtube for tips. It is EXTREMELY rewarding to win in multiplayer. Now, I'm gonna get back to playing Starcraft II
  34. 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
  35. OndrejD
    Jul 30, 2010
    9
    Great game, best RTS since original Starcraft. Only bummers are region lock and optimalization on Mac (had to use bootcamp to play it reasonably), but hopefully this will be fixed soon. Campaing is great, multiplayer is for me the best online experience ever.
  36. FrancoisV
    Jul 30, 2010
    6
    blizzard said this was going to be epic and even better than star-craft/bood war. well i just finished the game(every mission and even the secret mission), few interesting things but overall the story is lacking, i felt like ''ok i spent that much time just to know this, that and that and this is it''. So you do a bunch of missions that doesnt really advance the story. blizzard said this was going to be epic and even better than star-craft/bood war. well i just finished the game(every mission and even the secret mission), few interesting things but overall the story is lacking, i felt like ''ok i spent that much time just to know this, that and that and this is it''. So you do a bunch of missions that doesnt really advance the story. some missions were fun but it didnt add anything to the story. considering it has only the terran campaign and it took so much time before they release this game, it's seriously is weak. dialogue were a bit cheasy too. as for the multiplayer, i havent played much so far, but most of the map seems the same thing, you start on a elevate floor with one entrance....the gameplay overall seems a bit slower too (haverster, gather less mineral and gas than the first game and most unit/building cost around the same as the first game :S ) the menu/battle net is confusing too, i will probably get use to it but so far it's a little bit annoying. overall i am disapointed. i'll probably wait til they release protoss game or a bundle and spoil myself a little and see if the next games are going to be worth it.… Expand
  37. AustinE.
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Fantastic game. I got it at midnight and have not been disappointed. Single player missions are varied and interesting, and the story (while nothing mindblowing) is entertaining. The multiplayer is where hundreds of hours are going to be spent. Balance is pretty good, but there are always patches for improvement. Between the campaign, multiplayer, the single player challenges, the Fantastic game. I got it at midnight and have not been disappointed. Single player missions are varied and interesting, and the story (while nothing mindblowing) is entertaining. The multiplayer is where hundreds of hours are going to be spent. Balance is pretty good, but there are always patches for improvement. Between the campaign, multiplayer, the single player challenges, the achievements and portraits to earn, the game is bursting with content and well worth the $60.… Expand
  38. XahK
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    I'll admit I played the beta so I have a advantage for atleast the first 10 to 15 games going into multiplayer. I honestly believe some of these 1 rating individuals are giving up before the placement matches are even done. Just keep at it, there are floods of people who play just like you. However if you don't improve your experience with multiplayer will be dull, largely I'll admit I played the beta so I have a advantage for atleast the first 10 to 15 games going into multiplayer. I honestly believe some of these 1 rating individuals are giving up before the placement matches are even done. Just keep at it, there are floods of people who play just like you. However if you don't improve your experience with multiplayer will be dull, largely because the quality of your opponents' is terrible. Do some research, go to teamliquid.com watch how some people play the game and you'll slowly approve. This is all coming from someone who started as copper/silver to diamond.… Expand
  39. MichaelS
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Starcraft 2 is a what RTSs were 10 years ago, without the conveniences of squad systems that streamlined combat, or the get out there and explore the map encouraging systems like control points or reinforcement zones. It has the same heavy focus on base building that the original one did, and yet, it all works together remarkably well. Starcraft II is an absolutely fantastic RTS game Starcraft 2 is a what RTSs were 10 years ago, without the conveniences of squad systems that streamlined combat, or the get out there and explore the map encouraging systems like control points or reinforcement zones. It has the same heavy focus on base building that the original one did, and yet, it all works together remarkably well. Starcraft II is an absolutely fantastic RTS game that's lodged solidly in a kind of old school game play we haven't seen in years.… Expand
