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. AlfonsoG
    Aug 5, 2010
    10
    Fantastic. I've spent plenty of time in the campaign and the multiplayer, both Custom and Ladder and I have to say, I'm completely impressed. Being an avid gamer, that doesn't happen often. Bravo, Blizzard.
  2. PeterC
    Aug 4, 2010
    8
    I've heard all the arguments against this game, and it always, always, always comes down to one of 4 things 1) Its not as innovative as I thought it would be This is usually in reference to things associated with older RTS's, like base building. Well, its the second game in a series, if it were completely different, people would complain that they're simply trying to ride I've heard all the arguments against this game, and it always, always, always comes down to one of 4 things 1) Its not as innovative as I thought it would be This is usually in reference to things associated with older RTS's, like base building. Well, its the second game in a series, if it were completely different, people would complain that they're simply trying to ride the Starcraft name. The way I see this, it would be like people complaining that diablo 3 has too many dungeons. 2) There's no LAN play. Yes, this is a problem. This is also the reason I dropped the score a bit. I hope they come out with a patch that corrects this particular decision at some point. 3) battlenet is too hard Either you're really, really terrible at the game, or you haven't gotten through the placement matches. I find the game is quite good at putting you into somewhere you're competitive, neither dominating nor dominated. The lowest brackets allow people to start slowly and still have a good chance at winning the match, even without a clear strategy 4) Its only 1/3 of a game No, its not. Most non-rpg games run about 20-30 hours. Thats about what the story mode in starcraft 2 runs. Then there's the multiplayer on top of that. If this were the first game in the series, and blizzard simply announced 2 planned expansions for the other races, I doubt many people would complain about this at all. The other 2 games will be expansions, and so sold at a cheaper price (my guess would be somewhere around $30), and they'll be the same length Overall, I found the story engaging, the gameplay is challenging in the story mode and competitive in multiplayer. There are enough changes from the first game that it feels like a new game, but retains enough similarity that it feels somewhat familiar. A lot of the original strategies are still there, but i see a lot of room for new ones too.… Expand
  3. JohnR
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    Boohoo, interface issues exist. Anyone up to date knows that patches will remedy them (like chat functionality being announced for a future patch) - given this, the real issue is the actual core of a game, which has been honed to greatness. "Oh no, it didn't revolutionize the world!" - no game does that. There were FPSes before Counter-strike: true legends just do what they do Boohoo, interface issues exist. Anyone up to date knows that patches will remedy them (like chat functionality being announced for a future patch) - given this, the real issue is the actual core of a game, which has been honed to greatness. "Oh no, it didn't revolutionize the world!" - no game does that. There were FPSes before Counter-strike: true legends just do what they do extremely well, which SC2 does.… Expand
  4. ClaudS.
    Aug 4, 2010
    9
    This game was worth the wait, it is extremely polished with smooth gameplay. It manages to capture the glorious essence of it's predecessor while adding new units, abilities and features creating a nostalgic, awesome effect. The graphics are beautiful and clean, with amazing cinematics. My complaints are of course the lack of lan-support, and the $60 price tag, which will go up as This game was worth the wait, it is extremely polished with smooth gameplay. It manages to capture the glorious essence of it's predecessor while adding new units, abilities and features creating a nostalgic, awesome effect. The graphics are beautiful and clean, with amazing cinematics. My complaints are of course the lack of lan-support, and the $60 price tag, which will go up as the other 2/3 are released. A slight betrayal in my mind(why it doesn't deserve a 10) but still worth absolutely every penny. It stands up to the original and even more, it'll be an RTS staple and must have for almost every gamer.… Expand
  5. DannyV
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    It would be nice if some people actually played this game before putting up a bogus 0 review about LAN play. The game is awesome. I can never really get hooked on rts games because they aren't fast enough or the missions are too boring. This game is fast and each mission is completely different. I've played about 30 hours and I haven't even completed the single player It would be nice if some people actually played this game before putting up a bogus 0 review about LAN play. The game is awesome. I can never really get hooked on rts games because they aren't fast enough or the missions are too boring. This game is fast and each mission is completely different. I've played about 30 hours and I haven't even completed the single player campaign yet. It's a long game. Can't wait for the other 2.… Expand
  6. FJ
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    This is just another example of how great games will remain good for eternity. The trend of bringing games back to their roots is really saying something here. The truth is games have not really improved since the golden ages of gaming. Most developers no longer have the gamer's heart and creativity which shows in their bland games of this generation. Great job Blizzard, this game is This is just another example of how great games will remain good for eternity. The trend of bringing games back to their roots is really saying something here. The truth is games have not really improved since the golden ages of gaming. Most developers no longer have the gamer's heart and creativity which shows in their bland games of this generation. Great job Blizzard, this game is breath of fresh air for us true gamers.… Expand
  7. rockmosh
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    Excellent game, been waiting for a decade and it was well worth it. I played since the beta and I havent had this much fun in years. This is a full game, dont fall for the illusion that its incomplete just because its part of a trilogy. It has 30 or so campaing missions and the full multiplayer experience.
