Starcraft: Ghost

Alright d00ds, start drooling.

Leave it up to Blizzard to rely on brand names rather than originality to sell their games.

Yeah, I just saw that about 20 minutes ago. It looks to be quite entertaining, especially if you're a fan of either Starcraft or Metal Gear Solid. The in-game graphics look amazing, as well as the character and set designs. And considering that it IS Blizzard we are talking about here, you can rest assured that Starcraft:Ghost will just plain rock...

The only thing that worries me is that because it is a "console" game, they MAY decide not to release it on PC. I find that to be a logical improbability, but hey, I'd collapse on the floor if they decided not to. Damn, Starcraft: Ghost, Doom 3...the list is slowly growing...

Leave it up to Blizzard to rely on brand names rather than originality to sell their games.

Ignore my bitching and moaning

AndrewB said:

Leave it up to Blizzard to rely on brand names rather than originality to sell their games.

Doom, Doom II, Final Doom, Doom III. Wolfenstein, Spear of Destiny, Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Quake, Quake II, Quake III, Quake V.

Them too. Blizzard and iD.

But BBG's cousin said there would be no more SC sequels!! This can't be right!!!11 =P

Andrew. Hmm, really original name there.

Names aren't games. They're not supposed to entertain. That's a silly camparison to make.

But you're judging a game based on it's name...

So? That's what I do. There's not any freaking thing else to judge it by, except some pretty pictures which I'm certain have been chosen for their particular greatness.

Judge not, less ye yourself be judged.

Anyways, there's this really really cool but rather old strategy game. It's now been several years after it was released, and an action game spin-off is suddenly announced. Everyone thinks this spin-off will be absolutely amazing, and people start jumping up and down with joy, and doing other celebratory type stuff.

No, I'm talking about SC: Ghost, I'm talking about C&C: Renegade. And I'm surely you all know that everyone who thought that would be amazing was severely disappointed.

Yea, I heard about this like 2 days ago, or was it 1? Meh, I'm excited about this, but not nearly as much as I am for Doom III :)...The list grows longer...

The game is probably going to be good, but it will only be for consoles, so meh :(

It betta be on a Console that I have or I'm gunna go on a Massicure...(if I hear boasts about it about how good it is when it is out.) >:D

DOOM Anomaly said:

It betta be on a Console that I have or I'm gunna go on a Massicure...(if I hear boasts about it about how good it is when it is out.) >:D

Which do you have?

Shaviro said:

Which do you have?

*Shrugs* I got alot of consoles so ill have to wait and see which one Blizz makes it come out for :P

NiGHTMARE said:

No, I'm talking about SC: Ghost, I'm talking about C&C: Renegade. And I'm surely you all know that everyone who thought that would be amazing was severely disappointed.

I don't think you can compare Blizzard with Westwood. Where Blizzard games get better and better, Westwood games becoming worse and worse.

boris said:

I don't think you can compare Blizzard with Westwood. Where Blizzard games get better and better, Westwood games becoming worse and worse.

There's several flaws in that argument:

Eye of the Beholder 2 was better than Eye of the Beholder 1, Kyrandia 2 was better than Kyrandia 1, Red Alert was better than the original C&C, Red Alert 2 was better than Tiberian Sun, Lands of Lore 3 was better than Lands of Lore 2, etc, etc.

boris said:

I don't think you can compare Blizzard with Westwood. Where Blizzard games get better and better, Westwood games becoming worse and worse.

Warcraft 2 was better than Warcraft 1. StarCraft was better than Warcraft*. Warcraft 3 was a _huge: dissapointment.

Shaviro said:

Warcraft 2 was better than Warcraft 1. StarCraft was better than Warcraft*. Warcraft 3 was a _huge: dissapointment.