  40. KennethG.
    Jul 30, 2010
    3
    this game is so overrated its sad i notice how so far all the pro reviews has NOT been under 90. I must wonder how much money blizzard paid to reviewers to make sure so far there are no reviews under 90... or 9 out of 10. even some of the other user reviews here i wonder.... This game is a game thats 15 years old with new graphics. There is nothing new or innovative to it. In fact some of this game is so overrated its sad i notice how so far all the pro reviews has NOT been under 90. I must wonder how much money blizzard paid to reviewers to make sure so far there are no reviews under 90... or 9 out of 10. even some of the other user reviews here i wonder.... This game is a game thats 15 years old with new graphics. There is nothing new or innovative to it. In fact some of the dated elements distract from gameplay. the dated Ui: the dated camera. (you cant even ROTATE the camera!) the very start of the campaign has a boring introduction ( a guy sitting in a bar? COME ON!) and i think the game relys too much on its flashy CGI scenes rather then the actual gameplay. The campaign might be fun.. but its nothing that hasnt been done before 10 times over in RTS...games. there is no deep strategist with the game its basically gather as much resources as you can and build your stuff as fast as you can and attack? I think they are just spending so much time on Catacyslm that they just half did Starcraft 2 ... the next wow addon will be in my opinion ten times better and then times more interesting then Starcraft 2 is. Starcraft 2 feels more like a dated title with improved graphics. Heck i bet Red Alert 3 will be more fun for me! (i should reinstall it!). Next!… Expand
  41. JoolzL
    Jul 30, 2010
    9
    To CJ Henry, That an unfair rating and you know it. And if you don't then here's why, that's not a game rating. Thats a personal bitch because it doesn't delivery on YOUR expectations. The gameplay is fluid and familiar, the races are individual and unique from one another. The interactive menues (aka The Hyperion) add a great element to the story. You can skip the non To CJ Henry, That an unfair rating and you know it. And if you don't then here's why, that's not a game rating. Thats a personal bitch because it doesn't delivery on YOUR expectations. The gameplay is fluid and familiar, the races are individual and unique from one another. The interactive menues (aka The Hyperion) add a great element to the story. You can skip the non essentials completely or explore them to be rewarded with a deeper look atthe characters. There is SO much good in this game. To rate it low because it doesn't support your favored play style (LAN) or because it has a story instead of empty fighting for the sake of fighting is simply petulant. Also so say this game is "supposed" to be a tournament game is just shortsighted. It's an RTS with a deep history and massive following, the fact that it's developed into a mass passtime doesn't define it. For me this game has been well worth the wait, brilliant… Expand
  42. 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
  43. ChristianS.
    Jul 30, 2010
    9
    While disappointed in the fact that the other two races were not included in the first game and that the price was high, I like playing from Jim Raynor's perspective. And while not a huge departure from the first, it is so polished and smooth that I find myself rather enjoying it.
  44. CJHenry
    Jul 30, 2010
    1
    Yet another rehash from the kings of rehashes themselves. Only this time it's not even a full rehash, but a third of it, stripped of tonnes of features like LAN support to appease gaming 2.0 business design models and pie graphs so Robert Kotick can renovate his kitchen. Almost a billion hours of CGI to distract neckbeards from their looming diabetes, an epic tale of cliche' Yet another rehash from the kings of rehashes themselves. Only this time it's not even a full rehash, but a third of it, stripped of tonnes of features like LAN support to appease gaming 2.0 business design models and pie graphs so Robert Kotick can renovate his kitchen. Almost a billion hours of CGI to distract neckbeards from their looming diabetes, an epic tale of cliche' revenge killing and redemption that has nothing to do with what is supposed to be a tournament game. Facebook integration so all your cousins and parents can see why your friends list hasn't reached double figures yet. A taste of things to come from Blizzbooktivision.… Expand
  45. MichaelH
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    A perfect RTS. Very similar to the original, and for a good reason. The balancing is near-perfect, any pro would say the same. And it runs beautifully on nearly any machine. Except for Gary K's 1999 Windows ME antique. I have it running at low on my friend's laptop; Pentium 4, integrated graphics, and 1gb of ram. 40fps. On MY computer (high settings, 100fps), the game looks A perfect RTS. Very similar to the original, and for a good reason. The balancing is near-perfect, any pro would say the same. And it runs beautifully on nearly any machine. Except for Gary K's 1999 Windows ME antique. I have it running at low on my friend's laptop; Pentium 4, integrated graphics, and 1gb of ram. 40fps. On MY computer (high settings, 100fps), the game looks AMAZING. Beautiful. Buy this.… Expand
  46. JonnyT
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Fantastic...this game is the best RTS to come out in years! I love the old-school feel to it. Blizzard was smart not to change the formula. I wish we could get other 'old' games done like this. Imagine Stronghold redone...or Warcraft with detail like this...simply amazing.
  47. GazzaC.
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    What can i say.!!..ive never played the first Starcraft but I do love RTS games and this is without a doubt one of the finest and fully deserving of the high marks its getting. Take no note of Gary K's comment he must have poor pc if it crawls as the min specs on this game are failry low..and its far from unablanced!!,..if you like RTS games..then get this..its awesome!
  48. VicT
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    After finishing the campaign and having some experience with the multiplayer, after being through the epic story developed carefully over the years and seeing many magnificent battles, I give this a 9.5 I just rounded it up into a ten. It loses half a point for not having some of the great units in the multi-player, but I hope they return in the later expansions.
  49. ChadO
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    I hate Blizzard as a company, the way they drag things out, lie about release dates, scrap projects with little explanation, and milk products for every dime they are worth... And yet I keep coming back for more. Starcraft II is another perfect example of why Blizzard can make the best PC games in every genre they dabble in. It makes me sick, but #$#$ if I don't love Jim Raynor and I hate Blizzard as a company, the way they drag things out, lie about release dates, scrap projects with little explanation, and milk products for every dime they are worth... And yet I keep coming back for more. Starcraft II is another perfect example of why Blizzard can make the best PC games in every genre they dabble in. It makes me sick, but #$#$ if I don't love Jim Raynor and this new work of art Blizzard labeled an RTS.… Expand
  50. CoryL
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Awesome game indeed. Well worth waiting for, and I love the graphics. Gary K, you must be quite the character to give a game a 0 for not having a good enough computer to run it. You say the balancing is way off... I have to congratulate you. You must be one of the smartest men alive to by a few moments of playing the game, you can tell it's unbalanced, and that the team of Awesome game indeed. Well worth waiting for, and I love the graphics. Gary K, you must be quite the character to give a game a 0 for not having a good enough computer to run it. You say the balancing is way off... I have to congratulate you. You must be one of the smartest men alive to by a few moments of playing the game, you can tell it's unbalanced, and that the team of intelligent, dedicated people balancing this game in every aspect for several years are all wrong. I suggest you sign up for a job at Blizzard.… Expand
  51. Christoph
    Jul 30, 2010
    7
    Company of Heroes, Dawn of War 2 and WarCraft 3 are all more modern than this game. StarCraft II throws RTS evolution back by several years. The Campaign is "OK", not very exciting so far, and multiplayer is basically the same it was 10 years ago.
