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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. ARanly
    Aug 1, 2010
    9
    CJ Henry, that may be true, but there's no doubt that this game has polish and refinement written all over it. Original and innovative in improving the same old formula, yet uninspired in overhauling the foundation, its what Blizzard does best.
  5. NjoiF.
    Aug 1, 2010
    9
    Yes this is without a doubt an amazing game. An amazingly crafted campaign and extremely well balanced multiplayer make this the best rts experience this year. The only problem with this game is that blizzard had to compromise on the graphics in order to have a game that will run on almost any pc. Fortunately you can compensate for not so great graphics by playing it in stereoscopic 3d, Yes this is without a doubt an amazing game. An amazingly crafted campaign and extremely well balanced multiplayer make this the best rts experience this year. The only problem with this game is that blizzard had to compromise on the graphics in order to have a game that will run on almost any pc. Fortunately you can compensate for not so great graphics by playing it in stereoscopic 3d, like i do.… Expand
  6. BenF
    Aug 2, 2010
    9
    The good of the Old, The Spice of the new, but -1 on the score because the macro manage has not been made easier after so many years. it all comes down to keyboard & MVP it seems. Albiet a fun way to micro macro! no other game makes me want to learn how to use a keyboard with RTS as much as SC2.
  7. nwhaxyz
    Aug 4, 2010
    9
    Excellent single player campaign - there are some really nice levels, which can be replayed multiple times in different ways and difficulty (if only to get the achievements). The "secret level" is here -again . Kudos to Blizzard for not concentrating only on multiplayer. Though some missions in the later stages of the game, lack balance due to upgrades and units you buy - depending on the Excellent single player campaign - there are some really nice levels, which can be replayed multiple times in different ways and difficulty (if only to get the achievements). The "secret level" is here -again . Kudos to Blizzard for not concentrating only on multiplayer. Though some missions in the later stages of the game, lack balance due to upgrades and units you buy - depending on the way you progress and the choices you've made, these can make your life really easy on the hard difficulty. Very little about the missions that can be criticized. Some occasional crashes and slow-downs (a vivid example is the last mission with Zeratul). also some low-res textures in the cinematics and the only minus in the sound section worth mentioning IMHO, is that simply Tricia Helfer is not Glynnis Talken (the difference here is very notable and not in the right direction).… Expand
  8. AParsons
    Aug 5, 2010
    9
    Dont listen to the total haters out their its clear that they have something in their bonnet with either Blizzard or SC2 and having played all the single player I would say these people have not really played the game much or at all. What you get with SC2 is a great but shortish single player campaign where you play from the Terran side or miore exactly Jim Raynor's Rebels. The story Dont listen to the total haters out their its clear that they have something in their bonnet with either Blizzard or SC2 and having played all the single player I would say these people have not really played the game much or at all. What you get with SC2 is a great but shortish single player campaign where you play from the Terran side or miore exactly Jim Raynor's Rebels. The story line is fun though with a lot of humor and a few bits of cgi thrown in the rest of the story cut scenes are from the games engine. Again people claiming billion of hours of cgi really are miss informing you. The other two races single player stories are going to be covered in the next two expansions so you will have to buy too expansions to complete the whole story line. However SC2 main strength is not the single player campaign its the multiplayer where the true strengh of the game really lies and that side of play is really good fun you get split into different leagues after taking part in 5 placement matches so you will be facing people of your own skill level. The multiplayer is very fast paced with all the races being fairly well balanced yet playing in totally different fasions, matches can range from 1v1 roo teams of 4v4 or even Free for all matches and with the quick find functions of B.net you will be quicky to find a match most the time. You have too remember that SC1 is concidered a national sport in Korea and SC2 looks like it will replace its aging brother so expect a very high level of play in the top leagues. With players being able to earn upto a six figure sallary this game really can be concidered Pro Gaming. The down side of all this is that SC2 requires you to have internet access in order to play even the single player which can be a real downer if Battle.net is down for whatever reason because you will not be able to play the game at all. Also you can not lan this game at all. Still all in all this is as good as an RTS gets at the moment.… Expand
  9. JoeM
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    Lake of LAN play, no new race, and no Zerg or Protoss campaign bring the score from a 10 down to a 9. However I didn't know it was possible but they took the original Starcraft and made it MORE fun to play. The game is VERY fun. Lots of new units and strats. People that rate the game low are just bitchy because they have slow computers or think the few problems I mentioned above Lake of LAN play, no new race, and no Zerg or Protoss campaign bring the score from a 10 down to a 9. However I didn't know it was possible but they took the original Starcraft and made it MORE fun to play. The game is VERY fun. Lots of new units and strats. People that rate the game low are just bitchy because they have slow computers or think the few problems I mentioned above should drag the score down more.… Expand
  10. JustinG
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    The game is every bit worth they hype and although some elements are missing that you might know from other RTS games, it brings a fresh revitalized feel to the whole RTS genre and it is true to Starcraft. You have to have a really great state of the art video card to play the game at the highest resolution and detailed settings, it also takes 12GB of install space.
