This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Should we add a section for marketing or something? or maybe add the battle reports inside somewhere. The First Battle Report is here http://www.starcraft2.com/features/battlereports/1.xml another one is coming soon. this is true it is splitting into 3 games but its one for each race not one for the game and 2 expansions because i have it on hold for the whole game not 1/3 of the game¥
@ S@bre, please read the following (this is on the edit article page):
PLEASE READ BEFORE EDITING:
Unregistered contributor: according to the gamestop website, the store ships preorder shipments by 7/27/2010. So, shouldn't it have been released by then, not 2012? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.129.7 ( talk) 02:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
1. DO NOT INSERT ANY INFORMATION READ ON FANSITES, except when such information can be sourced by reliable sources, or has been released by Blizzard OFFICIALLY!
2. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, INFORMATION ADDED TO THIS PAGE SHOULD HAVE ITS SOURCE LISTED USING THE REF TAG. Information added to this page without a source is subject to removal from the article at any Wikipedian's discretion.
3. DO NOT ADD THE ALLEGED DATE OF RELEASE. As per long standing consensus on this page we will not add the release date for this game until Blizzard publicly issues a release date.
Number 3 clearly sums it up, Blizzard has not publicly issued a release date, nor have they mentioned 2009 as a year of release. I personally want it this year, but that doesn't mean it is going to be released this year, so please leave it as unknown until Blizzard announces an official release. Activision and IGN do not count as official sources. Here is the official source of Starcraft 2's release "www.starcraft2.com/faq.xml" 137.244.215.61 ( talk) 16:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Sabre. Both sources used to cite the date both state that the game's release date is still highly speculative.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/907/907028p1.html
http://www.starcraftwire.net/blog/comments/activision-confirms-starcraft-ii-for-2009/?gr_i_ni
Wait a minute, I thought you (Oldag07 and the guy who needs to register an account) said IGN and fansites were unreliable sources. Why then did you cite them in support of your argument?-- Soviet689 ( talk) 18:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
As for the new source, http://starcraft2may2009release.wordpress.com/ blogs are not considered reliable sources, unless they are official blogs of blizzard. Oldag07 ( talk) 13:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Right, Mike Morhaime, the president of the Blizzard Entertainment, has confirmed that the game is anticipated for this year at E3, though subject to the usual string of "we won't release until we're satisfied". This is a different case from the Activision Blizzard stuff above; this is Blizzard Entertainment themselves saying this. I'm sure we can all agree that the president of the company can speak on justifiably on behalf of the company. Source. -- Sabre ( talk) 18:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Oldag07 ( talk) 07:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
According to http://www.gamespot.com/news/6214823.html:
This seems official enough to add to the article, instead of TBA. Thue 13:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
"As of a report on July 28th, it has been speculated that the release date will be bumped back to 2010. This is not certain at this point, but in an interview with video game analyst Jess Lubert, he stated, "StarCraft 2 may be pushed out of this year, due to development delays. The beta testing for 'StarCraft' hasn't started yet. If it starts in August and takes 5-6 months, then launching the game this year is next to impossible."
I was hesitant put up this information due to WP:CRYSTAL. It is sourced and it is valid information. But it is speculative. Removing it however, begs the question, should we remove 2009 release date too, and state that it is TBA again. We spent so much time arguing over it earlier, I am hesitant to do anything at the moment. Oldag07 ( talk) 05:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Given the discussion above, I decided not to "be bold" just yet. But... This announcement is phrased in the first-person, as written by Blizzard, and is on an official Blizzard site (forums.battle.net) by an identified "Blizzard Poster" (Cydra). It says "StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty will not be ready for release by the end of 2009"... "we look forward to delivering a real-time strategy gaming experience worthy of the series’ legacy in the first half of 2010." Does that count as an official announcement? -- User:AlexChurchill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.44.18.173 ( talk) 17:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Blizzard has missed the "Summer" deadline for the Starcraft 2 Beta. Please make a note of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.50.224 ( talk) 23:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/02/starcraft-2-beta-begins-this-month-game-coming-mid-2010.ars — Wulf ( talk) 21:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if this isn't the best place - I'm a bit new and don't know where else to put this. I think it's worth noting that the beta came out (18 Feb right?) and that access keys to the beta are being sold on ebay for upwards of $300 w/ polar bears, and over $200 w/o. That seems excessive. While it may not be a huge deal to us today, in ten or fifteen years when SC and SC2 are near-forgotten relics, the fact that beta access keys were sold for 5-6x the anticipated retail price of the game (if not more) will help give perspective on how excited many fans are about this game. -Vaerax, 24Feb2010
This page is not a forum for general discussion about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7 at the Reference desk. |
It will be released on July 27 on Mac and PC worldwide except china linkI will edit it. -- Karim666 ( talk) 21:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/11157-blizzard-cites-piracy-as-reason-for-no-starcraft-ii-lan/ http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/59340
Blizzard says piracy is the reason for no support for LAN (offline local area network gameplay)
The controversy is that people are responding badly, thus this can lead to lower sales already and provoked hacking the game to get LAN to work, in which these hacks are often found in game cracks. I don't need more info to understand that it will be hacked and pirated more, especially for newcomers to the series. Which means me too, I will certainly not use some battle.net to go LAN, that's ridiculous. Just looking some sites , it's already sawn from space that this is a huge controversy from point one, seems that this will spark massive hacking. That's true, even I want LAN. Fact is also that no matter how good wow and warcraft3 is, the battle.net sucks so not a good start to direct people to it, while they're making new battle.net upgrade... I don't think that will prevent 13 year old noobs from spamming with shitload of threads.
The original Controversy part so far (I did not originally make it) is in hidden quote, edit, fix, use it when it's appropriate.
And let's be straight about one thing. Hackers will ALWAYS find a way. It's a lame excuse that even morons won't believe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.89.3 ( talk) 03:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
On July 28, MarketWatch reported that StarCraft II's release date may be postponed to 2010. While Blizzard has not confirmed any delays, video game analyst Jess Lubert stated, "StarCraft 2 may be pushed out of this year, due to development delays. The beta testing for 'StarCraft' hasn't started yet. If it starts in August and takes 5-6 months, then launching the game this year is next to impossible." [1]
In response to the possible delay of the release of StarCraft II, Jeff Haynes of IGN.com contacted Blizzard. A spokesperson for Blizzard informed Haynes, "We're still targeting the end of the year for the launch of StarCraft II and we're also still targeting this summer for the start of the beta, so none of that's changed on this end." and that, "We're still looking to ship the game by the end of the year. If that changes, we'll let you guys know, but that's how things are looking right now."