  52. BrettK
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    I remember when I first played Starcraft, and how I was absolutely addicted to it, and I think this is the first sequel that I've played that has actually matched the original experience. It actually made me feel like a kid again, especially when I realized it was 10 at night and I hadn't eaten supper yet.
  53. JoshB
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    As a huge fan of the original Starcraft, I was very underwhelmed while playing the multi-player beta for SC2. I was not all that excited about it, but still had the game pre-ordered. Well I'm about halfway through the campaign and my excitement for the two expansions is through the roof. It's even renewed my interest in the multi-player. I've played other RTS games since As a huge fan of the original Starcraft, I was very underwhelmed while playing the multi-player beta for SC2. I was not all that excited about it, but still had the game pre-ordered. Well I'm about halfway through the campaign and my excitement for the two expansions is through the roof. It's even renewed my interest in the multi-player. I've played other RTS games since playing Starcraft, my first, but none have ever measured up to SC, and SC2 is light years beyond the original.… Expand
  54. ChrisE.
    Jul 30, 2010
    9
    As old Blizzard RTS-"fan-boy" (since Warcraft I) I was of course anticipating this for many years. And now, it has finally arrived: A great game, but unforuntately with some flaws which hurt me a little bit. The Multiplayer is withouth doubt, great fun. The Singleplayer offers very good mission design, great cinematics and a very interesting story mode in between the missions. The graphic As old Blizzard RTS-"fan-boy" (since Warcraft I) I was of course anticipating this for many years. And now, it has finally arrived: A great game, but unforuntately with some flaws which hurt me a little bit. The Multiplayer is withouth doubt, great fun. The Singleplayer offers very good mission design, great cinematics and a very interesting story mode in between the missions. The graphic design is good (as far as I only play on my netbook, it should not be any better anyway :)) The weakness of the singleplayer mode, is unfortunately, the one thing that Blizzard could best in the past: THE STORY. Starcraft I had a great story with many surprising twists. Warcraft III had very great characters and a very interesting Story. But all the SCII story does is fullfilling clichees with boring and unemotional characters... But still: it is a great game worth its money, and the best RTS you can get at the moment.… Expand
  55. RemyM
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    This is the best RTS ever. It kept the original feeling from the original StarCraft, yet improved on it. The Single Player Campaign is epic, can't wait for the expansions so I can play the Zerg and Protoss campaigns as well. Blizzard definitely made the right choice by splitting this into three games. They could never have told such an epic story if the 29 missions had to be divided This is the best RTS ever. It kept the original feeling from the original StarCraft, yet improved on it. The Single Player Campaign is epic, can't wait for the expansions so I can play the Zerg and Protoss campaigns as well. Blizzard definitely made the right choice by splitting this into three games. They could never have told such an epic story if the 29 missions had to be divided over all the races. Multi-player is also extremely fun. Granted, it does annoy me that no LAN option is present, but not enough to give it a lower rating. Besides, Battle.net works perfectly. I can play even from behind a strict firewall, something that didn't work in SC1.… Expand
  56. CameronL
    Jul 30, 2010
    3
    Seriously, do all these reviewers get paid for over glorified reviews of this game? Sure it's good, but nothing more than pretty graphics and some new units. 1/3 the campaign, when I'm going to have to shell out yet another $40+ for every other campaign that comes out. Right now, it's at 96, giving it a tie with all the other greatest PC games ever made. While SC2 may be Seriously, do all these reviewers get paid for over glorified reviews of this game? Sure it's good, but nothing more than pretty graphics and some new units. 1/3 the campaign, when I'm going to have to shell out yet another $40+ for every other campaign that comes out. Right now, it's at 96, giving it a tie with all the other greatest PC games ever made. While SC2 may be good, it's not great and it's far from being the greatest.… Expand
  57. AnttiA
    Jul 30, 2010
    9
    I'd feel bad if I gave lower rating to game which does so much right. Practically Starcraft 2 is "only" a graphics update. It still feels just like Starcraft since none of the things which made it so great really haven't been changed at all. But if it is almost perfect so why to change it? I felt however that Blizzard wasn't able to make it any better. Not a bad thing I'd feel bad if I gave lower rating to game which does so much right. Practically Starcraft 2 is "only" a graphics update. It still feels just like Starcraft since none of the things which made it so great really haven't been changed at all. But if it is almost perfect so why to change it? I felt however that Blizzard wasn't able to make it any better. Not a bad thing necessary since it works so well. I kind of felt that campaign was too long. It was fun yes but it was few missions too long. I guess they're trying to make up for not including Zerg and Protoss campaigns. Original Starcraft had maybe 30 missions split between the factions. So Terrains had maybe 10 missions in original game. In Starcraft 2 Terrains have that about 30 missions just for them. Its full game and it's very good game. However I didn't give perfect score since it's practically stuff we have already seen and it isn't exactly perfect by any means but it is the best realtime strategy game in years.… Expand