  11. PelleS
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    Solid, quality next-gen Starcraft. Tactics are solidly upgraded over the first version (i.e zerging isn't rewarded as much as before), it looks beautiful, and remains as intense and well-balanced as ever. For all those whining about frame rates and graphics...get a computer that doesn't suck.
  12. LoganR
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    Let me say right off the bat that I'd been one of the many beta testers for this game. As such, I've made myself very familiar with the game's balance and design decisions, so I know what will be in the game in future patches and what won't make it. I'm suprised at the few hyperbolic low scores here... the game has been out for one day, and some of the problems Let me say right off the bat that I'd been one of the many beta testers for this game. As such, I've made myself very familiar with the game's balance and design decisions, so I know what will be in the game in future patches and what won't make it. I'm suprised at the few hyperbolic low scores here... the game has been out for one day, and some of the problems are on the user end, it seems. Additionally, people seem to think that this is 1/3 of a game... however, the campaign is just as long as that of a full game, and is much more robust than the original and most other current gen strategy games. Rest assured that it is not short on content. This is a fun game, and a challenging one at that. Some people might feel that Blizzard didn't depart from the original enough, but this is intentional (i.e. don't break what isn't broken and don't alienate the eSports community). The current level of balance between the races is good, but Zerg are a little under the weather (though my favorite). Chat channels and clans are coming, so don't fret too much about their current absence. Keep in mind that most games (PC) ship with many bugs and balance issues to work out, especially one with so much weight in multiplayer. The first Starcraft was no different, and was relatively light on graphics cards and servers. Give this game a month or two and it will be at full force. Until then, enjoy a very good game.… Expand
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. SamE
    Aug 1, 2010
    9
    This game is absolutely amazing. It delivers everything that is promised, from an epic campaign, to engaging multiplayer that will keep you hooked for a long time. Although with or without this review, you already know if you're buying it or not. Also, to those naysayers, they all seem to be made their computer can't run it or hold personal vendettas against Activision. Facebook This game is absolutely amazing. It delivers everything that is promised, from an epic campaign, to engaging multiplayer that will keep you hooked for a long time. Although with or without this review, you already know if you're buying it or not. Also, to those naysayers, they all seem to be made their computer can't run it or hold personal vendettas against Activision. Facebook integration in fact does not mean it updates your facebook with what you're doing in StarCraft 2. It just means it's easier to find your friends who have Battle.net accounts. Do a bit of research before you whine and complain.… Expand
  16. TimM
    Aug 2, 2010
    9
    Blizzard aimed to topple the original as the gold standard for RTS and succeeded admirably. Great graphics and stellar sound. Although "Wings of Liberty" provides a story-based single player campaign for the Terran faction only, that campaign is rich and deep, with some non-linear elements and considerable replayability. The single player campaign is comprised of 29 story missions, up to Blizzard aimed to topple the original as the gold standard for RTS and succeeded admirably. Great graphics and stellar sound. Although "Wings of Liberty" provides a story-based single player campaign for the Terran faction only, that campaign is rich and deep, with some non-linear elements and considerable replayability. The single player campaign is comprised of 29 story missions, up to 26 of which may be included in each play through (based on the player's decisions). Mission variety is superb, as each mission offers unique goals and obstacles, including some genuinely original and exciting scenarios. Rounding our the single player options are a series of "Challenge Modes", 9 stand-alone levels designed