Removed this from the page. as discussed above. If this page's official stance is TBA for the release date, than it makes no sense to have a "delays" section. moreover. WP:CRYSTAL Oldag07 ( talk) 14:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Removed: On August 5th, 2009, Blizzard announced that StarCraft II and another upcoming game will be delayed until early 2010.
The biggest reason why we put a release date was because the blizzard president said that it was coming out in 2009. The blizzard president did not say anything about the game coming out in 2010, even though there is reason to believe that there was another delay in the game. I say we keep to the old standards expressed in the comments at the beginning of the page. Oldag07 ( talk) 23:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
With all the reverting over the date going into this article should we consider semi-protecting for full-protecting the article for a while? I'm getting tired of constantly reverting unsourced speculation over the release date and any delays, and if that is true of me its probably true of one or two others as well. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Why was this article made indefinite semi-protected, and could we remove it now when the argument that triggered it has been laid to rest? I cant find any indication in the articles history to validate a indefinite semi-protection as given by WP:ROUGH-- Belorn ( talk) 18:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
SC2's art has been completely updated and redesigned. The screenshots on this article are very old and doesn't reflect the latest builds of the game. Also the game logo has been updated as well. Let me put some as examples:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3435/3843223287_6bcd517fc3_o.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3422/3844016988_71bfcff2e1_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2621/3843221879_2138f41cbe_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2635/3844007476_a320df7de4_o.jpg
New updated Wings of Liberty Logo can be found on various sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Houw ( talk • contribs) 04:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I also assume that some rewording will be required for the move. I have started working on it in my Sandbox. Oldag07 ( talk) 01:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there any chance of getting this page updated media wise? Like I said, the screenshots are very old and aren't really reflective of the game any longer. Makes wikipedia feel not updated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzO_3RCfJQw#t=03m17s -- 67.187.26.29 ( talk) 22:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't think wikipedia considers youtube a reliable source. Besides, thats seems highly unlikely. Noneofyour ( talk) 23:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Youtube may be hosting it, the source is the mouth pieces speaking. -- 67.187.26.29 ( talk) 02:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
In the context they said it, i'm pretty sure that they were just joking.
Yeah, they were joking. There is no way Blizzard would take that long to release the game. -- Thelifelessone ( talk) 04:21, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
This page is not a forum for general discussion about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7 at the Reference desk. |
Does that statement that Zeratul is still tormented mean that the game takes place before the novel Twilight? Chronolegion ( talk) 19:32, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Removed the 'lag times' comment from criticism because anyone who knows how battle.net operates would be aware that if all players in a game are on the same lan the service treats it AS a lan game. The only real concern is the inability to play multiplayer where no internet is present. Latency is NOT an issue in LAN games over bnet. Wikipedia is not a place for baseless slander. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.209.129 ( talk) 21:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I was AT Blizzcon, I listened to the interview that is linked as a reference for the point I edited. The person who added the segment about DotA didn't listen very carefully. DotA was listed as an example of an excellent mod for wc3, but was also stated very clearly that it would NOT qualify as a premium map because it uses mostly warcraft 3's attributes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.209.129 ( talk) 17:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Now it's in the number one spot [1] and it's been featured before in the list.-- 99.192.49.231 ( talk) 00:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
In the recently released Blizzcast 13 http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/community/blizzcast/archive/episode13.html
Production director, Chris Sigaty, said "You haven't asked this question yet, but I'll answer it ahead of time. We were targeting three to five months for the beta, we're really at a three month period of time for the beta at this point. We are still targeting the first half of this year, so with that in mind, it really shortens the window of time with our major content patch coming out pretty close to the end whether it's even worth it putting out the map editor at that point."
So should we put the release date as Q2 2010 (targeted)? KiasuKiasiMan ( talk) 11:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
An article released this week by IGN claims "TBA 2010". I think this is a more accurate date than simply "TBA" (as if it's vaporware). Jwesley 78 18:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
The Beta section needs to be updated. The article mentions that a map editor is expected to be released, along with a major content patch towards the end of beta. Also, it mentions patch 8 as the latest patch.
As of 4/22/2010, Patch 9 has been released, bringing the GalaxyEditor with it. Patch 9 corresponds to the major content patch mentioned as expected in the beta, and should be updated to reflect that. This link can be used as a source/reference: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23094049316&postId=243993487492&sid=5000#10
Cavillis ( talk) 22:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know how to update it on the main page and I don't really feel the urge to educate my self about it. Since people working on this wiki are probably big fans of the game: Here is the link where I uploaded it http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/8946/sc2m.png If you feel like mentioning my nickname its Polymorpher . Cheers. (You are welcome to delete this message when the image is included at the wiki) [July,23,2010] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.78.147.183 ( talk) 19:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Why is Kevin Costner on the cover? Terranmeapart ( talk) 07:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Why isn't it going to be released in China? All of the source doesn't indicate that it isn't going to be released in China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) is a part of China 58.9.204.175 ( talk) 05:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I added that Patch 9 added a map editor and updated the patch count to 10 (effective about an hour or so ago). Don't know the right way to cite so copied another citation and it came out wonky. Someone should fix it. Also fix this section if I put it in wrong. thx. Slackmaster K 09:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Check out this blog post on StarCraft 2. 192.118.11.112 ( talk) 21:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Any one have the official system requirements? It should be for the finalized version. Iys best for it to be cited to the official website. 76.21.122.234 ( talk) 03:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok i downloaded the patch witch allowed the map editor but how to i access it? 97.81.53.142 ( talk) 00:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
it is in the same folder as the main exe. the file that runs the editor is called starcraft 2 editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 08:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
It appears that Blizzard has censored parts of the game (specifically, recoloured the blood and removed swearing & smoking from the cut-scenes) and got away with a 12 from the South Korean ratings board. Source. Delusibeta ( talk) 19:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up: There is discussion about editing the critisism section of this article ongoing at http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128316. Arthena (talk) 07:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
A large part of the discussion on the TeamLiquid site was on improving the criticism section to meet wikipedia's standards and to edit out any bias appearing in the text. The website is well known for giving honest and direct feedback to Blizzard including a large amount of help with the Beta version of Starcraft 2. Overall the discussion has vastly improved the new criticism section. Zuchinni one ( talk) 08:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
This keeps getting added and subtracted, so after watching this for the last few hours I've fully protected the article for three days so we can:
I have no strong feelings on the matter, but I do want to see some decision on the matter by the time the protection ends. TomStar81 ( Talk) 08:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Here is a list of the current articles that may be suitable reference material for the criticism section.