Haven't tried WarCraft 3 - what's so dissapointing about it?
Oh and to add to this argument: Diablo II was in many ways dissapointing and inferior to Diablo - instead of enhancing on the combat aspect - Diablo 1's combat seemed more realistic because of the shield blocks -, they made the combat less realistic (going back to the totally unrealistic warcraft-style "trade-blows" combat style, and lessening the role of the shield blocking).
And as for the WarCraft games: WarCraft 1 was better than its sequel in some aspects (but I do agree that many basic aspects were better in the sequel) - namely that my favorite ground unit, the Raider/Wolfrider, from the first Warcraft game was ditched in the sequel and replaced by those ugly ogres, bah! And then there's the fact that none of the WII magicians could summon demons/water elementals anymore - Huuuuge dissapointment.

At least these elements were made right in WarCraft 3 as far as I have seen from screenshots/read in various previes or reviews.

Starcraft was better than the WarCraft games yes - there are a few things that disappointed me about it though: Ghosts, who are supposed to be superduper elite soldiers are barely any better than marines, most Protoss units are a pain in the ass to control, terrans fight their own kind far too much in the campaign where they should fight the Zerg a bit more often since it's more satisfying to squash the Zerg.

I actually didnt find much Dissapointing about D2X all that much, except the damned hackers >:(...It seemed better than Okay to me, Hence the I spent 2 years playing it...but Ive cut down on my playing time of it almost entirely; too many hackers, My chars were too good to find any much of a battle, it just gets tidius after a while,no?...This also applies For Diablo, Sc, Sc:BW imo...I havent played any Warcraft games, and I probly wont anytime soon, Meh.

I really enjoy Warcraft 3. It's just takes a little more pratice becuase it's different from any other RTS i've ever played. The races are very well balanced and each have many weaknesses/strengths to explore and work with. I just wish a had more friends to play with, because people on battle.net for WC3 are real assholes.

dsm said:

...terrans fight their own kind far too much in the campaign where they should fight the Zerg a bit more often since it's more satisfying to squash the Zerg.

Dude, what are ya talking about? Zergs were cool, hence my old screenname Lilzergling. It's so funny watching an army of Zerglings and Hydralisks charge at a small platoon (30 or 40 Terran units). The mayhem, oh the mayhem!

Though I didn't play alot of multiplayer games, I tried making some Starcraft maps, and some of them turned out to be ok, but I never sent any of them online. I remember th good ol' days of starcraft... But then I got bored of it after I realised that I've beat the game already...

Lizardcommando said:

Dude, what are ya talking about? Zergs were cool, hence my old screenname Lilzergling. It's so funny watching an army of Zerglings and Hydralisks charge at a small platoon (30 or 40 Terran units). The mayhem, oh the mayhem!

What are you talking about? /me looks at own post
Did I say anything about the zerg not being cool?
/Me looks at own post again, this time harder, fails to see what went wrong.
What I was saying was that the terran campaign got a bit boring because around 85% of the campaign was Terran vs Terran - I wanted to fight the Zerg a lot more, (as well as the Protoss) because nothing in that game is more satisfying than to let your siege tanks squash a zerg hive like a bug. Fighting other terrans with the terrans gets old really quick.
The Terran race was my favorite race because it had the coolest weaponry (Siege tanks anyone?), but the ghosts blow - if they ever make a sequel (a true sequel) to Starcraft, they oughta beef up the ghost enormously - make it a hero unit (like those Warcraft 3 heroes).

This is just my opinion.

dsm said:

What are you talking about? /me looks at own post
Did I say anything about the zerg not being cool?
.

Oops, sorry about that. I guess I misunderstood your post. Apology accepted?

Back on topic though, sure wish starcraft:ghost would go on the PC, but then again, I wouldn't be able to run it on account of my piece of shit computer. I'm guess this game will be on the XBox first, after that, maybe the PS2, but I highly doubt it'll be on the GameCube.

Starcraft:ghost will be released for XBOX , PSX2 and for the cube.

And for the Cube? Wow, now let's hope the orignal contents from the XBox and PS2 stay intact!

Hicks said:

Starcraft:ghost will be released for XBOX , PSX2 and for the cube.

Yay, I have those! Im in Luck!...I think...

Starcraft:ghost will be released for XBOX , PSX2 and for the cube.

Good, because it sure as hell won't run my computer..

I have PS2, but I'd rather have it for the computer.