I would like to know what is the major difference between this and the original because it seems like the same thing to me other than the obvious lego art system they have going here. From what I understand each race has a few new abilities and they added a single player campaign that took them 10 years to make ?
Development of games goes on and off with some companies, and most likely there was a large period of time when development of StarCraft 2 was halted. I'm personally glad it was stopped because it allowed it to be a beautiful game unlike some of the earlier RTS's of the 3-D era.
It's a sequel, you should expect A LOT of similarities. Three distinct races is enough so I'm glad they hadn't added a new race at this time. I'm personally happy that a StarCraft sequel has been made and that it is not a huge change from the original. I'm sure a lot of StarCraft players out there are very happy how it's coming out. Players posting beta videos on YouTube, forumers and articles all agree that this game, just like the original StarCraft, will be the RTS king for one more decade.
I've been playing the beta for this the last few weeks and about 7 of us in Inquisition have keys at present time. I was debating doing a write up about the game, but wasn;t sure if there was enough interst by members of this site. There is no NDA, and I have screenshots, so maybe I will put something together if the interest is here.
Originally posted by SaintViktor I would like to know what is the major difference between this and the original because it seems like the same thing to me other than the obvious lego art system they have going here. From what I understand each race has a few new abilities and they added a single player campaign that took them 10 years to make ?
Well that's what disappointed me (I'm part of the Beta). It didn't feel new to me. It still plays the same and I can clearly say that some are gonna use the current strategies they use in SC1. Sure it got time to change after all, we're still in the closed beta but well, the old SC1 feel is there and it can be played the same.
Main difference is they changed most units and what they can do. So you got to learn those a bit before really seeing much of the game. But if you feel like it, you can make a swarm of Protoss Carrier with a mothership and destroy the enemy base if the game last long enough for that.
Or do a zerg rush if you want a quite short game. As for the AI, what we have last time I played was the most easiest and basic AI that could be choose in any RTS games.
So with that, I'm simply looking forward to the Map Editor and see what can be taken from there and the various balance patch that Blizzard will get out until the game is out on the market to see if it's worth that wait and the price.
If MMORPG.com hasn't posted a news story you've encountered on the internet regarding an MMORPG, then why not submit it as a tip to the Newsroom?
My tips get published regularly, you might see "Thanks for the tip from Xobdar123!" at the bottom of some news pieces, and you'll notice that my title is "Tipster."
I want a title...even if it is miserable b&st%rd or even PITA!
I would like to know what is the major difference between this and the original because it seems like the same thing to me other than the obvious lego art system they have going here. From what I understand each race has a few new abilities and they added a single player campaign that took them 10 years to make ?
I can clearly say that some are gonna use the current strategies they use in SC1.
That's already been thrown out of the window. Strategies that worked in SC1 often times do not work in SC2. Not at the higher level of play at least.
I've been playing the beta for this the last few weeks and about 7 of us in Inquisition have keys at present time. I was debating doing a write up about the game, but wasn;t sure if there was enough interst by members of this site. There is no NDA, and I have screenshots, so maybe I will put something together if the interest is here.
Please do put something together. I'm willing to read such a "rant."
Want to see some plat league (high skill level) players go at with commentry? I've been watching these since beta started and learned loads of play styles ready for retail.
I've been playing the beta for this the last few weeks and about 7 of us in Inquisition have keys at present time. I was debating doing a write up about the game, but wasn;t sure if there was enough interst by members of this site. There is no NDA, and I have screenshots, so maybe I will put something together if the interest is here.
Please do put something together. I'm willing to read such a "rant."
Wouldn't be a rant unless we are talking about how terrible I am at the game lol, would be more of a beta review / preview.
Though, its alot more fast paced than SC1, the adrenaline rush after 10 mins+ play in the old game, is now there after only a few minutes.. it seems to have opened up alot more for different strategies, and the graphics are nice.
For me, its alittle too fast paced and i feel like I have my head held down to the screen.. i keep wanting to zoom out, but cant. The units seem too big for the zoom limits.. but thats probably just me wanting it to be SC1.
Still plays alot like sc1, which I must admit, had me bored after a week of play.. but ill prob come back for more.
I'll agree with one of the comments made on the first page stating it's wrong of the reviewer to make such an article only having had 15 minutes with a game you truly require at minimum 20+ hours playing to really understand... and to those moaning about it not being an MMO grow up, who cares.