-The original Frank Pearce interview:
http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/270/blizzards-frank-pearce-interview
-An INC Gamers article on the petitions to include LAN support:
http://www.incgamers.com/News/17162/Thousands-Petition-Blizzard-For-StarCraft-LAN
-An INC Gamers article on the lack of even Semi-LAN support:
http://www.incgamers.com/News/22943/not-even-semi-lan-in-starcraft-ii
-A Game Rant article discussing the lack of LAN:
http://gamerant.com/blizzard-starcraft-2-no-lan-js-23284/
-An INC Gamers article on the region locking issue:
http://www.incgamers.com/News/22928/no-intercontinental-starcraft-ii-friendships
-A GX interview with Kevin Yu of Blizzard discussing region lock:
http://www.gx.com.sg/Blog/Blog.aspx?id=cee4cc72-d74f-4837-8e9e-d25983a2e67e
-A Gosu Gamers article discussing the lack of cross-region play & how that will effect the competitive scene. It also briefly discusses the lack of chat rooms:
http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12068-battle-net-2-0-what-are-we-missing
-A kotaku article about the lack of LAN play:
http://kotaku.com/5304113/no-lan-play-for-starcraft-ii
-A Gossip Gamers article about lack of LAN play:
http://www.gossipgamers.com/blizzards-response-to-no-lan-support-for-starcraft-2/
-An article on Starcraft-Fans giving Blizzard's response to LAN requests:
http://www.starcraft-fans.com/page/Blizzard+Responds+to+No+LAN+Support?t=anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zuchinni one ( talk • contribs) 21:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Here's the best solution I see. There's no dispute that the LAN issue needs to be covered (its already touched upon in the article), this is about how it is covered. The lack of LAN is still part of the development narrative; it, the reaction to it ( properly sourced) and Blizzard's response to that are all still development information. Nevertheless, I think we could get a good paragraph, possibly two, out of available sources. However, any top-level section heading that indicates weight on either positive or negative aspects in such a manner, such as the troll-magnet titles "Criticism" or "Controversy" is a very bad idea for this case, especially given that the article isn't in great condition at the moment anyway.
What I'd suggest is to put it in a sub-section heading within the development section entitled "Lack of LAN play", "Multiplayer production", or some variant on that. Doing that would provide a neutral structure, satisfying WP:NPOV, for discussing the whole LAN issue. That way, it still gets a section all to itself, but is integrated properly.
Lets have a look at sourcing:
That leaves IGN, Kotaku and Incgamers, and tentatively GX. There's some more decent references from GameSpot and Ars Technica in the article already as a start towards more mainstream stuff, which I'm confident exists. I'm sure something can be put together out of those. -- Sabre ( talk) 22:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
This article currently lacks a reception section, which is listed as essential content in the video game article guidelines, and, after quickly skimming through the article history, it seems that it has never had such a section. Could someone with editing rights add a {{ game cleanup}} tag to the article? -- Gordon Ecker ( talk) 08:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
It occurs to me that perhaps the best thing to do would be to write a brief bit about the reception of the Beta, which was very positive overall, as a sub-section of the Beta section. And then have a sentence or two about the criticism along with all appropriate references from RSs.
Something like:
The wording here might have too much bias so I welcome suggestions on improving it.
Thoughts? Zuchinni one ( talk) 02:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm interested in hearing if anyone would object to creating a page notice for the article, perhaps something like:
IMPORTANT:
PLEASE READ BEFORE EDITING: 1. DO NOT INSERT ANY INFORMATION READ ON FANSITES, except when such information can be sourced by reliable sources, or has been released by Blizzard OFFICIALLY! 2. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, INFORMATION ADDED TO THIS PAGE SHOULD HAVE ITS SOURCE LISTED USING THE <ref> TAG. Information added to this page without a source is subject to removal from the article at any Wikipedian's discretion. 3. DO NOT ADD A CRITICISM SECTION TO THIS ARTICLE. As per consensus reached on the talk page no such section will be added to the article until after the release of the game. Any attempt made to add a criticism section to this article will be reverted immediately. |
What do y'all think? Is this worth pursuing? TomStar81 ( Talk) 08:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC) Would prefer something to the tune of:
Please read before editing:
|
based on what i have found out it is online only. there is however a guest mode where people can play single player online without an account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 11:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
To validate the game, a battle.net account and connection is required. An offline single-player mode will be available, but only after valdation. 74.88.105.35 ( talk) 19:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC) i read a faq on blizzards forums that say that it is online only. i do however understand that people refuse to believe it. most people on the hive workshop also refuse to believe that it is online only.
i have used the editor myself so i can tell that is simply called the starcraft 2 editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 11:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Blizzard has confirmed that the official name for the editor will be the Galaxy Editor. What was seen was simply a title for the application window. 88.151.126.254 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC). the fact is that is called the starcraft 2 editor, live with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 08:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Let's avoid some form of flame war, but here's a reliable source for the official title for the map editor in Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty being called the Galaxy Map Editor.
Read post #3, posted by a blizzard poster Furthermore, the programming language used in the editor is called Galaxy.
See question #1 I am not saying that Blizzard does not use several names for the tool used to edit the game, but the Galaxy Editor seems to be the successor to StarEdit. 75.67.82.245 ( talk) 18:08, 5 July 2010 (UTC) i currently use the editor. there isnt any galaxy in the editors name. on the european forum of the beta it is called the starcraft 2 map editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 19:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC) the game have been released and the editor is called the starcraft II editor. please correct the error in the article.