  58. JamesS.
    Jul 30, 2010
    3
    Technically superb, but otherwise I don't feel like getting my money's worth with this one. The multiplayer is, as expected, just a horrible korean zergfest. Single player dishes out nothing new and is as dull as the first game back in the day. Even with the Blizzard logo on the game's cover, I just can't bring myself to like this game.
  59. JordanB
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    Back in 1998, I was playing Warcraft II before Starcraft came along. Starcraft really swept me off my feet. The story had a surprising level of depth. The game play was addictive, both online and off. The graphics were quite good. This game had everything going for it, and I wanted more, even after the Broodwar expansion. Twelve years later, Blizzard delivers. The story is somewhat Back in 1998, I was playing Warcraft II before Starcraft came along. Starcraft really swept me off my feet. The story had a surprising level of depth. The game play was addictive, both online and off. The graphics were quite good. This game had everything going for it, and I wanted more, even after the Broodwar expansion. Twelve years later, Blizzard delivers. The story is somewhat predictable at times, but the ride is enjoyable regardless. All the units, even the new ones, feel somewhat familiar (a pro and a con). The game runs on a ton of different computer specs., but it's important to check to see if you meet them before purchasing. The graphics are superb, and the cut scenes, in game and pre-rendered, pull you into the universe. The multiplayer is challenging, yet fun. There is no LAN support, sadly; I know many friends that refused to by it because of this. The campaign focuses primarily on the Terrans. The Zerg and Protoss campaigns will release in separate expansions later on. This may be a con for some people. If you like Starcraft, you… Expand
  60. SaikoM
    Jul 30, 2010
    10
    A game that has (currently) a 96 critic rating and an 86 user rating? It's sad that people will just vote the game a 0 if: 1) Their computers can't handle it (looking at you, Gary K); 2) They don't know how to get around real ID; 3) They think the single player is short or they're getting shafted because it's only the terran campaign. I'm not a fanboy but A game that has (currently) a 96 critic rating and an 86 user rating? It's sad that people will just vote the game a 0 if: 1) Their computers can't handle it (looking at you, Gary K); 2) They don't know how to get around real ID; 3) They think the single player is short or they're getting shafted because it's only the terran campaign. I'm not a fanboy but I'm going to sound like one, other than TF2 I don't think there is any game on the market that has as much replayability and 'bang for the buck' as this. The single player alone will take you 20 something hours if you have to retry a couple of missions, the multiplayer sets you up with people of your level after the 5 placement maches, and if you're an achievement whore, you'll literally be playing the game at least a year before you get all of them. 10/10 easily, game of the year… Expand
  61. HansM
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Pretty much the best RTS I've played. My pc is not the best, but I can run it on ultra graphics with no FPS problems, and the gameplay is magnifique. One of the best campaigns I've played, and the achievements and challenges makes it more interesting. Anyone who says different are basically stupid.
  62. Maladjester
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I would like to say something to all the people rating this game a 0: If you thought Blizzard would "reinvent the RTS genre" or other such thing, you weren't paying attention. History shows their strategy very well. What they do is polish an existing concept....and polish it, and polish it, and polish it. It's what they did in 1998 with StarCraft 1, and again with WoW, and now I would like to say something to all the people rating this game a 0: If you thought Blizzard would "reinvent the RTS genre" or other such thing, you weren't paying attention. History shows their strategy very well. What they do is polish an existing concept....and polish it, and polish it, and polish it. It's what they did in 1998 with StarCraft 1, and again with WoW, and now again with StarCraft 2. I've got no complaints. What game were you expecting?… Expand
  63. BenjaminG
    Jul 29, 2010
    1
    This game is only for Starcraft pros and for people who played the beta. Never before have I been at such a disadvantage when player the multiplayer. This is not a RTS where everyone starts at the same level and some will become better than others, on it's release there were already starcraft 2 pros. I think There is something really wrong with this.
  64. Fazz
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Just incredible. The campaign is epic and in depth, with huge mission variety, the multiplayer is naturally flawless and only improves on the origonal. No LAN is a small issue but this was an anti piracy move so it makes sense, considering blizzard decided not to clutter the game with DRM (The only security check is the serial key and a battle.net connection, hence why the cracked release Just incredible. The campaign is epic and in depth, with huge mission variety, the multiplayer is naturally flawless and only improves on the origonal. No LAN is a small issue but this was an anti piracy move so it makes sense, considering blizzard decided not to clutter the game with DRM (The only security check is the serial key and a battle.net connection, hence why the cracked release was out so fast)… Expand
  65. SteveN
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    SC2 continues the story and tradition of the franchise. Balance in multiplayer is a polished as the first game and it will only get better. The single player story is a great story presented well each mission is unique. All in all worth the money. Truly a game that will last a decade or more like it's predecessor.