I’ve been in the SC2 Beta since about the second – third wave of invites; that means I’ve seen the game evolve from nearly the beginning of the Beta patches to where it is now. The changes are generally small such as a unit gaining 10HP or losing X amount of damage or lowering / raising a unit cost, but you need to remember even the smallest of changes can drastically affect the balance in an RTS… so Blizzard is being very careful with what they do. The last patch has seen one of the most drastic changes made to the game where an ability a Terran unit had by default became one requiring an upgrade, do I agree with the change? Sure, I’ll admit this unit was before the change a topic if much debate on the Beta forums… moral of the story is I’m sure we’ll be seeing similar changes in the future, changes that are a little more drastic than the little changes listed near the top of this section.
The game is well balanced, has been throughout Beta really… at least in my opinion there has never been a time in Beta when one race was obviously so much better than the others; I play “random” race all the time, so I’d like to claim I know what I’m talking about in that regard. My favorite race would be Terran, why? Because I feel they have the most diversity in “affective units”… that diversity makes them extremely fun to play yet at the same time very difficult since you’ll be trying to manage all your unit’s different abilities at once, and let’s just say since the game is very fast paced you may only have seconds to issue the commands that determine your winning the battle or losing. Protoss can also be diverse, and they do have one of the “cheapest” abilities in the game you should all remember from SC1, Psionic Storm… so I’d classify them as my second favorite race. Zerg… this one is hard to describe because in my eyes they are the easiest of the races to play because they don’t have very much diversity in affective units, and like the first game they are easy to mass units with (More so because of the Queen unit now). If a player allows me to get a good economy going there is a slim chance I’ll lose as Zerg, however in saying that I feel they are also the weakest race out of the three because their “hard counters” to Terran / Protoss units just don’t match the many counters the other two races have against Zerg… so as confusing as this may sound Zerg is both the easiest to play and the weakest out of the races, don’t think so? Well then good thing this is my opinion and not yours.
Much of what the article goes through I don’t feel the need to go through again (T1-T3 units), however I will say many games don’t go beyond T2, and if you're Zerg there is almost no reason to get to T3 except for upgrades. Most games are ended with a rush, rushing like the first game is the preferred way to win a match… at least in 2v2 it is; in saying that about rushes I have been noticing the patches recently have been trying to slow down certain rush tactics that were being used in Beta, they haven’t been stopping rushes… only changing how people rush. The maps thus far are great… though I’m sure anyone in Beta will agree whoever made the map “Twilight Fortress” should be shot, why? Because it reminds us of money maps from the first game, ZC and BGH should NEVER be created again.
In the end the game is great; SC2 even in Beta form is by far my favorite game to play. It’s an adrenaline rush from beginning to end that never gets old because of the vast amount of ways a match can play through… for people wondering what the next big competitive RTS is, look no further this is it; with the ranking system in place people will always play people of their skill level. (Not working in Beta as well because of the lack of people)
P.S. If you want someone to write about SC2 at least get someone in Beta to do it.
@Bainwalker - Thanks so much for ther heads up on everything. I admit threse days I been a tad harsh on Blizzard because they take too damn long to make games but in the end, Starcraft is Starcraft and I'll be there at launch.
@Bainwalker - Thanks so much for ther heads up on everything. I admit threse days I been a tad harsh on Blizzard because they take too damn long to make games but in the end, Starcraft is Starcraft and I'll be there at launch.
I could likely write up to ten pages worth of material for SC2 if I took the time to do it, what a posted here is just what little I felt I could add to try and make the article more viable for people who haven't played.
I'll agree with one of the comments made on the first page stating it's wrong of the reviewer to make such an article only having had 15 minutes with a game you truly require at minimum 20+ hours playing to really understand... and to those moaning about it not being an MMO grow up, who cares.
I’ve been in the SC2 Beta since about the second – third wave of invites; that means I’ve seen the game evolve from nearly the beginning of the Beta patches to where it is now. The changes are generally small such as a unit gaining 10HP or losing X amount of damage or lowering / raising a unit cost, but you need to remember even the smallest of changes can drastically affect the balance in an RTS… so Blizzard is being very careful with what they do. The last patch has seen one of the most drastic changes made to the game where an ability a Terran unit had by default became one requiring an upgrade, do I agree with the change? Sure, I’ll admit this unit was before the change a topic if much debate on the Beta forums… moral of the story is I’m sure we’ll be seeing similar changes in the future, changes that are a little more drastic than the little changes listed near the top of this section.