Will there be released a game for Mac OSX and one for Windows - or will there be only one release which works on both platforms? -- Lindberg ( talk) 21:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
the system requirements shouldnt include a dvd drive because there will be a digital version which will be released on the same day but 10 am pacific time.the dvd drive should be listed as optional —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xboi209 ( talk • contribs) 07:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/launch?ref=/sc2/en/ http://www.facebook.com/#!/StarCraft
The game was released today, Tuesday, July 27, 2010 in Southeast Asia. It is not 'currently under development' - the game is live, as Blizzard has announced. 99.178.100.125 ( talk) 16:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone who's been playing the game have the time to spare to flesh out the campaign? It's been half a day and a lot of people are bound to start looking for this site to know what the plot line is all about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.201.36.162 ( talk) 14:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I heard the game is a computerized version of the Warhammer 40k table-top game (with Warcraft being similarly a computerized version of the original Warhammer table-top game). Not sure where or if this origin of the game should be mentioned in article. C3ndy99 ( talk) 01:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2010/07/29/128846098/starcraft-placeholder
Check out the above link. It's clear that the media has noticed that Starcraft:Broodwar was a major e-sport (especially in S. Korea), and it looks like SC2 might be following suit.
Any thoughts on adding a section about the pro-scene or e-sports?
Zuchinni one ( talk) 13:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey all,
A recent edit of mine using an RS of a negative review of SC2 was undone recently.
Here was the original edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty&diff=376243669&oldid=376239680
The removal occurred here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty&diff=376247787&oldid=376246742
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty&diff=376246742&oldid=376243746
I don't want to get into an edit war, but there wasn't any clear reasoning for why the review was removed. This is an encyclopedia, we need to stay WP:NPOV and cannot take sides. I personally love starcraft and starcraft 2, but the negative reviews have just as much of a place in this article as the positive reviews.
Lets keep this discussion open and stay NPOV.
Zuchinni one ( talk) 12:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't be concerned with negative reviews getting removed in gernal, not on my watch. But in reality, it's most likely just going to get replaced, and in this recent case the inclusion of that image was very unnecessary. Stabby Joe ( talk) 16:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Here's a few links with some basic info on Map Making including quotes from Blizzard and the limits placed on new maps. "The storage limit for each user is 20MB in total. Up to 5 maps or mods, each with size no more than 10MB."
I don't have time to add it now, but wanted to throw it out there if someone else feels like doing it.
http://starcraft.incgamers.com/blog/comments/starcraft-ii-map-publishing-intro/
http://www.blizzblues.com/us/starcraft-ii-map-publishing-a-primer-25026453020.html
http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12022-blizzard-posts-a-guide-to-map-publishing
http://sclegacy.com/articles/730-battlenet-20-concerns#Map%20Making/Editor%20Issues -- This link is a fairly expansive article, but it does contain good info towards the end regarding map making.
Zuchinni one ( talk) 14:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The lack of chat rooms, cross-region play, cross-game chat, LAN, being released as one third of the game it should be, $60 instead of $50, and several other Battle.net 2.0 and StarCraft II criticisms should be added.-- SaturnElite ( talk) 19:19, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Theres actually alot of controversy coming from custom mapmakers due to imposed restrictions from many angles.
20mb overall map space limit, 10mb map space limit, 5 maps only , popularity system blocks new ppl from joining newly published games. complicated map editor , inappropriate content filter , ban to publishing without reason , no lobby options to change teams once saturated, or kick. 30second countdown (10 or less should be needed). this is just a rough compilation. checkout battle net forums under custom maps to see more details.
99.251.195.19 (
talk) 06:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I've seen these issues mentioned in numerous SC2 articles. Here is one where map-making problems are the focus: http://kotaku.com/5605333/blizzard-policing-inappropriate-starcraft-ii-maps-because-they-can Zuchinni one ( talk) 23:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I would like to see a website list of trusted community sites for Starcraft 2.
For World of Warcraft, I see that wow.com and mmo-champion.com are great companions for news and info about WoW, and wowhead.com has emerged as the best online resource for detailed item information as well as stats testing via their profile section.
But there doesn't seem to be a clear community site through Google or noted in the SC2 Wikipedia section and this is pretty valuable info that I would like to see, considering that many listings in Google at the moment are going to lead to sites with potentially false info, or even malware/trojan/virus hazards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.195.203 ( talk) 16:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't really do much editing on wikipedia. That said, it seems like the article would be much more useful with more external links added at the bottom. Besides the official website, I'd love to see some links to starcraft specific wikis that have more detailed information on units and strategy, as well as an aggregate review site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.123.179 ( talk) 15:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
So apparently Blizzard has acknowledged that there is a problem with the way that certain portions of the game are rendered and this has been causing some graphics cards to overheat. This should be fixed in an upcoming patch so I'm not sure if it deserves mention in the article. But I wanted to put it out there for discussion.
Here are some relevant links:
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/223306,how-to-dust-away-starcraft-2-overheating-issues.aspx
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=258215
http://www.geek.com/articles/games/starcraft-ii-menu-screen-are-overheating-pcs-20100729/
Zuchinni one ( talk) 17:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
As someone who knows about computer hardware and software I find this section a little alarmist this is only an issue because of the huge popularity of the game. 1.5M+ games were sold the first day (and that's not counting South East Asia,) statistically speaking a few hundred people with computer failures out of millions seems reasonable to me.
datth a technical support employee at Blizzard posted this --- http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/248296509?page=3#54 "As other users have said, the upkeep of your hardware is your responsibility. There isn't a bug in programming code that would cause your hardware to overheat or die unless it was already on its way out. Nothing can help a ticking time bomb. We've offered two variables to cap the rate at which you render the game for less than optimal cooling conditions (for example, my media center box in a Mozart Sx HTPC case, where my 8800 is on a riser card and it's barely hovering over the entire motherboard) but what you do with the rest is up to you.
There's a hard cap on your GPU and memory frequency set by your manufacturer and that serves as a protection mechanism. That and their cooling solution they use keeps the card in working condition when it's clean and has good air flow. StarCraft II (or World of Warcraft since we had a few people say the same thing about it) does not change your GPU/memory clock speeds so it can only go up until the video card's upper bounds when it is not bottlenecked by your CPU. You're supposed to plateau out heat-wise as you can't push instructions thru the chip and memory at a higher rate.
If your hardware is damaged, you need to go talk to the damaged part's manufacturer and see if you can get help there." - Navitron ( talk) 12:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
I think its very doubtful to only cite "official" gaming authorities on reviews. At least someone should reflect on that 52% of people on Amazon are totally dissatisfied with their buy.
