Yet another person who can't correctly remember the name of the expansion "Brood War."
Also someone who obviously doesn't watch pro matches. The handful of new units and upgrades have dramatically altered all matchups and made them much more dynamic and entertaining, imo.
I would say that the reason for this is the metagame problems in vanilla SC2 were SO MUCH smaller than the problems in vanilla SC, so no huge shifts were needed. The tacked on changes they did make definitely opened up more strategic possibilities, so I'm happy.
Look, I don't want to be overly harsh on you, but why do you care what some guy thinks about a game you like? There has never been a piece of entertainment that has been universally praised by literally everyone, why should games be any different? Who gives a shit about meta scores? They have no bearing on whether you enjoy a game or not, and while I disagree with Tom's critique, his points are valid from his experience with the game, they just don't matter as much to me as they did to him. Maybe you should play games you like without caring so much what someone on the internet says about your game.
This review was seriously a joke, and hope that the reviewer gets canned. I get that he didn't like the story, but come one, this is pathetic.
I hadn't heard of this site before someone linked me to it, and I can tell why it isn't regarded as anything other than a troll site with reviews like this.
"Unless you count the campaign, but why on earth would you do that?" Maybe some of us prefers you know, a single player experience? While I admit its not up to SC1; Brood War glory, it is alot improved over WoL.
I think, also, that people really need to stop comparing these games to the older ones so much. SC/BW were games that had a much higher skill ceiling than these new games do, and while that means that these new games are "easier" I think they provide a much better experience for a casual competitive player than any of blizzards previous RTS games. At least, I don't always get my ass handed to me in sc2 mp.
I actually agree with pretty much everything you say, but it doesn't particularly bug me that Tom emphasizes the poor storytelling. What frustrates me about the storytelling in these games is that there are moments where you can see where small changes to dialogue and characterization could have vastly improved the quality of the narrative, but they just went for shlock. While it's not the worst thing in the world, it still rankles.
Do you think that fewer than 1 out 87 people disliked Halo 4? 1.1% of all people? Not just the people you know, but out of everybody? How many reviews are acceptable before we're allowed to start believing that one of them may have honestly disliked the game?
When answering, remember that there is no such thing as an objective amount of "quality" that reviews are attempting to measure. They merely represent a record of the reviewer's interaction with the game.