  8. StefanD
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    Wow amazing the hate from the trolls in this vote board. Starcraft 2 is excellent, if you loved the first one you will love this! Engaging story, excellent graphics (remember this is an RTS and not a FPS you TROLLS!), and great all around presentation!! Highly Recommended!
  9. ColinY
    Aug 4, 2010
    1
    A one for expenditure, but no points for effort. They took all the points that made SC 1 good, and removed them, and tried to cover for it with some prettied up graphics, and then split the game into three to make an even more obscene profit by releasing the same game engine again and again and call them new games rather then expansion packs. Activision is the devil.
  10. Brian
    Aug 4, 2010
    2
    Utter disappointment. Felt more like Starcraft 1.5 than a true sequel. Twelve years of waiting for the exact same game, just with shinier graphics and a few new units, definitely not worth it. The writing was almost offensively bad, as well (though Blizzard hasn't had any good storytelling in its games since Diablo II). If I had bought a physical copy of this game, I'd have Utter disappointment. Felt more like Starcraft 1.5 than a true sequel. Twelve years of waiting for the exact same game, just with shinier graphics and a few new units, definitely not worth it. The writing was almost offensively bad, as well (though Blizzard hasn't had any good storytelling in its games since Diablo II). If I had bought a physical copy of this game, I'd have already returned it. Definitely not going to waste my time on the next two.… Expand
  11. NikoD
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    It's a perfect combination of RTS and RPG elements. The story itself is great and is being told in a very stylish manner. Graphics are pure awesomeness and so is the gameplay. Everything feels so familiar and yet so fresh. I dunno how Blizzard managed to pull this on off, but it's just perfect in every way. Waiting for the new campaigns.
  12. SpendrikC.
    Aug 4, 2010
    7
    It's a good game: polished, high production values, fun. However, despite new units and new abilities, there's nothing game-changing. Playing it feels like playing SC1+BW, good for nostalgia, but seems a bit boring for a essential a third of a story. The lack of LAN, chat, and cross-region support bothers me. With the new Bnet, I miss the days of signing on privately to just It's a good game: polished, high production values, fun. However, despite new units and new abilities, there's nothing game-changing. Playing it feels like playing SC1+BW, good for nostalgia, but seems a bit boring for a essential a third of a story. The lack of LAN, chat, and cross-region support bothers me. With the new Bnet, I miss the days of signing on privately to just play a few games. I hope they have more robust privacy settings soon.… Expand
  13. GernR.
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    I don't know why everyone complains: "It's a new sc1". In my eyes, that's the best that could have happened. Starcraft 1 was the best strategygames for years, so why not remaking it, polished up, with a nice competition-system, new units, upgrades and abilities and an awesome editor? Blizzard really did a great job in those things, although the graphics aren't really I don't know why everyone complains: "It's a new sc1". In my eyes, that's the best that could have happened. Starcraft 1 was the best strategygames for years, so why not remaking it, polished up, with a nice competition-system, new units, upgrades and abilities and an awesome editor? Blizzard really did a great job in those things, although the graphics aren't really high end. I myself like that Blizz-comiclook, so I have nothing to complain. Great multiplayer experience, wonderful campaign, awesome game.… Expand