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Should we add a section for marketing or something? or maybe add the battle reports inside somewhere. The First Battle Report is here http://www.starcraft2.com/features/battlereports/1.xml another one is coming soon. this is true it is splitting into 3 games but its one for each race not one for the game and 2 expansions because i have it on hold for the whole game not 1/3 of the game¥
@ S@bre, please read the following (this is on the edit article page):
PLEASE READ BEFORE EDITING:
Unregistered contributor: according to the gamestop website, the store ships preorder shipments by 7/27/2010. So, shouldn't it have been released by then, not 2012? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.129.7 ( talk) 02:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
1. DO NOT INSERT ANY INFORMATION READ ON FANSITES, except when such information can be sourced by reliable sources, or has been released by Blizzard OFFICIALLY!
2. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, INFORMATION ADDED TO THIS PAGE SHOULD HAVE ITS SOURCE LISTED USING THE REF TAG. Information added to this page without a source is subject to removal from the article at any Wikipedian's discretion.
3. DO NOT ADD THE ALLEGED DATE OF RELEASE. As per long standing consensus on this page we will not add the release date for this game until Blizzard publicly issues a release date.
Number 3 clearly sums it up, Blizzard has not publicly issued a release date, nor have they mentioned 2009 as a year of release. I personally want it this year, but that doesn't mean it is going to be released this year, so please leave it as unknown until Blizzard announces an official release. Activision and IGN do not count as official sources. Here is the official source of Starcraft 2's release "www.starcraft2.com/faq.xml" 137.244.215.61 ( talk) 16:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Sabre. Both sources used to cite the date both state that the game's release date is still highly speculative.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/907/907028p1.html
http://www.starcraftwire.net/blog/comments/activision-confirms-starcraft-ii-for-2009/?gr_i_ni
Wait a minute, I thought you (Oldag07 and the guy who needs to register an account) said IGN and fansites were unreliable sources. Why then did you cite them in support of your argument?-- Soviet689 ( talk) 18:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
As for the new source, http://starcraft2may2009release.wordpress.com/ blogs are not considered reliable sources, unless they are official blogs of blizzard. Oldag07 ( talk) 13:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Right, Mike Morhaime, the president of the Blizzard Entertainment, has confirmed that the game is anticipated for this year at E3, though subject to the usual string of "we won't release until we're satisfied". This is a different case from the Activision Blizzard stuff above; this is Blizzard Entertainment themselves saying this. I'm sure we can all agree that the president of the company can speak on justifiably on behalf of the company. Source. -- Sabre ( talk) 18:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Oldag07 ( talk) 07:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
According to http://www.gamespot.com/news/6214823.html:
This seems official enough to add to the article, instead of TBA. Thue 13:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
"As of a report on July 28th, it has been speculated that the release date will be bumped back to 2010. This is not certain at this point, but in an interview with video game analyst Jess Lubert, he stated, "StarCraft 2 may be pushed out of this year, due to development delays. The beta testing for 'StarCraft' hasn't started yet. If it starts in August and takes 5-6 months, then launching the game this year is next to impossible."
I was hesitant put up this information due to WP:CRYSTAL. It is sourced and it is valid information. But it is speculative. Removing it however, begs the question, should we remove 2009 release date too, and state that it is TBA again. We spent so much time arguing over it earlier, I am hesitant to do anything at the moment. Oldag07 ( talk) 05:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Given the discussion above, I decided not to "be bold" just yet. But... This announcement is phrased in the first-person, as written by Blizzard, and is on an official Blizzard site (forums.battle.net) by an identified "Blizzard Poster" (Cydra). It says "StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty will not be ready for release by the end of 2009"... "we look forward to delivering a real-time strategy gaming experience worthy of the series’ legacy in the first half of 2010." Does that count as an official announcement? -- User:AlexChurchill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.44.18.173 ( talk) 17:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Blizzard has missed the "Summer" deadline for the Starcraft 2 Beta. Please make a note of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.50.224 ( talk) 23:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/02/starcraft-2-beta-begins-this-month-game-coming-mid-2010.ars — Wulf ( talk) 21:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if this isn't the best place - I'm a bit new and don't know where else to put this. I think it's worth noting that the beta came out (18 Feb right?) and that access keys to the beta are being sold on ebay for upwards of $300 w/ polar bears, and over $200 w/o. That seems excessive. While it may not be a huge deal to us today, in ten or fifteen years when SC and SC2 are near-forgotten relics, the fact that beta access keys were sold for 5-6x the anticipated retail price of the game (if not more) will help give perspective on how excited many fans are about this game. -Vaerax, 24Feb2010
This page is not a forum for general discussion about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7 at the Reference desk. |
It will be released on July 27 on Mac and PC worldwide except china linkI will edit it. -- Karim666 ( talk) 21:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/11157-blizzard-cites-piracy-as-reason-for-no-starcraft-ii-lan/ http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/59340
Blizzard says piracy is the reason for no support for LAN (offline local area network gameplay)
The controversy is that people are responding badly, thus this can lead to lower sales already and provoked hacking the game to get LAN to work, in which these hacks are often found in game cracks. I don't need more info to understand that it will be hacked and pirated more, especially for newcomers to the series. Which means me too, I will certainly not use some battle.net to go LAN, that's ridiculous. Just looking some sites , it's already sawn from space that this is a huge controversy from point one, seems that this will spark massive hacking. That's true, even I want LAN. Fact is also that no matter how good wow and warcraft3 is, the battle.net sucks so not a good start to direct people to it, while they're making new battle.net upgrade... I don't think that will prevent 13 year old noobs from spamming with shitload of threads.
The original Controversy part so far (I did not originally make it) is in hidden quote, edit, fix, use it when it's appropriate.
And let's be straight about one thing. Hackers will ALWAYS find a way. It's a lame excuse that even morons won't believe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.89.3 ( talk) 03:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
On July 28, MarketWatch reported that StarCraft II's release date may be postponed to 2010. While Blizzard has not confirmed any delays, video game analyst Jess Lubert stated, "StarCraft 2 may be pushed out of this year, due to development delays. The beta testing for 'StarCraft' hasn't started yet. If it starts in August and takes 5-6 months, then launching the game this year is next to impossible." [1]
In response to the possible delay of the release of StarCraft II, Jeff Haynes of IGN.com contacted Blizzard. A spokesperson for Blizzard informed Haynes, "We're still targeting the end of the year for the launch of StarCraft II and we're also still targeting this summer for the start of the beta, so none of that's changed on this end." and that, "We're still looking to ship the game by the end of the year. If that changes, we'll let you guys know, but that's how things are looking right now."