to teach advanced RTS tactics and test experienced players' acumen. Multiplayer components are both familiar and engaging. Starcraft 2 debuts Blizzard's "Battle.net 2.0" online functionality, with built in matchmaking, leagues, statistics, and chat. Smartly, Blizzard has included Facebook integration to allow players to easily add online friends to their in-game friends lists for multiplayer. Gameplay consists of the same 3 classic factions from the original, with many units from the previous game returning with new abilities alongside a host of new units. Balance is excellent, although the early game focus (known online as Blitzing and Rushing) may frustrate newer players. If Starcraft 2 has faults, they are likely to be found deep in the pedigree itself. Starcraft 2 remains an "old-school" RTS, with plenty of base building, resource gathering, and hands-on unit control. The trappings of modern RTS's are not present, and players accustomed to the features of newer strategy games may find themselves fustrated by the level of micromanagement the game demands. While faction balance is nearly flawless, the multiplayer relies on an elaborate structure of so-called "hard counters": units which trump specific other units. Slow build times and deep tech trees can mean that, at all but the highest levels of gameplay, even if you see a particular attck coming well in advance you may still be helpless against it. Adding to the frustration, the aforementioned Rush and Blitz strategies predominate competitive multiplayer, forcing both players to go "all-in" within the first minutes of a match. Despite these minor annoyances, Starcraft 2 remains one of the best RTS games available today. This is a must-have for any fan of the genre.… Expand
  17. MatthewH
    Jul 27, 2010
    9
    Looks at all the evolutions of the RTS (which I also love) and says "Actually, Starcraft was good enough then and it's good enough now". Throw in some counter related tweaks and you have some great gameplay coupled with great presentation. Sure, I'll miss my squad based commands (looking at you DoW and CoH) but I can accept that Starcraft is simply a different type of game and Looks at all the evolutions of the RTS (which I also love) and says "Actually, Starcraft was good enough then and it's good enough now". Throw in some counter related tweaks and you have some great gameplay coupled with great presentation. Sure, I'll miss my squad based commands (looking at you DoW and CoH) but I can accept that Starcraft is simply a different type of game and all are thoroughly enjoyable.… Expand
  18. Michael
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    People with complaints about balance have a baseless argument since patches will fix it. People with complaints about performance can turn settings down. People with complaints about how it's 1/3 of the game clearly don't that its multiplayer experience has near endless replayability. The only valid concerns are the prices (and yes, the expansion prices as well) and the lack of People with complaints about balance have a baseless argument since patches will fix it. People with complaints about performance can turn settings down. People with complaints about how it's 1/3 of the game clearly don't that its multiplayer experience has near endless replayability. The only valid concerns are the prices (and yes, the expansion prices as well) and the lack of LAN play, since there IS and offline mode if you can't connect to the internet.… Expand
  19. AlexK
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    I played the original and never finished the single player due to its high difficulty. I
  20. JeffW
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    Really, really good... I wish you could give 9.8, but oh well! Doesn't quite get the full 10 from me, I would have liked to have seen maybe a little more innovation and new material, otherwise it has a flawless interface, engaging strategy, and just hard enough on normal to satisfy!
  21. JoeE
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    Simply amazing. I was in both phases of the beta, and the finished release version is just awesome. The level of detail in the single player game, so many hidden little bits of awesomeness, is astounding. Issues with RealID, lack of LAN play, lack of battle.net chat channels aside, the Game here in SC2 is damn good. And this is just the first of 3!