  66. MatthewM
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I love how douchebags can rate a game as zero simply to make a point. Even if you don't like Starcraft 2 there's no way you can give it a zero. The Balance is great and it works on low end systems. The game looks great, you get a ton of options, amazing cinematics and an online experience that people will playing for years to come
  67. JeremyL.
    Jul 29, 2010
    1
    This game is the biggest piece of overated crap ever to have tarnished the single player and storyline sc1 was so famous for. There is very little thought put into the story. Metzin, what were you thinking? From what I see here, you do not appear to write at all well! Pacing is abysmal. It seems they are trying to please everyone at once, focusing on flashy gameplay than the story that This game is the biggest piece of overated crap ever to have tarnished the single player and storyline sc1 was so famous for. There is very little thought put into the story. Metzin, what were you thinking? From what I see here, you do not appear to write at all well! Pacing is abysmal. It seems they are trying to please everyone at once, focusing on flashy gameplay than the story that creates it. They also killed all the old characters from the sc1 by putting them in situations that are not identical to the mood of sc1. Like choosing sides! The ending ought to leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouths.… Expand
  68. StefanB
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    It has everything I expect from an RTS: a single-player campaign with a large number of challenging missions that are surprisingly varied, great game-play, a solid story and base-building. It is well-polished and keeps me up until late in the night, which few other games do these days. I paid A$69, which is about the same, or actually less than other new PC games in Australia, so I It has everything I expect from an RTS: a single-player campaign with a large number of challenging missions that are surprisingly varied, great game-play, a solid story and base-building. It is well-polished and keeps me up until late in the night, which few other games do these days. I paid A$69, which is about the same, or actually less than other new PC games in Australia, so I can't even complain about the price. Instead of 9 Human, 9 Zerg and 9 Protoss missions in the one game, you get 27 Human missions and the other campaigns in the expansions. So it is not less of a game. It is just a different way of doing things. For the sake of the story, it probably works out better this way.… Expand
  69. PacManP
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Turns out the 12 year wait WAS worth it. SC2 is immediately familiar to old school fans and yet still up to date with the visuals and improvements to the RTS genre that have occurred since the last Starcraft was released. The addition of the RPG elements only enhances the experience.
  70. RyanC
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I've taken bits of everything the game has had to offer, from the full campaign, the challenge modes, the customs maps, the ladder system, the ai skirmishes, and the messing with the editor itself. This game deserves a 10 for sure from my experiences. What culminates a s story far more enriched and longer than the previous starcraft campaign even in the terran scenario. A lot has I've taken bits of everything the game has had to offer, from the full campaign, the challenge modes, the customs maps, the ladder system, the ai skirmishes, and the messing with the editor itself. This game deserves a 10 for sure from my experiences. What culminates a s story far more enriched and longer than the previous starcraft campaign even in the terran scenario. A lot has been attested to whether the sequel could hold up to the original in it's strength, I have no doubts in my mind that has surpassed such expectations.… Expand
  71. WilfridW
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    This game as a whole package is perfect. Classic Starcraft RTS that you can get into it immediately like haven't cycled for a long time, checked. Immense story before and after campaigns, checked. Clear achievement goals, checked. Rewards to choose how you want to upgrade your units and structure, checked. Different tech path to upgrade your overall faction, checked. Integration to This game as a whole package is perfect. Classic Starcraft RTS that you can get into it immediately like haven't cycled for a long time, checked. Immense story before and after campaigns, checked. Clear achievement goals, checked. Rewards to choose how you want to upgrade your units and structure, checked. Different tech path to upgrade your overall faction, checked. Integration to Internet on showcasing achievements and linking to Facebook, checked. Guys, ignore those whinners. Get this game.… Expand
  72. NikE
    Jul 29, 2010
    9
    People who have been calling out the balancing: No, you're just awful if you think the game has bad balance. Terran Mech is slightly OP but overall the game IS VERY VERY well balanced ( trust me, I'm a random Diamond league player, I know what the f*ck I'm talking about), there is a good reason blizzard spent so much time with the beta. Also to anyone complaining that the People who have been calling out the balancing: No, you're just awful if you think the game has bad balance. Terran Mech is slightly OP but overall the game IS VERY VERY well balanced ( trust me, I'm a random Diamond league player, I know what the f*ck I'm talking about), there is a good reason blizzard spent so much time with the beta. Also to anyone complaining that the multi-player is too Micro-based apparently you have never heard of IdrA, the Macro King. Guess what: he does JUST FINE in SC2 and already has a few 1st and 2nd place finishes in slew of different tournaments. Storyline is quite pathetic, but then again the plot in nearly every video game are simplistic, awful or cringe-worthy melodramatic.… Expand
  73. StephenB
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    While I'm in no way a fan of Blizzard anymore after what WoW should have been and what it is now I am floored by SC2. I thought the story was excellent and well polished. While there may or may not be some balance issues Blizzard always addresses those quickly in their RTS games. What really makes me give this game a 10 is the Galaxy Editor that comes with the game. Blizzard has While I'm in no way a fan of Blizzard anymore after what WoW should have been and what it is now I am floored by SC2. I thought the story was excellent and well polished. While there may or may not be some balance issues Blizzard always addresses those quickly in their RTS games. What really makes me give this game a 10 is the Galaxy Editor that comes with the game. Blizzard has released what is essentially a professional game development kit with some pre-made stuff for you to play with.… Expand