  14. ErikC.
    Aug 4, 2010
    10
    I think most people need to step back and remember it's STARCRAFT 2, not some new game. Blizzard never has been known for their pushing of new innovated game play and I doubt they ever will. They take what they know works and throw it together into a bundle and polish it to near perfection. That is exactly what SC2 is, Starcraft with a nice new shiny coat of paint. If you don't I think most people need to step back and remember it's STARCRAFT 2, not some new game. Blizzard never has been known for their pushing of new innovated game play and I doubt they ever will. They take what they know works and throw it together into a bundle and polish it to near perfection. That is exactly what SC2 is, Starcraft with a nice new shiny coat of paint. If you don't like Starcraft then you shouldn't review this game because guess what it's Starcraft 2.0. There is nothing really new about Starcraft and I personally like that; I was able to jump right in and enjoy my old favorite game once again. If you wanted different game play then go play a different RTS franchise. The storyline wasn't deep but it was fun, I felt involved within the missions and look forward to the expansions. For all your people out there down rating for what it lacks it's time to look at what it has, and tell me what you find wrong with it then.… Expand
  15. 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
  16. JerremyB.
    Aug 3, 2010
    3
    Pros + Retains faithful to the original in every aspect (gameplay, graphics, accessibility, etc). + Plethora of units to choose. + Very well balanced units and maps. + Single player campaign is pretty awesome, and much more interactive then the first. + Ladder system is cleaner and offers competitive play at all experience/skill levels. Cons + Rehash of the original. Nothing new has been Pros + Retains faithful to the original in every aspect (gameplay, graphics, accessibility, etc). + Plethora of units to choose. + Very well balanced units and maps. + Single player campaign is pretty awesome, and much more interactive then the first. + Ladder system is cleaner and offers competitive play at all experience/skill levels. Cons + Rehash of the original. Nothing new has been introduced to the game. + Storyline is very linear. + Blizzard gauging its fans by providing 3 installments of the same game but to access the 3 different campaigns. + No LAN support means the local gaming community takes a big hit. + Graphics is dated (5 years behind the curve). + B.Net gameplay is localized, which is disappointing (cannot play with my european and asian friends).… Expand
  17. Fluster
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    After the disappointing C&C 4, this came as a most welcome change for a RTS fan like me. I loved Starcraft 1 and I love this game even more. The graphics are amazing and surprisingly the game runs smooth on High/Ultra settings on my 2gb, geforce9800 and 2ghz C2D PC. The campaign is fun and plays out at just the right pace. There are numerous upgrades, bonus units for you to play around After the disappointing C&C 4, this came as a most welcome change for a RTS fan like me. I loved Starcraft 1 and I love this game even more. The graphics are amazing and surprisingly the game runs smooth on High/Ultra settings on my 2gb, geforce9800 and 2ghz C2D PC. The campaign is fun and plays out at just the right pace. There are numerous upgrades, bonus units for you to play around with, and finally the Multiplayer totally blows you away. Ladders, perfect match making and a slick efficient Battlenet 2. The Terran campaign included is huge with around 30 missions, that would keep you busy for hours. Add to this achievements, excellent cinematics and voice acting and you have tons of stuff to fuel your bragging rights. My only complaint is the absence of LAN play. In conclusion the RTS game world sorely needed a game like this and Blizzard has delivered a masterpiece. Starcraft 2 lives up to the hype and more.… Expand
  18. DF
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    The game is fantastic. I received it the day it came out and haven't really been able to put it down since. I'm a very casual gamer, so I was thrilled at the new multiplayer mode as it really helps work you into the game. First, there are "practice" levels with easier map layouts to help ease you into the game, you can play up to 50 of these matches before jumping into the real The game is fantastic. I received it the day it came out and haven't really been able to put it down since. I'm a very casual gamer, so I was thrilled at the new multiplayer mode as it really helps work you into the game. First, there are "practice" levels with easier map layouts to help ease you into the game, you can play up to 50 of these matches before jumping into the real thing. Second, placement matches- you will play 5 matches then get placed with people who are as terrible as you are! this is a big selling point for me because I'm not very good. Third, challenges- there are challenges you can try to master that really show the strengths and pros of each unit for each race and helps give you an idea of what you want to do. fourth-organized computer battles- in the original my friends and I really enjoyed playing computers, but we had to go to custom games set it up etc. Now its just a click away, get you friend and pick the game. fantastic. Th ere are also many different A.I. difficulty levels to make it fun. Fifth- Easy matching- You can quick start a game and don't have to try to join a game first, which is awesome. you can be playing in seconds. I've played a little of the campaign too (which is really why I bought the game in the first place, it says a lot about the game that it's MP has kept me so engrossed). It is fantastic, and the interaction with the environment between missions which highlights the story and lore even more is unlike any RTS I've ever played. That said it IS an RTS which really isn't for everyone, but if you like real time strategy this game is a must buy.… Expand