Removed this from the page. as discussed above. If this page's official stance is TBA for the release date, than it makes no sense to have a "delays" section. moreover. WP:CRYSTAL Oldag07 ( talk) 14:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Removed: On August 5th, 2009, Blizzard announced that StarCraft II and another upcoming game will be delayed until early 2010.
The biggest reason why we put a release date was because the blizzard president said that it was coming out in 2009. The blizzard president did not say anything about the game coming out in 2010, even though there is reason to believe that there was another delay in the game. I say we keep to the old standards expressed in the comments at the beginning of the page. Oldag07 ( talk) 23:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
With all the reverting over the date going into this article should we consider semi-protecting for full-protecting the article for a while? I'm getting tired of constantly reverting unsourced speculation over the release date and any delays, and if that is true of me its probably true of one or two others as well. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Why was this article made indefinite semi-protected, and could we remove it now when the argument that triggered it has been laid to rest? I cant find any indication in the articles history to validate a indefinite semi-protection as given by WP:ROUGH-- Belorn ( talk) 18:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
SC2's art has been completely updated and redesigned. The screenshots on this article are very old and doesn't reflect the latest builds of the game. Also the game logo has been updated as well. Let me put some as examples:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3435/3843223287_6bcd517fc3_o.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3422/3844016988_71bfcff2e1_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2621/3843221879_2138f41cbe_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2635/3844007476_a320df7de4_o.jpg
New updated Wings of Liberty Logo can be found on various sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Houw ( talk • contribs) 04:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I also assume that some rewording will be required for the move. I have started working on it in my Sandbox. Oldag07 ( talk) 01:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there any chance of getting this page updated media wise? Like I said, the screenshots are very old and aren't really reflective of the game any longer. Makes wikipedia feel not updated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzO_3RCfJQw#t=03m17s -- 67.187.26.29 ( talk) 22:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't think wikipedia considers youtube a reliable source. Besides, thats seems highly unlikely. Noneofyour ( talk) 23:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Youtube may be hosting it, the source is the mouth pieces speaking. -- 67.187.26.29 ( talk) 02:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
In the context they said it, i'm pretty sure that they were just joking.
Yeah, they were joking. There is no way Blizzard would take that long to release the game. -- Thelifelessone ( talk) 04:21, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
This page is not a forum for general discussion about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty/Archive 7 at the Reference desk. |
Does that statement that Zeratul is still tormented mean that the game takes place before the novel Twilight? Chronolegion ( talk) 19:32, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Removed the 'lag times' comment from criticism because anyone who knows how battle.net operates would be aware that if all players in a game are on the same lan the service treats it AS a lan game. The only real concern is the inability to play multiplayer where no internet is present. Latency is NOT an issue in LAN games over bnet. Wikipedia is not a place for baseless slander. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.209.129 ( talk) 21:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I was AT Blizzcon, I listened to the interview that is linked as a reference for the point I edited. The person who added the segment about DotA didn't listen very carefully. DotA was listed as an example of an excellent mod for wc3, but was also stated very clearly that it would NOT qualify as a premium map because it uses mostly warcraft 3's attributes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.209.129 ( talk) 17:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Now it's in the number one spot [1] and it's been featured before in the list.-- 99.192.49.231 ( talk) 00:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
In the recently released Blizzcast 13 http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/community/blizzcast/archive/episode13.html
Production director, Chris Sigaty, said "You haven't asked this question yet, but I'll answer it ahead of time. We were targeting three to five months for the beta, we're really at a three month period of time for the beta at this point. We are still targeting the first half of this year, so with that in mind, it really shortens the window of time with our major content patch coming out pretty close to the end whether it's even worth it putting out the map editor at that point."
So should we put the release date as Q2 2010 (targeted)? KiasuKiasiMan ( talk) 11:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
An article released this week by IGN claims "TBA 2010". I think this is a more accurate date than simply "TBA" (as if it's vaporware). Jwesley 78 18:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
The Beta section needs to be updated. The article mentions that a map editor is expected to be released, along with a major content patch towards the end of beta. Also, it mentions patch 8 as the latest patch.
As of 4/22/2010, Patch 9 has been released, bringing the GalaxyEditor with it. Patch 9 corresponds to the major content patch mentioned as expected in the beta, and should be updated to reflect that. This link can be used as a source/reference: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23094049316&postId=243993487492&sid=5000#10
Cavillis ( talk) 22:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know how to update it on the main page and I don't really feel the urge to educate my self about it. Since people working on this wiki are probably big fans of the game: Here is the link where I uploaded it http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/8946/sc2m.png If you feel like mentioning my nickname its Polymorpher . Cheers. (You are welcome to delete this message when the image is included at the wiki) [July,23,2010] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.78.147.183 ( talk) 19:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Why is Kevin Costner on the cover? Terranmeapart ( talk) 07:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Why isn't it going to be released in China? All of the source doesn't indicate that it isn't going to be released in China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) is a part of China 58.9.204.175 ( talk) 05:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I added that Patch 9 added a map editor and updated the patch count to 10 (effective about an hour or so ago). Don't know the right way to cite so copied another citation and it came out wonky. Someone should fix it. Also fix this section if I put it in wrong. thx. Slackmaster K 09:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Check out this blog post on StarCraft 2. 192.118.11.112 ( talk) 21:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Any one have the official system requirements? It should be for the finalized version. Iys best for it to be cited to the official website. 76.21.122.234 ( talk) 03:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok i downloaded the patch witch allowed the map editor but how to i access it? 97.81.53.142 ( talk) 00:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
it is in the same folder as the main exe. the file that runs the editor is called starcraft 2 editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 08:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
It appears that Blizzard has censored parts of the game (specifically, recoloured the blood and removed swearing & smoking from the cut-scenes) and got away with a 12 from the South Korean ratings board. Source. Delusibeta ( talk) 19:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up: There is discussion about editing the critisism section of this article ongoing at http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128316. Arthena (talk) 07:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
A large part of the discussion on the TeamLiquid site was on improving the criticism section to meet wikipedia's standards and to edit out any bias appearing in the text. The website is well known for giving honest and direct feedback to Blizzard including a large amount of help with the Beta version of Starcraft 2. Overall the discussion has vastly improved the new criticism section. Zuchinni one ( talk) 08:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
This keeps getting added and subtracted, so after watching this for the last few hours I've fully protected the article for three days so we can:
I have no strong feelings on the matter, but I do want to see some decision on the matter by the time the protection ends. TomStar81 ( Talk) 08:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Here is a list of the current articles that may be suitable reference material for the criticism section.
