starcraft 2

[Anprionsa]

Sigh, just another negative for it...

I see some user reviews (mostly fanboys) who end up giving it a 10... and most of them just say a few words.

[Hydralisk_X]

Sigh, just another negative for it...

I see some user reviews (mostly fanboys) who end up giving it a 10... and most of them just say a few words.

I could give a detailed user review, but honestly it's probably wasted words since it seems like most people have their minds made up. I honestly couldn't care less if SC2 supported triplewide. I'm a pretty big eyefinity person but as far as RTS games go, I really don't care and would rather play on a single monitor.

All I've gotta say is that this is the real deal - a very worthy successor to SC1. There's definitely plenty of things I dislike (namely Battle.net 2.0), but as far as the core game goes it's fantastic.

[Anprionsa]

[quote]Sigh, just another negative for it...

I see some user reviews (mostly fanboys) who end up giving it a 10... and most of them just say a few words.

I could give a detailed user review, but honestly it's probably wasted words since it seems like most people have their minds made up. I honestly couldn't care less if SC2 supported triplewide. I'm a pretty big eyefinity person but as far as RTS games go, I really don't care and would rather play on a single monitor.

All I've gotta say is that this is the real deal - a very worthy successor to SC1. There's definitely plenty of things I dislike (namely Battle.net 2.0), but as far as the core game goes it's fantastic.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the story is awesome (the #1 reason I play any game), but it is mainly having to pay for that and the expansions at full price atm.

[yogibbear]

Say my mate comes over can we play lan vs. each other? (or is there at least a "pseudo"-lan functionality? like run over network but have cd-key check get pinged every 10 mins to the singapore servers or whatever?... could not stand having to plan LAN at 300ms ping)

(If anything the main times i play RTS games (Age of Empires 2, Red Alert 2, C&C: Tiberium Sun, Rome: Total War, etc.) has always been on a LAN. Either 1 v 1, 1v 1v1 or 2 v 4 x AI or something like that)

[Hydralisk_X]

There is no LAN whatsoever. Any multiplayer has to be done while connected to battle.net. I'm not sure what Singapore has to do with anything. If you're worried about latency, SC2 does a fine job with that.

Anywho, played the campaign non stop and did 27 of the 29 missions on 'brutal'... but there's 2 that I just can't seem to crack and had to step it down. Must take a break...

[yogibbear]

Not even like some sort of pseudo LAN?

The reason why i ask is people like me in Australia have to connect via the Singapore Battle.net servers so if i had two connections up from my house to play LAN via battle.net basically we'd both be getting 300+ ms ping. (Which in a APM based RTS is criminal).

[El_Matarife]

They specifically banned eyefinity as they deemed it as cheating. Don't expect to get anything but the normal aspects (16:9, 16:10, 4:3)

You can try using each monitor in portrait. 3x9:16 will give you basically 16:10, 3 x 10:16 will give you basically 16:9.

I can't get stretching to work at all. I'm beginning to suspect that it's just not possible, but I haven't tried a 3x1 portrait array yet.

Not even like some sort of pseudo LAN?
The reason why i ask is people like me in Australia have to connect via the Singapore Battle.net servers so if i had two connections up from my house to play LAN via battle.net basically we'd both be getting 300+ ms ping. (Which in a APM based RTS is criminal).

Wow, 5-6 years after the first protests and Blizzard is still screwing the Anzac crowd?

[suiken_2mieu]

[quote]They specifically banned eyefinity as they deemed it as cheating. Don't expect to get anything but the normal aspects (16:9, 16:10, 4:3)

You can try using each monitor in portrait. 3x9:16 will give you basically 16:10, 3 x 10:16 will give you basically 16:9.

I can't get stretching to work at all. I'm beginning to suspect that it's just not possible, but I haven't tried a 3x1 portrait array yet.

Stretching? It'll be rendering at that resolution. Star Craft 2 is 3D not 2D.

[Amon Amarth]

Does someone actually have the game? If so, would someone please post on the official forums regarding Eyefinity/Triple Head support? It seems that only people who have bought the game can post.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/13438/

It would be great to at least hear some kind of official word like "We are working on it", or "We are not supporting it" instead of guessing.

Thanks if anyone does this! :cheers

[Anprionsa]

Hydralisk has the game. He is the only one I have seen that has posted so.

[Hydralisk_X]

Does someone actually have the game? If so, would someone please post on the official forums regarding Eyefinity/Triple Head support? It seems that only people who have bought the game can post.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/13438/

It would be great to at least hear some kind of official word like "We are working on it", or "We are not supporting it" instead of guessing.

Thanks if anyone does this! :cheers

They have stated before that they think it's an unfair advantage. I know I'm quoting my memory, but i'm 95% sure that's their official stance. They used to be completely against widescreen in general, so I was very pleased to see that at least the game was hor+ for widescreen resolutions and not vert-.