  19. BenF.
    Aug 3, 2010
    9
    OK lets get this straight this IS a full game. you can play 3 fractions and you do infact play 2 fractions in the campaign. There are 26 missions all together each mission about 20 mins in lenght ranging to a 1 hour mission i clocked up and that was me "blitzing it" there are 9 challenge remminisant of the mini games in rise of nation if not a full blown copy of it and then there's OK lets get this straight this IS a full game. you can play 3 fractions and you do infact play 2 fractions in the campaign. There are 26 missions all together each mission about 20 mins in lenght ranging to a 1 hour mission i clocked up and that was me "blitzing it" there are 9 challenge remminisant of the mini games in rise of nation if not a full blown copy of it and then there's the terrifying multiplayer and i was getting beat in beta all time so i'll stay away from it untill all the hardcore players have gone through the beginner leagues. The gameplay is amazingly balance for a newly release product clocking maybe a little to easy to use since the ai doesn't twat you every time you use it like in starcraft 1. the audio is amazing you'll never hear a better sounding real time strategy (right up with napoleon TW) from the retro music down to the the people say "slam'n'". Bg question is it worth the inflated price only just. and depending if your the person who expects the next ps3 blockbuster to be the best looking game available. As for the people giving it 1 2's ect just read there comments there all about only 1/3 of a game. as i said 26 missions with amazing story telling is not 1/3 of a game these days. and they will all say so i'm not getting it. well there missiong out and well they havn't played the game all way through so how can they review it. sorry about grammer, puntuation, spellings ect i'm dyslexic and lazy. very nasty combo when writing long stuff.… Expand
  20. JamesY.
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    Starcraft 2 is all about the multiplayer. It's singleplayer is good, much better than MW2 where it's one go and done, whereas this will keep you coming back, because it's just so fun. Custom content is what makes me coming back and back.
  21. TomN.
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    This game is beautiful, polished, and worth every penny of the 59.99. Full of features, music, artistic touch, and excellent gameplay it is a joy to own. Yet This is more than a game. It is a call to liberty, and take our fallen nation back. Its theme of revolution throughout is something we need in our own society, as the government has become opressive, defunct, and corrupt beyond This game is beautiful, polished, and worth every penny of the 59.99. Full of features, music, artistic touch, and excellent gameplay it is a joy to own. Yet This is more than a game. It is a call to liberty, and take our fallen nation back. Its theme of revolution throughout is something we need in our own society, as the government has become opressive, defunct, and corrupt beyond repair. When voting starts making no difference, The only thing left is a revolution. How much longer are we going to allow the calamity of harsh taxes, false wars, and oppresive oligarchies to ruin us before we stop being cowards, pick up the guns, and take our country back from the plutocracy it has become?… Expand