The game is well balanced, has been throughout Beta really… at least in my opinion there has never been a time in Beta when one race was obviously so much better than the others; I play “random” race all the time, so I’d like to claim I know what I’m talking about in that regard. My favorite race would be Terran, why? Because I feel they have the most diversity in “affective units”… that diversity makes them extremely fun to play yet at the same time very difficult since you’ll be trying to manage all your unit’s different abilities at once, and let’s just say since the game is very fast paced you may only have seconds to issue the commands that determine your winning the battle or losing. Protoss can also be diverse, and they do have one of the “cheapest” abilities in the game you should all remember from SC1, Psionic Storm… so I’d classify them as my second favorite race. Zerg… this one is hard to describe because in my eyes they are the easiest of the races to play because they don’t have very much diversity in affective units, and like the first game they are easy to mass units with (More so because of the Queen unit now). If a player allows me to get a good economy going there is a slim chance I’ll lose as Zerg, however in saying that I feel they are also the weakest race out of the three because their “hard counters” to Terran / Protoss units just don’t match the many counters the other two races have against Zerg… so as confusing as this may sound Zerg is both the easiest to play and the weakest out of the races, don’t think so? Well then good thing this is my opinion and not yours.
Much of what the article goes through I don’t feel the need to go through again (T1-T3 units), however I will say many games don’t go beyond T2, and if you're Zerg there is almost no reason to get to T3 except for upgrades. Most games are ended with a rush, rushing like the first game is the preferred way to win a match… at least in 2v2 it is; in saying that about rushes I have been noticing the patches recently have been trying to slow down certain rush tactics that were being used in Beta, they haven’t been stopping rushes… only changing how people rush. The maps thus far are great… though I’m sure anyone in Beta will agree whoever made the map “Twilight Fortress” should be shot, why? Because it reminds us of money maps from the first game, ZC and BGH should NEVER be created again.
In the end the game is great; SC2 even in Beta form is by far my favorite game to play. It’s an adrenaline rush from beginning to end that never gets old because of the vast amount of ways a match can play through… for people wondering what the next big competitive RTS is, look no further this is it; with the ranking system in place people will always play people of their skill level. (Not working in Beta as well because of the lack of people)
P.S. If you want someone to write about SC2 at least get someone in Beta to do it.
There is 10 times more useful information in this post that in the paid article of the OP.
Indeed 15 minutes played isn't worth anything.
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
I've been playing the beta for this the last few weeks and about 7 of us in Inquisition have keys at present time. I was debating doing a write up about the game, but wasn;t sure if there was enough interst by members of this site. There is no NDA, and I have screenshots, so maybe I will put something together if the interest is here.
Yes please, I'd be interested in reading what you have to say about it.
Guys, we're not listing the game, we're just doing an article on it. If you think a ton of MMO gamers aren't also looking toward Blizzard's RTS, you're wrong. We do our best to bring stories that are going to be of interest to our readers and we think that this is. We did the same thing with Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age.
If you're not interested in reading about non-MMOs, then don't click on it.
"We did the same thing with Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age."
Get ready for the Starcraft 2 adverts on mmorpg.com
@Bainwalker - Thanks so much for ther heads up on everything. I admit threse days I been a tad harsh on Blizzard because they take too damn long to make games but in the end, Starcraft is Starcraft and I'll be there at launch.
I could likely write up to ten pages worth of material for SC2 if I took the time to do it, what a posted here is just what little I felt I could add to try and make the article more viable for people who haven't played.
As a big fan of the first game I'd like to know what the major gameplay differences are between the two games. I know there will be a lot of similar features, after all it is a sequel, but is there anything that really separates the two games other than graphics? If you have time I'd love to read any information you could provide.
I'll agree with one of the comments made on the first page stating it's wrong of the reviewer to make such an article only having had 15 minutes with a game you truly require at minimum 20+ hours playing to really understand... and to those moaning about it not being an MMO grow up, who cares.
I’ve been in the SC2 Beta since about the second – third wave of invites; that means I’ve seen the game evolve from nearly the beginning of the Beta patches to where it is now. The changes are generally small such as a unit gaining 10HP or losing X amount of damage or lowering / raising a unit cost, but you need to remember even the smallest of changes can drastically affect the balance in an RTS… so Blizzard is being very careful with what they do. The last patch has seen one of the most drastic changes made to the game where an ability a Terran unit had by default became one requiring an upgrade, do I agree with the change? Sure, I’ll admit this unit was before the change a topic if much debate on the Beta forums… moral of the story is I’m sure we’ll be seeing similar changes in the future, changes that are a little more drastic than the little changes listed near the top of this section.