-The original Frank Pearce interview:
http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/270/blizzards-frank-pearce-interview
-An INC Gamers article on the petitions to include LAN support:
http://www.incgamers.com/News/17162/Thousands-Petition-Blizzard-For-StarCraft-LAN
-An INC Gamers article on the lack of even Semi-LAN support:
http://www.incgamers.com/News/22943/not-even-semi-lan-in-starcraft-ii
-A Game Rant article discussing the lack of LAN:
http://gamerant.com/blizzard-starcraft-2-no-lan-js-23284/
-An INC Gamers article on the region locking issue:
http://www.incgamers.com/News/22928/no-intercontinental-starcraft-ii-friendships
-A GX interview with Kevin Yu of Blizzard discussing region lock:
http://www.gx.com.sg/Blog/Blog.aspx?id=cee4cc72-d74f-4837-8e9e-d25983a2e67e
-A Gosu Gamers article discussing the lack of cross-region play & how that will effect the competitive scene. It also briefly discusses the lack of chat rooms:
http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12068-battle-net-2-0-what-are-we-missing
-A kotaku article about the lack of LAN play:
http://kotaku.com/5304113/no-lan-play-for-starcraft-ii
-A Gossip Gamers article about lack of LAN play:
http://www.gossipgamers.com/blizzards-response-to-no-lan-support-for-starcraft-2/
-An article on Starcraft-Fans giving Blizzard's response to LAN requests:
http://www.starcraft-fans.com/page/Blizzard+Responds+to+No+LAN+Support?t=anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zuchinni one ( talk • contribs) 21:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Here's the best solution I see. There's no dispute that the LAN issue needs to be covered (its already touched upon in the article), this is about how it is covered. The lack of LAN is still part of the development narrative; it, the reaction to it ( properly sourced) and Blizzard's response to that are all still development information. Nevertheless, I think we could get a good paragraph, possibly two, out of available sources. However, any top-level section heading that indicates weight on either positive or negative aspects in such a manner, such as the troll-magnet titles "Criticism" or "Controversy" is a very bad idea for this case, especially given that the article isn't in great condition at the moment anyway.
What I'd suggest is to put it in a sub-section heading within the development section entitled "Lack of LAN play", "Multiplayer production", or some variant on that. Doing that would provide a neutral structure, satisfying WP:NPOV, for discussing the whole LAN issue. That way, it still gets a section all to itself, but is integrated properly.
Lets have a look at sourcing:
That leaves IGN, Kotaku and Incgamers, and tentatively GX. There's some more decent references from GameSpot and Ars Technica in the article already as a start towards more mainstream stuff, which I'm confident exists. I'm sure something can be put together out of those. -- Sabre ( talk) 22:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
This article currently lacks a reception section, which is listed as essential content in the video game article guidelines, and, after quickly skimming through the article history, it seems that it has never had such a section. Could someone with editing rights add a {{ game cleanup}} tag to the article? -- Gordon Ecker ( talk) 08:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
It occurs to me that perhaps the best thing to do would be to write a brief bit about the reception of the Beta, which was very positive overall, as a sub-section of the Beta section. And then have a sentence or two about the criticism along with all appropriate references from RSs.
Something like:
The wording here might have too much bias so I welcome suggestions on improving it.
Thoughts? Zuchinni one ( talk) 02:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm interested in hearing if anyone would object to creating a page notice for the article, perhaps something like:
IMPORTANT:
PLEASE READ BEFORE EDITING: 1. DO NOT INSERT ANY INFORMATION READ ON FANSITES, except when such information can be sourced by reliable sources, or has been released by Blizzard OFFICIALLY! 2. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, INFORMATION ADDED TO THIS PAGE SHOULD HAVE ITS SOURCE LISTED USING THE <ref> TAG. Information added to this page without a source is subject to removal from the article at any Wikipedian's discretion. 3. DO NOT ADD A CRITICISM SECTION TO THIS ARTICLE. As per consensus reached on the talk page no such section will be added to the article until after the release of the game. Any attempt made to add a criticism section to this article will be reverted immediately. |
What do y'all think? Is this worth pursuing? TomStar81 ( Talk) 08:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC) Would prefer something to the tune of:
Please read before editing:
|
based on what i have found out it is online only. there is however a guest mode where people can play single player online without an account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 11:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
To validate the game, a battle.net account and connection is required. An offline single-player mode will be available, but only after valdation. 74.88.105.35 ( talk) 19:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC) i read a faq on blizzards forums that say that it is online only. i do however understand that people refuse to believe it. most people on the hive workshop also refuse to believe that it is online only.
i have used the editor myself so i can tell that is simply called the starcraft 2 editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 11:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Blizzard has confirmed that the official name for the editor will be the Galaxy Editor. What was seen was simply a title for the application window. 88.151.126.254 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC). the fact is that is called the starcraft 2 editor, live with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 08:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Let's avoid some form of flame war, but here's a reliable source for the official title for the map editor in Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty being called the Galaxy Map Editor.
Read post #3, posted by a blizzard poster Furthermore, the programming language used in the editor is called Galaxy.
See question #1 I am not saying that Blizzard does not use several names for the tool used to edit the game, but the Galaxy Editor seems to be the successor to StarEdit. 75.67.82.245 ( talk) 18:08, 5 July 2010 (UTC) i currently use the editor. there isnt any galaxy in the editors name. on the european forum of the beta it is called the starcraft 2 map editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 ( talk) 19:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC) the game have been released and the editor is called the starcraft II editor. please correct the error in the article.