  74. Jonny
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I must agree that the 12 year wait has not been wasted. For the first time ever, I am TRULY impressed in the detail, sounds, missions, etc. A couple of the cinematics were so epic, I had shivers and goosebumps...A first for me, and I've been playing games all my life. It is the most polished, ready-to-go game on release I've ever experienced, and the wait and price ell worth the I must agree that the 12 year wait has not been wasted. For the first time ever, I am TRULY impressed in the detail, sounds, missions, etc. A couple of the cinematics were so epic, I had shivers and goosebumps...A first for me, and I've been playing games all my life. It is the most polished, ready-to-go game on release I've ever experienced, and the wait and price ell worth the admission. And with future patches and additions, it's only going to get better.… Expand
  75. AsimS
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    This is probably the BEST fantasy RTS game around. The game is similar in style to SC1, but rather than being a weakness, it has become its strength. The gameplay has been even more streamlined and the graphics have been given the next gen treatment. This is perfection. Well done Blizzard. Now waiting for Diablo 3 :)
  76. JungH
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Here I will basically break down what everyone else is saying for you: $60 Price tag: Great game + free b.net service for life. Running these servers take some major $. I say a bargain, but only if you include the multiplayer. Performance: Like all modern games, you need to adjust for your computer's specs, but I think for the graphics it gives, its very tweaked and polished. Here I will basically break down what everyone else is saying for you: $60 Price tag: Great game + free b.net service for life. Running these servers take some major $. I say a bargain, but only if you include the multiplayer. Performance: Like all modern games, you need to adjust for your computer's specs, but I think for the graphics it gives, its very tweaked and polished. Single-player: various, unique missions, plenty of achievements and tech upgrades to play around with. Multiplayer: it's the best multiplayer experience you'll ever have with RTS. it does suck that LAN option is not there, but I believe it has to do with Activision influence, who don't want to lose profits from LANers bootlegging copies. Editor: Editor is like worth at least $30 alone. This has a potential to spawn hundreds of other games under starcraft. Most negative reviewers aren't really reviewing the game - just complaining about only portion of the game and giving a 0 or 1.… Expand
  77. BernT
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    A worthy successor to probably the best RTS ever made. Involving storyline with some nice inbetween mission features, like different tech trees and upgrade choices so it has a bit more re-playability. Multiplayer is top notch and is already more balanced than most RTS' are years after they're released. Probably the next big thing in eSports, which is a good thing since so many A worthy successor to probably the best RTS ever made. Involving storyline with some nice inbetween mission features, like different tech trees and upgrade choices so it has a bit more re-playability. Multiplayer is top notch and is already more balanced than most RTS' are years after they're released. Probably the next big thing in eSports, which is a good thing since so many shoddy games come out these days none get picked up and we're stuck seeing the same old games.… Expand
  78. JonathanK.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    One of, if not the best strategy games of all time. Everything about this game has been refined and polished down to the last pixel. Even though this is just the first installment in a series of three, there's enough content to keep you entertained for hundreds of hours, easily. From the robust story missions, to the challenge missions, online ladder, and endless amounts of user One of, if not the best strategy games of all time. Everything about this game has been refined and polished down to the last pixel. Even though this is just the first installment in a series of three, there's enough content to keep you entertained for hundreds of hours, easily. From the robust story missions, to the challenge missions, online ladder, and endless amounts of user generates maps, this game is well worth the investment. Long time fans of starcraft or the RTS genre in general will not be disappointed with this spectacular offering. Even if you didn't play the first starcraft, really don't let this one pass you by. There's something here for everyone.… Expand
  79. JosephW
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    So far the campaign is phenomenal. The way they tell the story and how you interact with the characters and environments is totally unique and a breath of fresh air. The campaign is immersive and is not just a tutorial for the multiplayer. The challenge maps are helpful to beginners and advanced users alike, but also are a lot of fun and adds to the value of the game. This game is So far the campaign is phenomenal. The way they tell the story and how you interact with the characters and environments is totally unique and a breath of fresh air. The campaign is immersive and is not just a tutorial for the multiplayer. The challenge maps are helpful to beginners and advanced users alike, but also are a lot of fun and adds to the value of the game. This game is everything a Blizzard fan would want in a Starcraft game, I can't wait to see what they do with the Protoss and Zerg campaigns.… Expand
  80. JosiahA
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Amazing start to the trilogy. Empahsis on the word trilogy. Many people complain because the game is not "complete." Actually, the game is quite complete they realease the entire Terran campaign as they said they would. As was stated before, they forumla did not change much, but it did not need to. It is an instant classic and nominee for game of the year in my book.