The game is well balanced, has been throughout Beta really… at least in my opinion there has never been a time in Beta when one race was obviously so much better than the others; I play “random” race all the time, so I’d like to claim I know what I’m talking about in that regard. My favorite race would be Terran, why? Because I feel they have the most diversity in “affective units”… that diversity makes them extremely fun to play yet at the same time very difficult since you’ll be trying to manage all your unit’s different abilities at once, and let’s just say since the game is very fast paced you may only have seconds to issue the commands that determine your winning the battle or losing. Protoss can also be diverse, and they do have one of the “cheapest” abilities in the game you should all remember from SC1, Psionic Storm… so I’d classify them as my second favorite race. Zerg… this one is hard to describe because in my eyes they are the easiest of the races to play because they don’t have very much diversity in affective units, and like the first game they are easy to mass units with (More so because of the Queen unit now). If a player allows me to get a good economy going there is a slim chance I’ll lose as Zerg, however in saying that I feel they are also the weakest race out of the three because their “hard counters” to Terran / Protoss units just don’t match the many counters the other two races have against Zerg… so as confusing as this may sound Zerg is both the easiest to play and the weakest out of the races, don’t think so? Well then good thing this is my opinion and not yours.
Much of what the article goes through I don’t feel the need to go through again (T1-T3 units), however I will say many games don’t go beyond T2, and if you're Zerg there is almost no reason to get to T3 except for upgrades. Most games are ended with a rush, rushing like the first game is the preferred way to win a match… at least in 2v2 it is; in saying that about rushes I have been noticing the patches recently have been trying to slow down certain rush tactics that were being used in Beta, they haven’t been stopping rushes… only changing how people rush. The maps thus far are great… though I’m sure anyone in Beta will agree whoever made the map “Twilight Fortress” should be shot, why? Because it reminds us of money maps from the first game, ZC and BGH should NEVER be created again.
In the end the game is great; SC2 even in Beta form is by far my favorite game to play. It’s an adrenaline rush from beginning to end that never gets old because of the vast amount of ways a match can play through… for people wondering what the next big competitive RTS is, look no further this is it; with the ranking system in place people will always play people of their skill level. (Not working in Beta as well because of the lack of people)
P.S. If you want someone to write about SC2 at least get someone in Beta to do it.
There is 10 times more useful information in this post that in the paid article of the OP.
Indeed 15 minutes played isn't worth anything.
Don't get me into your dispute with the editor, The OP / Article is all he could do with the time he had. Though I will suggest to the person who wrote the OP to avoid getting into these situations and not post such articles if indeed he gets paid to make them. Write about something you know more of so you earn the money you're paid.
@Bainwalker - Thanks so much for ther heads up on everything. I admit threse days I been a tad harsh on Blizzard because they take too damn long to make games but in the end, Starcraft is Starcraft and I'll be there at launch.
I could likely write up to ten pages worth of material for SC2 if I took the time to do it, what a posted here is just what little I felt I could add to try and make the article more viable for people who haven't played.
As a big fan of the first game I'd like to know what the major gameplay differences are between the two games. I know there will be a lot of similar features, after all it is a sequel, but is there anything that really separates the two games other than graphics? If you have time I'd love to read any information you could provide.
Suppose I best start writing then, I'll try to have it done tonight and posted... somewhere.
Now before calling me a douche as chief editor... tell me about which part of the article was actually worth the read?
Was it informative? Was it something worthwhile "knowing someone somewhere played for 15 minutes".
And that " if you enjoyed the first one, you're going to love the second one."
What did we learn except for the fact there was a title, a confession of someone playing for 15 minutes and ... that's about it.
I learned more from the reaction by the chief editor.
Not classy at all.
I didn't call you a douche, I said you were being a douche. And you were.
You didn't enjoy the article, that's fine. It was clearly labelled as a hands-on demo. The value was in hearing one of our site's writers' experience and impressions of the fifteen minutes of gameplay he had.
You're not the only person that reads articles on this site, and there are those who have read it and enjoyed it. While you're perfectly free to not like something, there are ways to voice it other than to insult the author. So come on down off of your high horse and make a rational argument that consists of more than a mistaking insinuation that because you didn't like an article, that no one will.
And for the record, my title is Managing Editor, I'm not sure what a chief editor is.