  22. BLB
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    Great game. Don't understand what people are complaining about "not getting a full game". They get 30 missions in singleplayer and MP to boot. In the first Starcraft, you had 30 missions total between all the factions (10 each). This time around, you're going to get 30 in each expansion to come. I'm loving this game. I wonderful return to the classic game, with a new twist. Great game. Don't understand what people are complaining about "not getting a full game". They get 30 missions in singleplayer and MP to boot. In the first Starcraft, you had 30 missions total between all the factions (10 each). This time around, you're going to get 30 in each expansion to come. I'm loving this game. I wonderful return to the classic game, with a new twist. Great buy if you love new RTS games that play like a classic. Wonderful!… Expand
  23. RodM
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    This is the ultimate RTS game. Period. Out of all the negative comments there is one stating the only reason why I won't give this game a 10: Lack of LAN play. Horrendous decision. Also ugly to deal with BNet for anything multiplayer, but other than that, the game is very well balanced, tweaked, detailed and thought out. Definitely a worthy successor of the legacy.
  24. BlazeN
    Jul 28, 2010
    9
    I played the original when it came out, and I gotta say i'm loving the sequel. I havent played online, but I have heard of some online balance issues, but that'll likely be fixed in short order like all of Blizzards RTS'. I gave it a 9 though because the Vulture was replaced by that god awful hellion. That may seem like a minor gripe, but I looooooove the Vulture.
  25. 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
  26. 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
  27. steven
    Aug 6, 2010
    9
    I had a chance to watch someone play this game and it looks amazing. Blizzard did not make the mistake of overhauling gameplay for the next chapter in the story. An upgrade in graphics, engaging storyline and the introduction of new units is plenty to spike the interest of a RTS fan.
  28. Luki
    Aug 11, 2010
    9
    Not many games made me spend so much time there - this does. Single player is really nice, mult really much fun. Only bad thing is high price but well, blizzard know how to make profit...
  29. Googoo24
    Aug 12, 2010
    9
    It kills me when people promise an objective review, yet slap the work in question with a 0. But I digress. The title in question, SC II, is a superlative piece. Is it revolutionary? No. However, if you were even remotely interested in this product before its release, you probably already knew this. What you get is a refined game that gets a lot of things right, and is unapologetic aboutIt kills me when people promise an objective review, yet slap the work in question with a 0. But I digress. The title in question, SC II, is a superlative piece. Is it revolutionary? No. However, if you were even remotely interested in this product before its release, you probably already knew this. What you get is a refined game that gets a lot of things right, and is unapologetic about retaining an established format. Is this a bad thing? In my humble opinion, no. It's refreshing to play a strategy game that isn't desperate to skew its perspective, or mimic other recent RTS', for the sake of innovation. Is it safe? Perhaps. But the product is so refined, who cares?

    In regards to the campaign, it gets a lot of things right. This is what the original DoW II campaign should have been like. The missions are diverse, the story is strong (albeit cheesy at times), and the experience, as a whole, is very entertaining. The productions values, per usual Blizzard, are excellent. The game world is vibrant and detailed.

    MP, per usual, is good. However, unlike a majority of games that toss fresh meat into the fray with no support, SC II goes out of its way to accommodate inexperienced players; even assigning them to specific leagues. Is the absence of LAN or chat a big deal? I didn't care, but maybe some one else will. Also, the game ships with a intuitive map editor that is fun to toy around with, even if you aren't creating anything. I can only imagine the works art members of the community will present in the near future.

    The big question is the game worth $60! YES! Rarely do games come this refined and bug free.    … Expand
  30. nvnick
    Aug 12, 2010
    9
    Really 'effin polished. Great strategy, I always wanted to start starcraft but was never motivated as everyone was so good and I hated the graphics. Now SC2 is the only game I'm playing. You don't need to play the first but check the summary of the story if you want so that you'll understand the story more for the second. Better than average cinematics, solid gameplay and lots of onlineReally 'effin polished. Great strategy, I always wanted to start starcraft but was never motivated as everyone was so good and I hated the graphics. Now SC2 is the only game I'm playing. You don't need to play the first but check the summary of the story if you want so that you'll understand the story more for the second. Better than average cinematics, solid gameplay and lots of online fun. Polished to hell, no bugginess! What a relief.… 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 »