Starcraft 2 Review Round up

By Jamie Pert - Jul 29, 2010

Ealier this week Blizzard released Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty, so far we have seen a mixture of opinions from user reviews, however now professional and reputable reviews are coming in.

At the time of this post metacritics unique scoring system has given Starcraft 2 a metascore of 97 out of 100 and a user score of 8.5 out of 10, therefore it would be fair to say that a lot of the other criticism we have seen may be a little unjustified.

JoyStiq scored Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty 100/100, they seem happy that Blizzard kept the strong foundations from the original, whilst bringing the franchise up-to-date with today’s impressive graphical expectations, you can see their full review here.

GamingXP scored the game 94/100, GamingXP and pretty much summed things up with this extract from their review “The long time waiting between “StarCraft” and StarCraft II has not been wasted. Flawless gameplay, great graphics and a bombastic atmosphere result in one of the best real-time strategy games in the world.

If you would like to read more views check out NZGamer’s review here and Gameplanet’s detailed review here.

Check out the reviews and then come back and let us know whether you agree with them. Do you think Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty deserves a metascore of 97/100?

Source: Metacritic

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus.

Also See: StarCraft 2: Heart of the Swarm – Ending Leaked

  • stiliom

    StarCraft 2 Video Review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kwEXXebT4A
    full review from BadSec (ex-GameStar): http://www.gladriel.com/reviewFull/content/3761/S

  • bmw

    I can't find out what they were working on for more than 5 years on this piece of crap. SC I battlechest 19.99 this 1/3 of a game 59.99. No much difference in a graphic. view, UI, etc. I feel like I wasted $60.00. game goes to uninstall and directly to the trash.

  • G_G

    Just spent 8 hours getting the game installed. In an area with less than dial up internet access, the patch was a pointless waste of time… it should have been shipped ready to go for campaign playing.

    If this is the trend Blizzard are going to use then I won't be buying Diablo. With no interest in PVP playing I want to play the campaigns and leave it at that. I will never buy a stand alone game that is licensed as opposed to purchased ever again. Once bitten, twice shy. Logging in every time sucks, especially with the connection I have.

    Gameplay feels archaic, a UI that goes back to the old warcraft days and not much has changed. RTS games are about how you interface with them, this fails and I feel like I have gone back 5 years in time. Story line and main characters are crass, cheesey and unimaginative.

    If you want an RTS that trumps this hands down with a better mechanics and UI then I suggest Command and Conquer 3 or 4.

  • blah

    Yeah the blizzard publicy machine must be working overtime on reviewing itself. Given that they took so long to release it there were only two possibilities: It would either be the best thing since sliced bread or, as I suspected, the people in charge didn’t know what they were doing. Unfortunately my suspicions proved correct.

    The cinematic sequences are very good, but the rest of the game sucks. The movement engine has the same flaws as the original with units getting suck behind buildings or on terrain on a regular basis (Gameplay is far from flawless). the graphics though more detailed are sillier for the zerg & protoss making hard to take them seriously.

    Extra units make the terrans more interesting but the added complexity interferes with the fast paced gameplay that was one of the hallmarks of the original.

    The storyline of the campaign is a typical cliche designed to appeal to 13-15 year old boys.

    Multiplayer must run through Blizzards battlenet making the game close to useless without a very good broadband connection. No LAN parties with this one.

    Overall there is no way an independant reviewer would give this anywhere close to 100% unless they’re hyped up on some stim packs.

    With a few simple changes this could have been an excellent game but as they say the devil is in the details. Basically they should have not some real gamers design this, not a bunch of suits.

