starcraft 2

[Bimmi]

There's currently some talk that Battle.net might itself become a pay service, but as far as I know it's only talk. I've yet to hear anything about monthly fees for either StarCraft II or Diablo III.

Will SC2 be a good game? Well, I'd certainly hope so! Blizzard has yet to release a genuine turd (though there are some, myself included, who might count Warcraft III as their first real misfire)

 

[Meever]

I doubt Battle.net will ever be pay to play. It's gotten integrated so deeply with Starcraft 2 and most likely Diablo 3 that without it you'd essentially be crippling the games. And I bet they already get a crap ton of revenue from advertisement.... and this is before there's any games to play on it yet. God, imagine how much they can charge for advertisement when their traffic becomes like few hundred thousands on a slow day.

Oh and yeah, after seeing that Gefore FX even being mentioned pretty much confirms that pretty much everything above the macbook white will run it amazingly well.

 

[QCassidy352]

There's currently some talk that Battle.net might itself become a pay service, but as far as I know it's only talk. I've yet to hear anything about monthly fees for either StarCraft II or Diablo III.

Will SC2 be a good game? Well, I'd certainly hope so! Blizzard has yet to release a genuine turd (though there are some, myself included, who might count Warcraft III as their first real misfire)

I doubt it will ever be a monthly service. I know that would cost them my business.

As for War3 being a misfire - seriously?? I think it's one of their best efforts ever. I still play it more than any other game, and it's what, 6 years old?

 

[dead goon]

Oooo I look forward to SC2!

 

[akbc]

Blizzard is a pretty mac-friendly gaming company. They're always known for making a native mac version (unlike those crappy PORTS).

And they're also known to try to have their games enjoyable by everyone, not only the ones with like.. alienware or something...

They even said in the interview that they will make the game graphic-intensive for the ones who has the power to do so, but at the same time, the ones without the power can just turn off some special effects but enjoy the game itself just as fun. Games like Starcraft isn't really about graphics.. it's about the gameplay..

 

[MyDesktopBroke]

So far, Blizzard's official stance on this is that when a person buys Starcraft II at retail, they will be able to play on battle.net at no extra charge.

Although Bashiok (Blizzard employee) pointed out that this was a very carefully constructed sentence.

 

[Sambo110]

So far, Blizzard's official stance on this is that when a person buys Starcraft II at retail, they will be able to play on battle.net at no extra charge.

Although Bashiok (Blizzard employee) pointed out that this was a very carefully constructed sentence.

Probably because you can now make a map and charge for it.

 

[wheelhot]

LOL, 8600M GT > 9400M, if you don't believe me, you can Google it and the answer will be the same as what I tell ya.

I used to think that being a new series 9 vs 8 meaning it will be better but last time when it was 6 vs 7 I was told that the higher end 6 works better then the mid range 7. So don't let the no. fool you

 

[Syonidism]

you CAN play. but you wont enjoy it as much as you would on a mac pro '09 with Nvidia 285 and 8 gigs of ram.

Blizz officially stated that there are 600$ machines that CAN play SC2.

But you won't enjoy it.

 

[CJM]

you CAN play. but you wont enjoy it as much as you would on a mac pro '09 with Nvidia 285 and 8 gigs of ram.

Blizz officially stated that there are 600$ machines that CAN play SC2.

But you won't enjoy it.

I'm quite certain that any computer that can run Red Alert 3 right now on Max without issues will be fine when it comes to SC2. I don't think you'll need THAT powerful a setup ;P

As for Battle.net, yeah that was clarified as free the other day.

Tidbit fact: When playing computers in skirmish, the comp will surrender and say 'gg' when it realises it can no longer win.