  22. MikeG.
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    Everything you could hope for to the sequel to what many consider the best RTS game out there. All though battle.net 2.0 may be a work in process everything that is import about the game itself is wonderfully executed. Gameplay is as addicting as SC1, the Soundtrack seems even better, the graphics look wonderful for the style of SC, the campaign is an absolute blast. Even in spite of Everything you could hope for to the sequel to what many consider the best RTS game out there. All though battle.net 2.0 may be a work in process everything that is import about the game itself is wonderfully executed. Gameplay is as addicting as SC1, the Soundtrack seems even better, the graphics look wonderful for the style of SC, the campaign is an absolute blast. Even in spite of Battle.nets limitations the most important thing it needs to do works flawlessly, which is placing you in matches against players of your relative skill level.… Expand
  23. RamiroC.
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    After 12 years waiting...they just appeared with the Best Game Ever. Amazing Campaign mode with a lot of different missions. New options between missions New amazing and well balanced units. The worst thing about the game? That you have to wait for the expansion to know what is going to happen!
  24. ColinK
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    Anyone criticizing this game because it's only "one third" of a game obviously hasn't played it. While it's true that the campaign is Terran only, it's as big, if not bigger, than the 30 mission campaign that included all the races in the original game. The additions of mission choices; buying upgrades, research, and mercenaries; acheivements; and bonus objectives in Anyone criticizing this game because it's only "one third" of a game obviously hasn't played it. While it's true that the campaign is Terran only, it's as big, if not bigger, than the 30 mission campaign that included all the races in the original game. The additions of mission choices; buying upgrades, research, and mercenaries; acheivements; and bonus objectives in missions all build on top of the same formula that worked to make the original game so much fun. Add to that the new units and structures, and the fact that the missions are more varied than ever (still haven't played one where the goal was just to destroy the enemy, there's always some interesting twist), and this might have been worth the 10 year wait.… Expand
  25. MikeO.
    Aug 3, 2010
    10
    It's what was great about StarCraft but with additional dimensions added on (and I don't just mean gorgeous 3D rendering as compared to SC:BW isomorphic 2D). Play through the campaign on "Normal" for the story, then play through on "Hard" (or worse!) for a challenge; complete all the 'Challenges'; chase down interesting achievements; and that's all aside from the It's what was great about StarCraft but with additional dimensions added on (and I don't just mean gorgeous 3D rendering as compared to SC:BW isomorphic 2D). Play through the campaign on "Normal" for the story, then play through on "Hard" (or worse!) for a challenge; complete all the 'Challenges'; chase down interesting achievements; and that's all aside from the core of the game, multiplayer play. The ladder is still there, but the new BattleNet system prevents "smurphing", i.e. good players can't use a fake name to sneak into the Copper leagues and stomp on the n00bs. And they've improved the management of cooperative games. Twenty pounds of fun in a five-pound bag!… Expand
  26. DamienR
    Aug 3, 2010
    5
    While the in-game graphics and cut-scenes are undeniably well made, with excellent art design, voice acting and animation, the part of the game that you pay for (namely the RTS gameplay) just isn't up to par. It is undeniably well balanced for multiplayer, but the graphics and level design are way behind current technology, and are not even slightly ground breaking. Really pretty While the in-game graphics and cut-scenes are undeniably well made, with excellent art design, voice acting and animation, the part of the game that you pay for (namely the RTS gameplay) just isn't up to par. It is undeniably well balanced for multiplayer, but the graphics and level design are way behind current technology, and are not even slightly ground breaking. Really pretty disappointing. Singleplayer story is average, if not a bit cliche (saving a lost love, betrayal, shady alliances etc etc yawn), though the missions are fairly interesting. Lastly, paying three times for one game, and forcing Battle.net on everyone, AND no LAN? No thanks.… Expand
  27. Dokk
    Aug 3, 2010
    7