    Graphics 8/10

    Gameplay 3/10

    Campaign 2/10

    Functionality 0/10

    Overall 4/10

    • beau

      i havent even opened it since they bumped it up another 20 bucks in my area, fuck that i aint paying 100 bucks for 1/3 of the campaign based around the fucking race i HATE the most, ill just download a cracked version and wait for heart of the swarm and legacy of the void
      but what i was getting at was im really dissapointed in the campaign from what ive seen aswell
      i saw the end of it and was like “wow that is so fucking stupid”

      *spoiler alert*

      kerrigan should stay zerg she is meant to be the queen of fucking blades for gods sake! i played in the beta and i liked the gameplay so i dont completley agree with you, but i do agree with you about the fucking campaign

      • Blahhhh

        And one more thing:

        I'm sorry, you just came off looking like a contrarian idiot who hasn't even played the game. The only valid point your entire comment had was the lack of LAN, but even that was faulted by your claim that the game is close to useless without a "very good broadband connection." I have incredibly erratic broadband, it fluctuates between being very good (10 mbits) or being almost unusable (less than 1 mbit). (usually within the same hour) I spent the weekend playing a few games, and I had barely any lag. Get off your dial-up modem, it's time to upgrade. :(

    • BlahSucks

      It sounds like you're not a fan of RTS games, so no shit, you wouldn't enjoy SC2. "units getting suck behind buildings or on terrain on a regular basis " – Haha, what? You're blaming the game for your lack of ability. Amazing. Silly Zerg and Protoss? First, Blizzard has never been in the business of making their games uber-realistic, and that's part of their charm. WarCraft 3 had relatively cartoony art, so did WoW. Second, uh, making something more realistic implies that they exist in real life. As far as I know, we haven't come in contact with any Zerg or Protoss yet. I guess I could be wrong, but I think Blizzard can use their creative license in this case.

  • Chris

    absolute rubbish. its the opposite thing happening here… the "fanboys" are slagging it off because of unjustifiied reasons. One being the game is not as long as the first with no zerg and protoss campaigns.. lol the actual game has at least 30 missions which some of those you acutally play as a protoss. The main campaign is longer than the original starcraft and way more in depth and varied. The second rediculous argument is about battle.net, needing an internet connection. who the hell doesnt have access to some small form of internet? Long enough to validate your copy and play offline as much as u want.

    Even if you mark it down for some of blizzards business decisions in needing internet to play multiplayer either locally or internet then dont mark down graphics/gameplay/story/soundtrack/acting/replayability… Dont listen to ignorant people who refuse to like the game based on rediculous arguments. Try it out for yourself!

  • badd

    anyone who doesn't think this game is really good is out of their mind.. anyone who gives this game a 2 on 10 is someone who didn't play the game and just wants to put down blizzard because it's seperated into 3 games or he can't LAN so he can pirate the game.

  • Doug

    I bought it and love it, people who don't own it are delusional in thinking its 1/3 of a single player, no lan sucked when i first heard of it but it was stable enough for me in Australia to play with a group of friends at my house. If your buying it purely for giant LANs then its a valid complaint. There's alot of fanatical anti blizzard fans to.

  • patrick

    No lan support, no protoss / zerg campaigns and there are no good mods out yet.

    I bought the game (as well as played beta) and I give it a 6/10.

    Just interested in the campaign (yay cutscenes!).

  • Barua

    To be honest, I’m not that surprised at all these perfect scores rolling in. These reviewers are clearly either dishonest or delusional. Fanatical Blizzard fanboys? Payment for good reviews? Who knows, but they couldn’t be further from the truth.

    It becomes especially obvious when “professional” game reviewers give SC2 perfect scores whereas thousands upon thousands of regular joes are giving this game anywhere from 2/10 to 6/10 scores.

    So who’s right and who’s wrong? It’s hard to say but personally I’m not buying SC2 until the major game flaws are rectified.

    • Sebastian

      People are just being ignorant dicks, and complaining you need the internet to play, or trollin' on ANYHING they can.

      Don't take it from what stupid people tell you, the game's great, it's brilliant. It's not broken, perfectly balanced (Those who say zerg aren't just suck at zerg) and it's compelling and groundbreaking.

      Best RTS of all time, hands down.