Will there be released a game for Mac OSX and one for Windows - or will there be only one release which works on both platforms? -- Lindberg ( talk) 21:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
the system requirements shouldnt include a dvd drive because there will be a digital version which will be released on the same day but 10 am pacific time.the dvd drive should be listed as optional —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xboi209 ( talk • contribs) 07:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/launch?ref=/sc2/en/ http://www.facebook.com/#!/StarCraft
The game was released today, Tuesday, July 27, 2010 in Southeast Asia. It is not 'currently under development' - the game is live, as Blizzard has announced. 99.178.100.125 ( talk) 16:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone who's been playing the game have the time to spare to flesh out the campaign? It's been half a day and a lot of people are bound to start looking for this site to know what the plot line is all about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.201.36.162 ( talk) 14:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I heard the game is a computerized version of the Warhammer 40k table-top game (with Warcraft being similarly a computerized version of the original Warhammer table-top game). Not sure where or if this origin of the game should be mentioned in article. C3ndy99 ( talk) 01:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2010/07/29/128846098/starcraft-placeholder
Check out the above link. It's clear that the media has noticed that Starcraft:Broodwar was a major e-sport (especially in S. Korea), and it looks like SC2 might be following suit.
Any thoughts on adding a section about the pro-scene or e-sports?
Zuchinni one ( talk) 13:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey all,
A recent edit of mine using an RS of a negative review of SC2 was undone recently.
Here was the original edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty&diff=376243669&oldid=376239680
The removal occurred here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty&diff=376247787&oldid=376246742
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty&diff=376246742&oldid=376243746
I don't want to get into an edit war, but there wasn't any clear reasoning for why the review was removed. This is an encyclopedia, we need to stay WP:NPOV and cannot take sides. I personally love starcraft and starcraft 2, but the negative reviews have just as much of a place in this article as the positive reviews.
Lets keep this discussion open and stay NPOV.
Zuchinni one ( talk) 12:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't be concerned with negative reviews getting removed in gernal, not on my watch. But in reality, it's most likely just going to get replaced, and in this recent case the inclusion of that image was very unnecessary. Stabby Joe ( talk) 16:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Here's a few links with some basic info on Map Making including quotes from Blizzard and the limits placed on new maps. "The storage limit for each user is 20MB in total. Up to 5 maps or mods, each with size no more than 10MB."
I don't have time to add it now, but wanted to throw it out there if someone else feels like doing it.
http://starcraft.incgamers.com/blog/comments/starcraft-ii-map-publishing-intro/
http://www.blizzblues.com/us/starcraft-ii-map-publishing-a-primer-25026453020.html
http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12022-blizzard-posts-a-guide-to-map-publishing
http://sclegacy.com/articles/730-battlenet-20-concerns#Map%20Making/Editor%20Issues -- This link is a fairly expansive article, but it does contain good info towards the end regarding map making.
Zuchinni one ( talk) 14:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The lack of chat rooms, cross-region play, cross-game chat, LAN, being released as one third of the game it should be, $60 instead of $50, and several other Battle.net 2.0 and StarCraft II criticisms should be added.-- SaturnElite ( talk) 19:19, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Theres actually alot of controversy coming from custom mapmakers due to imposed restrictions from many angles.
20mb overall map space limit, 10mb map space limit, 5 maps only , popularity system blocks new ppl from joining newly published games. complicated map editor , inappropriate content filter , ban to publishing without reason , no lobby options to change teams once saturated, or kick. 30second countdown (10 or less should be needed). this is just a rough compilation. checkout battle net forums under custom maps to see more details.
99.251.195.19 (
talk) 06:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I've seen these issues mentioned in numerous SC2 articles. Here is one where map-making problems are the focus: http://kotaku.com/5605333/blizzard-policing-inappropriate-starcraft-ii-maps-because-they-can Zuchinni one ( talk) 23:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I would like to see a website list of trusted community sites for Starcraft 2.
For World of Warcraft, I see that wow.com and mmo-champion.com are great companions for news and info about WoW, and wowhead.com has emerged as the best online resource for detailed item information as well as stats testing via their profile section.
But there doesn't seem to be a clear community site through Google or noted in the SC2 Wikipedia section and this is pretty valuable info that I would like to see, considering that many listings in Google at the moment are going to lead to sites with potentially false info, or even malware/trojan/virus hazards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.195.203 ( talk) 16:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't really do much editing on wikipedia. That said, it seems like the article would be much more useful with more external links added at the bottom. Besides the official website, I'd love to see some links to starcraft specific wikis that have more detailed information on units and strategy, as well as an aggregate review site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.123.179 ( talk) 15:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
So apparently Blizzard has acknowledged that there is a problem with the way that certain portions of the game are rendered and this has been causing some graphics cards to overheat. This should be fixed in an upcoming patch so I'm not sure if it deserves mention in the article. But I wanted to put it out there for discussion.
Here are some relevant links:
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/223306,how-to-dust-away-starcraft-2-overheating-issues.aspx
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=258215
http://www.geek.com/articles/games/starcraft-ii-menu-screen-are-overheating-pcs-20100729/
Zuchinni one ( talk) 17:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
As someone who knows about computer hardware and software I find this section a little alarmist this is only an issue because of the huge popularity of the game. 1.5M+ games were sold the first day (and that's not counting South East Asia,) statistically speaking a few hundred people with computer failures out of millions seems reasonable to me.
datth a technical support employee at Blizzard posted this --- http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/248296509?page=3#54 "As other users have said, the upkeep of your hardware is your responsibility. There isn't a bug in programming code that would cause your hardware to overheat or die unless it was already on its way out. Nothing can help a ticking time bomb. We've offered two variables to cap the rate at which you render the game for less than optimal cooling conditions (for example, my media center box in a Mozart Sx HTPC case, where my 8800 is on a riser card and it's barely hovering over the entire motherboard) but what you do with the rest is up to you.
There's a hard cap on your GPU and memory frequency set by your manufacturer and that serves as a protection mechanism. That and their cooling solution they use keeps the card in working condition when it's clean and has good air flow. StarCraft II (or World of Warcraft since we had a few people say the same thing about it) does not change your GPU/memory clock speeds so it can only go up until the video card's upper bounds when it is not bottlenecked by your CPU. You're supposed to plateau out heat-wise as you can't push instructions thru the chip and memory at a higher rate.
If your hardware is damaged, you need to go talk to the damaged part's manufacturer and see if you can get help there." - Navitron ( talk) 12:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
I think its very doubtful to only cite "official" gaming authorities on reviews. At least someone should reflect on that 52% of people on Amazon are totally dissatisfied with their buy.