  81. MarkO
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    StarCraft II is a great game. The multiplayer is still as well-balanced as the first (though I'm sure there will be some tweaks with some patches). If this weren't true then we'd see some substantial win ratios with a particular race on battle.net - but we don't. The graphics are good enough to appease any enthusiast but not too intense as to shrink the game's StarCraft II is a great game. The multiplayer is still as well-balanced as the first (though I'm sure there will be some tweaks with some patches). If this weren't true then we'd see some substantial win ratios with a particular race on battle.net - but we don't. The graphics are good enough to appease any enthusiast but not too intense as to shrink the game's consumer base. The story is much more involving than the first and Blizzard has really made a push to make it a more intense, real and interactive experience. The "No LAN play" issue isn't really an issue. I've been playing with my friends in the same room through battle.net just fine with no issue. LAN isn't really needed these days. Don't listen to the whiners. They're either stupid or bad players. This game includes all the options the original lacked (even though it was one of the best games ever!) including idle worker buttons, autocast, waypoints, order queuing, nonlinear campaign, etc). They've come up with some brilliant ways to alter gameplay while still making this game feel like the original and remain balanced. 10/10. Well done Blizzard.… Expand
  82. JesseC
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I am not a huge fan of the first starcraft and I only played it a little bit so I wasnt even going to buy the SC2 at first. I thought the first one was boring and I assumed SC2 was just going to be some pushover 5 hour long campaign mode and online multiplayer mode. Now having put 10 hours or so in single player and messed around in multiplayer I am in love. In campaign, I thought the I am not a huge fan of the first starcraft and I only played it a little bit so I wasnt even going to buy the SC2 at first. I thought the first one was boring and I assumed SC2 was just going to be some pushover 5 hour long campaign mode and online multiplayer mode. Now having put 10 hours or so in single player and messed around in multiplayer I am in love. In campaign, I thought the missions were going to be repetitive and have you play a CPU opponent much like you do in multiplayer for each mission. The missions are a variety of different scenarios and objectives all based around the storyline. In between missions you will be on your spaceship, able to interact with fellow shipmates, buy upgrades for your soldiers, buy contracts with mercenaries, upgrade tech/science, and even play arcade games! Multiplayer is as advertised, only with much more depth and tactics involved. This game deserves nothing less than a 10… Expand
  83. SuarezP
    Jul 29, 2010
    0
    -$60 for PC game no thanks, not about to feed this new trend of price jacking(CoD:MW2 I'm looking at you) when the cost to produce a game on PC hasn't gone up. -Original allowed you to play as all 3 factions. In this you have to wait for 2 more "expansions" that will cost a currently unknown price to play as other 2 factions. Don't get me wrong I liked the beta, but -$60 for PC game no thanks, not about to feed this new trend of price jacking(CoD:MW2 I'm looking at you) when the cost to produce a game on PC hasn't gone up. -Original allowed you to play as all 3 factions. In this you have to wait for 2 more "expansions" that will cost a currently unknown price to play as other 2 factions. Don't get me wrong I liked the beta, but I'm not paying $60 for an incomplete game. About 12 years between StarCraft and StarCraft 2 and you can't give me all 3 factions off the bat? I can wait until the other two factions are released as a combo, in the meantime I'll go back to playing the original while waiting.… Expand
  84. DaveF
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I don't like to play many or any RTS games because of the unbalanced game play or the terrible wait time. Starcraft the original was the exception. Most likely my favorite game since 1998 till about 2005. After hearing about a squeal for the game a lot of people I knew built up such high expectations and deemed it to be the most highly anticipated PC game of all time. Joining some I don't like to play many or any RTS games because of the unbalanced game play or the terrible wait time. Starcraft the original was the exception. Most likely my favorite game since 1998 till about 2005. After hearing about a squeal for the game a lot of people I knew built up such high expectations and deemed it to be the most highly anticipated PC game of all time. Joining some elite company including the Half Life series. Worth the wait and not a second too soon. Unlike those other boring RTS games Starcraft 2 goes back to its roots and really engages the old style of game play, story line and yes the god like multi player that kept the original alive for 10+ years. This one gives new eye candy, new troops and supports a better balanced system. Unlike the first one the second one offers more of an obstacle challenging the player to make strategies with different troops to maneuver across the high/low ground and even destroy barricades to either access an enemy base or just build a new colony. Hands down in my opinion it is the most anticipated PC game of all time and did not disappoint. This is one of those games that can single handedly return many old and abandoned RTS fans back to the PC to follow up on this game that deserves nothing short than a 10.… Expand
  85. JacobP.
    Jul 29, 2010
    7
    Cinematics are great (although blizzard are still way behind square enix) but the rest of the graphics are just not up to 2010 standards, not by a long shot to be honest. The single player is entertaining but its nothing new at all so it just cant get higher marks from me. I was expecting something truly fantastic but its just not. Good game ? Yes Greamt game ? No.
  86. RanoldC
    Jul 29, 2010
    7
    While this game is a pretty good RTS by itself, it just doesn't feel right. It feels like blizzard tried too hard to make it as good as its predecessor which in my opinion just ruined the game. Making the game overpriced and splitting it up into 3 campaign also shows that they are trying to rip off people with the legacy of its predecessor. Honestly, I'm disappointed.