Comments
No! This is Sparta!!!
*kicks you into a well*
Uhh... what?
Development of games goes on and off with some companies, and most likely there was a large period of time when development of StarCraft 2 was halted. I'm personally glad it was stopped because it allowed it to be a beautiful game unlike some of the earlier RTS's of the 3-D era.
It's a sequel, you should expect A LOT of similarities. Three distinct races is enough so I'm glad they hadn't added a new race at this time. I'm personally happy that a StarCraft sequel has been made and that it is not a huge change from the original. I'm sure a lot of StarCraft players out there are very happy how it's coming out. Players posting beta videos on YouTube, forumers and articles all agree that this game, just like the original StarCraft, will be the RTS king for one more decade.
I've been playing the beta for this the last few weeks and about 7 of us in Inquisition have keys at present time. I was debating doing a write up about the game, but wasn;t sure if there was enough interst by members of this site. There is no NDA, and I have screenshots, so maybe I will put something together if the interest is here.
TwitchTV Partnered Streamer
MMORPG.com Spotlight Blog Writer
Co-Leader of Inquisition
Youtube Channel
Well that's what disappointed me (I'm part of the Beta). It didn't feel new to me. It still plays the same and I can clearly say that some are gonna use the current strategies they use in SC1. Sure it got time to change after all, we're still in the closed beta but well, the old SC1 feel is there and it can be played the same.
Main difference is they changed most units and what they can do. So you got to learn those a bit before really seeing much of the game. But if you feel like it, you can make a swarm of Protoss Carrier with a mothership and destroy the enemy base if the game last long enough for that.
Or do a zerg rush if you want a quite short game. As for the AI, what we have last time I played was the most easiest and basic AI that could be choose in any RTS games.
So with that, I'm simply looking forward to the Map Editor and see what can be taken from there and the various balance patch that Blizzard will get out until the game is out on the market to see if it's worth that wait and the price.
I want a title...even if it is miserable b&st%rd or even PITA!
That's already been thrown out of the window. Strategies that worked in SC1 often times do not work in SC2. Not at the higher level of play at least.
Please do put something together. I'm willing to read such a "rant."
Want to see some plat league (high skill level) players go at with commentry? I've been watching these since beta started and learned loads of play styles ready for retail.
Sub to these guys utube channels
http://www.youtube.com/user/BlizShouter
http://www.youtube.com/user/HuskyStarcraft
Dear god I can't wait to drop 8 archons into someone's mining base and watch all their drones get mutilated.
And this most certainly is an MMORPG.....The role I took on was "Zerg-Destroyer".
Ugh...at some point Devs will look outside the box.
Wouldn't be a rant unless we are talking about how terrible I am at the game lol, would be more of a beta review / preview.
Regardless I'll see what I can do!
TwitchTV Partnered Streamer
MMORPG.com Spotlight Blog Writer
Co-Leader of Inquisition
Youtube Channel
Im in the beta, and its nice
Though, its alot more fast paced than SC1, the adrenaline rush after 10 mins+ play in the old game, is now there after only a few minutes.. it seems to have opened up alot more for different strategies, and the graphics are nice.
For me, its alittle too fast paced and i feel like I have my head held down to the screen.. i keep wanting to zoom out, but cant. The units seem too big for the zoom limits.. but thats probably just me wanting it to be SC1.
Still plays alot like sc1, which I must admit, had me bored after a week of play.. but ill prob come back for more.
Played SC1, thought it was "meh", moved on to Age of Empires II.
Played Dawn of War, fell in love.
Play(ing) Dawn of War II, still love it.
I'll try SC2, though.
While we're on the subject.... If anyone has an extra beta key like a friend invite, let me know. I'd love you forever.
I'll agree with one of the comments made on the first page stating it's wrong of the reviewer to make such an article only having had 15 minutes with a game you truly require at minimum 20+ hours playing to really understand... and to those moaning about it not being an MMO grow up, who cares.
I’ve been in the SC2 Beta since about the second – third wave of invites; that means I’ve seen the game evolve from nearly the beginning of the Beta patches to where it is now. The changes are generally small such as a unit gaining 10HP or losing X amount of damage or lowering / raising a unit cost, but you need to remember even the smallest of changes can drastically affect the balance in an RTS… so Blizzard is being very careful with what they do. The last patch has seen one of the most drastic changes made to the game where an ability a Terran unit had by default became one requiring an upgrade, do I agree with the change? Sure, I’ll admit this unit was before the change a topic if much debate on the Beta forums… moral of the story is I’m sure we’ll be seeing similar changes in the future, changes that are a little more drastic than the little changes listed near the top of this section.