[Wiz33]

I hate to say it but not buying a excellent game because it does not support some niche product (eyefinity and triplehead are definitely niche) is so stupid. As for reviews not saying much. How's this from NZGamer:

Bang for buck? Check. Killer gameplay? Check. Loads of options? Check. Story, sound, presentation? All awesome. It even has a "casual" difficulty level. What's not to like? Screw 2010 - StarCraft II is the best RTS game released in YEARS and one of the best games on PC full stop. If you like gaming at all, you owe it to yourself to check this out. The ultimate RTS has arrived.

[slagg]

I am not interested in checking it out, realy don't like any of the RTS games I have played

[GeneralAdmission]

I hate to say it but not buying a excellent game because it does not support some niche product (eyefinity and triplehead are definitely niche) is so stupid.

You must be willing to admit that "excellent game" is a subjective descriptor. About multi-monitor support in particular, I would much rather play an RTS game like this:


...rather than like this:


In my opinion, 'excellent' applies far more to the first example than the second.

[thales100]

I am not interested in checking it out, realy don't like any of the RTS games I have played

x2, they look to me the same for the last 6 or 7 years.

[Wiz33]

[quote]I hate to say it but not buying a excellent game because it does not support some niche product (eyefinity and triplehead are definitely niche) is so stupid.

You must be willing to admit that "excellent game" is a subjective descriptor. About multi-monitor support in particular, I would much rather play an RTS game like this:


...rather than like this:


In my opinion, 'excellent' applies far more to the first example than the second.

Does that means all you want is eye candy? I'll gladly give up eye candy for any game with a good mechanic and wonderful story. I still play Harpoon 2 and have a bunch of older games on my system.

[GeneralAdmission]

Eye candy? There is no change at all to textures, models, effects, or anything typically associated with that term. The increased FOV is a functional difference and makes only one significant change: allowing more time to be spent controlling units and core gameplay mechanics by greatly reducing the need to manipulate the camera. With a multi-mon FOV such as the one I posted above, I could build an entire base without moving the camera a single time if I wanted. That is simply not possible with the single-screen, restricted FOV.

I, too, play a number of older games. In fact the screenshots are from BFME2, which is certainly not a new game. Zero Hour is an even older RTS I still play, and now I play that in surround as well. Extremely low camera angles is something that I strongly dislike in RTS games. Thus I've attempted to modify/correct the issue wherever I can.

[Wiz33]

Eye candy? There is no change at all to textures, models, effects, or anything typically associated with that term. The increased FOV is a functional difference and makes only one significant change: allowing more time to be spent controlling units and core gameplay mechanics by greatly reducing the need to manipulate the camera. With a multi-mon FOV such as the one I posted above, I could build an entire base without moving the camera a single time if I wanted. That is simply not possible with the single-screen, restricted FOV.

I, too, play a number of older games. In fact the screenshots are from BFME2, which is certainly not a new game. Zero Hour is an even older RTS I still play, and now I play that in surround as well. Extremely low camera angles is something that I strongly dislike in RTS games. Thus I've attempted to modify/correct the issue wherever I can.

But that's probably why you will never see that feature in SC2. Being such a competitive game that it is (at least internationally). Any feature that would give a player that much more situation awareness will not be included. Guess they might come up with a way to enable it for single player games but then they will constantly have to watch for ppl hacking it to be used in multiplayer match.

[GeneralAdmission]

But that's probably why you will never see that feature in SC2. Being such a competitive game that it is (at least internationally). Any feature that would give a player that much more situation awareness will not be included. Guess they might come up with a way to enable it for single player games but then they will constantly have to watch for ppl hacking it to be used in multiplayer match.

Exactly correct, and this is one of the reasons for my disinterest in the game. It does not, and probably never will, give me the playing experience I desire. The multi-mon support is joint one point, but the bottom line is SC2 just doesn't pique my interest. For the millions who want/have the game I hope it's awesome and they get their money's worth from the purchase.

[Wiz33]

[quote]But that's probably why you will never see that feature in SC2. Being such a competitive game that it is (at least internationally). Any feature that would give a player that much more situation awareness will not be included. Guess they might come up with a way to enable it for single player games but then they will constantly have to watch for ppl hacking it to be used in multiplayer match.

Exactly correct, and this is one of the reasons for my disinterest in the game. It does not, and probably never will, give me the playing experience I desire. The multi-mon support is joint one point, but the bottom line is SC2 just doesn't pique my interest. For the millions who want/have the game I hope it's awesome and they get their money's worth from the purchase.

Did you play the first game? I'm a diehard romantic at heart ;-P and I have been dying for the resolution of the story for the last 12 years so that was my main draw for SC2, I'm in it more for the story than the game mechanic. Got to give Blizzard credit for creating a storyline that I still care about after 12 years.