    Ultimately I gave it an 7, but I'm honestly kinda conflicted about it overall. It deserves at least a 7 because of the bottom line - it's a shit load of fun. OTOH, it deserves a lower score for lack of innovation. It really makes you appreciate just how great SC1 was in 1998 and remains to this day. I haven't played the original for quite a while now, but I would revisit it Ultimately I gave it an 7, but I'm honestly kinda conflicted about it overall. It deserves at least a 7 because of the bottom line - it's a shit load of fun. OTOH, it deserves a lower score for lack of innovation. It really makes you appreciate just how great SC1 was in 1998 and remains to this day. I haven't played the original for quite a while now, but I would revisit it regularly over the years and it was always like seeing an old friend. I'm having a blast with Starcraft 2 but 12 years is too long to wait for this to be honest. It could just have easily come out 5 years ago. After all this time, we should have something new and innovative while still maintaining the high level of polish and fun we've come to expect. And sometime during that 12 year hiatus, I wish they would have given us the original with a new coat of paint - ie higher resolutions, etc - just to whet the appetite for SC2. I guess they have been working on the whole "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality. But that's where they went with the sequel as well. The gameplay was awesome fun 12 years ago and is still plenty of fun all this time later. Unfortunately, given the next 2 expansions as well as the very long development cycle, it seems Blizzard is leaving innovation to more creative companies. Like I said, that's not such a bad thing given how much fun there is to be had. But if we're still zerg rushing in 2025 or so (when SC3 is released).… Expand
  28. noop
    Aug 3, 2010
    1
    Excellent production values? Yes. Anything original and fresh? No. Bad game? No. Overrated? Yes. Starcraft 2 is the game without soul. 12-years old core gameplay. 3D graphics that almost looks like high-res 2D, so what's the point in making sophisticated graphics engine? Story is extremely predictable and cheesy. "Non linearity" is fake and leaves no chance for coherent storytelling. Excellent production values? Yes. Anything original and fresh? No. Bad game? No. Overrated? Yes. Starcraft 2 is the game without soul. 12-years old core gameplay. 3D graphics that almost looks like high-res 2D, so what's the point in making sophisticated graphics engine? Story is extremely predictable and cheesy. "Non linearity" is fake and leaves no chance for coherent storytelling. Choices you make don't really do much. Too much "magical" fantasy stuff for a sci-fi game. Still too much micromanagement for 2010 game. And price is really to high for a one chapter of a game you basically don't even own. I believe this game deserves 7 or 8 but something has to be done to offset fake fanboy ratings.… Expand
  29. AndreyI
    Aug 3, 2010
    7
    If you are not a RTS multiplayer fan this game have very little for you to offer. Campaign is dull, full of cliché and self-repeating. 26 mission just for one side (other 2 factions will come for additional money) and half of em you can throw away without any problems. I like old 3x8 format from SC a way more than new one. Graphics is good, but for me not better than Company of If you are not a RTS multiplayer fan this game have very little for you to offer. Campaign is dull, full of cliché and self-repeating. 26 mission just for one side (other 2 factions will come for additional money) and half of em you can throw away without any problems. I like old 3x8 format from SC a way more than new one. Graphics is good, but for me not better than Company of Heroes. And that is 4 years old game. SGI are good but not that impressive as it were in Diablo 2. And those childish things like achievements and facebook integration. It's really making me a sad panda. Overall it's a good game but nothing like "brilliant sequel" or any other hollow words in all this 95+ score reviews. Today Blizzard is more about making money so we all "enjoying" this "the same old thing but 2x shiny". Sad but true.… Expand
  30. KarstenF
    Aug 3, 2010
    7
    SC2 is a decent game. You get some nice story told in wing commander mannor that is not too deep. You get many really different missions that get some replay value as you could go for the achievements. And thats it. Was fun playing it but nothing that has a deeper impression than a good towerdefense flash game. The AI is basically absolent throwing enemies at me based on time and given SC2 is a decent game. You get some nice story told in wing commander mannor that is not too deep. You get many really different missions that get some replay value as you could go for the achievements. And thats it. Was fun playing it but nothing that has a deeper impression than a good towerdefense flash game. The AI is basically absolent throwing enemies at me based on time and given paths. I don't really have to develop a tactic. Multiplayerwise I am not a fan of a wild click orgy. There is basically no helping AI for movement. Your Units will frequently block each other. But hey its starcraft and the wild clicking is called esports. Be quick and anywhere on the map and replace the missing AI. Not my kind of game. We get what we expected. A game over 12 years old with an graphics update. Still works but really won't blow my mind or reinvents the RTS genre.… 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 »