The game is well balanced, has been throughout Beta really… at least in my opinion there has never been a time in Beta when one race was obviously so much better than the others; I play “random” race all the time, so I’d like to claim I know what I’m talking about in that regard. My favorite race would be Terran, why? Because I feel they have the most diversity in “affective units”… that diversity makes them extremely fun to play yet at the same time very difficult since you’ll be trying to manage all your unit’s different abilities at once, and let’s just say since the game is very fast paced you may only have seconds to issue the commands that determine your winning the battle or losing. Protoss can also be diverse, and they do have one of the “cheapest” abilities in the game you should all remember from SC1, Psionic Storm… so I’d classify them as my second favorite race. Zerg… this one is hard to describe because in my eyes they are the easiest of the races to play because they don’t have very much diversity in affective units, and like the first game they are easy to mass units with (More so because of the Queen unit now). If a player allows me to get a good economy going there is a slim chance I’ll lose as Zerg, however in saying that I feel they are also the weakest race out of the three because their “hard counters” to Terran / Protoss units just don’t match the many counters the other two races have against Zerg… so as confusing as this may sound Zerg is both the easiest to play and the weakest out of the races, don’t think so? Well then good thing this is my opinion and not yours.
Much of what the article goes through I don’t feel the need to go through again (T1-T3 units), however I will say many games don’t go beyond T2, and if you're Zerg there is almost no reason to get to T3 except for upgrades. Most games are ended with a rush, rushing like the first game is the preferred way to win a match… at least in 2v2 it is; in saying that about rushes I have been noticing the patches recently have been trying to slow down certain rush tactics that were being used in Beta, they haven’t been stopping rushes… only changing how people rush. The maps thus far are great… though I’m sure anyone in Beta will agree whoever made the map “Twilight Fortress” should be shot, why? Because it reminds us of money maps from the first game, ZC and BGH should NEVER be created again.
In the end the game is great; SC2 even in Beta form is by far my favorite game to play. It’s an adrenaline rush from beginning to end that never gets old because of the vast amount of ways a match can play through… for people wondering what the next big competitive RTS is, look no further this is it; with the ranking system in place people will always play people of their skill level. (Not working in Beta as well because of the lack of people)
P.S. If you want someone to write about SC2 at least get someone in Beta to do it.
Full Sail University - Game Design
I've gotten warnings for less. Nice.
@Bainwalker - Thanks so much for ther heads up on everything. I admit threse days I been a tad harsh on Blizzard because they take too damn long to make games but in the end, Starcraft is Starcraft and I'll be there at launch.
I could likely write up to ten pages worth of material for SC2 if I took the time to do it, what a posted here is just what little I felt I could add to try and make the article more viable for people who haven't played.
Full Sail University - Game Design
There is 10 times more useful information in this post that in the paid article of the OP.
Indeed 15 minutes played isn't worth anything.
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
Yes please, I'd be interested in reading what you have to say about it.
"We did the same thing with Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age."
Get ready for the Starcraft 2 adverts on mmorpg.com
You guys are so transparent...
As a big fan of the first game I'd like to know what the major gameplay differences are between the two games. I know there will be a lot of similar features, after all it is a sequel, but is there anything that really separates the two games other than graphics? If you have time I'd love to read any information you could provide.
Don't get me into your dispute with the editor, The OP / Article is all he could do with the time he had. Though I will suggest to the person who wrote the OP to avoid getting into these situations and not post such articles if indeed he gets paid to make them. Write about something you know more of so you earn the money you're paid.
Full Sail University - Game Design
Suppose I best start writing then, I'll try to have it done tonight and posted... somewhere.
Full Sail University - Game Design
I didn't call you a douche, I said you were being a douche. And you were.
You didn't enjoy the article, that's fine. It was clearly labelled as a hands-on demo. The value was in hearing one of our site's writers' experience and impressions of the fifteen minutes of gameplay he had.
You're not the only person that reads articles on this site, and there are those who have read it and enjoyed it. While you're perfectly free to not like something, there are ways to voice it other than to insult the author. So come on down off of your high horse and make a rational argument that consists of more than a mistaking insinuation that because you didn't like an article, that no one will.
And for the record, my title is Managing Editor, I'm not sure what a chief editor is.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com