  87. AdamP.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Perfect RTS game, amazing sequel! The single player is a lot better then in the first game, even the multiplayer got some new modes like 3v3 and 4v4 (finally some dedicated maps for these modes besides FFA maps). Great cinematics, awesome cutscenes on the Hyperion, insane map editor. Best Blizzard game so far and best RTS in years! Can't wait for the expansions. EPIC!
  88. NateH
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    As a long time jaded PC gamer this gem has me enjoying just playing more than any other game in recent memory. Its made my heart pound, made me laugh, and made me cry out in anguish! Every game pretty much I'm smiling thinking how fun it is.
  89. thevoiceofreason
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Gary K This is not the game's fault, upgrade your computer. Don't blame the game just because your computer is shit.
  90. ToddS.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    It's Starcraft and you already know you should be playing instead of reading this. Great mix of everything that was great about the first one while adding new units and new tech trees to make it new enough. the single player campaign might only be 1 third of the story, but it's large enough that it IS it's own game. Can't wait for the Zerg and Protoss Campaigns!
  91. BrianI.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Most of the 0's are because peoples computers suck, or they don't have good internet, its like saying Ferrari's suck because the roads around here aren't developed. Sucks for you, but don't give a 10 game 0's because of it.
  92. J.Prevost
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    An amazing demonstration of why great gameplay is great. The core mechanics are pretty much the same as in the original
  93. ArthurI
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    I've waited 4,502 days for this RTS game from Blizzard to come out. I've bought a new computer just to enjoy it in its full glory. I've played thousands in the first game and hundreds in the beta to prepare for this mammoth of a title. Well, I'm more than glad to say that not only has StarCraft 2 match the hype that it has been given, but it surpasses it to levels I've waited 4,502 days for this RTS game from Blizzard to come out. I've bought a new computer just to enjoy it in its full glory. I've played thousands in the first game and hundreds in the beta to prepare for this mammoth of a title. Well, I'm more than glad to say that not only has StarCraft 2 match the hype that it has been given, but it surpasses it to levels unknown. There are so few games nowadays that take us back to our childhood bliss, so few that make us want to take a day off work just to enjoy. Starcraft 2 is that game.… Expand
  94. MarcG.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Incredible game. I have been waiting for this for 12 years and now being through the campaign I can safely say it has been worth the wait! Best of the Starcraft Single Player stories and online is pretty fun too.
  95. RohitD.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    Impossible for me to vote less that 10, been playing it between WoW raiding and work and absolutely love the level of immersion that the game makes me feel.
  96. AndreiS.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    This is one of the best games I've ever played. Only one game, Warcraft 3, gave me a greater feeling while playing it for the first couple times... but maybe this is only because i was way younger when I played wc3 :P The multiplayer is great and the campaign seems exciting. The german localisation is GREAT. The game is pretty balanced, which is great for a new-released game. All in This is one of the best games I've ever played. Only one game, Warcraft 3, gave me a greater feeling while playing it for the first couple times... but maybe this is only because i was way younger when I played wc3 :P The multiplayer is great and the campaign seems exciting. The german localisation is GREAT. The game is pretty balanced, which is great for a new-released game. All in all, i would give it a 12 out of 10.… Expand
  97. Hendrik
    Jul 29, 2010
    7
    The campaign is well done. Great mood, good story. Intense. The multiplayer experience is... like you are used to it from SC1. No differences. In fact: almost a remake. If you liked SC1 then you should play SC2 totally. But if you are used to more complex RTS games which were released after SC1, which brought a lot of new developments in gameplay just like Company of Heroes, then you wont The campaign is well done. Great mood, good story. Intense. The multiplayer experience is... like you are used to it from SC1. No differences. In fact: almost a remake. If you liked SC1 then you should play SC2 totally. But if you are used to more complex RTS games which were released after SC1, which brought a lot of new developments in gameplay just like Company of Heroes, then you wont become that happy… Expand
  98. JacobB
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    The singles best RTS ever made. The choice to have one epic campaign instead of three smaller campaigns brought alot of awesomeness and epicness. Aside from this the multiplayer is intense, balanced, and fun. And the multiplayer actually WORKS compared to some other RTS's
  99. MarcJ
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    This is an absolute masterpiece of a game and 1 of the years greatest. SC2 has a great storyline that is actually involving and isn't just a tutorial for the multi-player. People complaining about the game being split up into 3 different games should shut it. the campaign is a good length and the multiplayer is outstanding. If you don't like this game, you either don't like This is an absolute masterpiece of a game and 1 of the years greatest. SC2 has a great storyline that is actually involving and isn't just a tutorial for the multi-player. People complaining about the game being split up into 3 different games should shut it. the campaign is a good length and the multiplayer is outstanding. If you don't like this game, you either don't like RTS games or are retarded and don't know a quality game when they see it. stop reading these reviews and go pick up SC2 NOW!… Expand
  100. ThomasM.
    Jul 29, 2010
    10
    This is by far the best RTS game since WC3. One sentence about the campaign: I cried nerd tears of happiness while i watched the ending-cinematic. I think this says everything. And i think i'm addicted to the multiplayer. The matchmaking is really fair once you are ranked correctly.
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 »