That's possible, though I think I'd be miffed if I were Terran, as I feel they got the short end of the stick, units wise, with this expansion.
Love the site BTW, even if this is my first time commenting here :)
it's the reason some people play Starcraft. It's the reason I bought it. Nostalgic affection for the lore brought me back one more time, but I'm struggling to bother to finish.
Sure. But isn't it safe to say that the popularity of that franchise has more to do with pvp than the campaign?
Wow! I left a comment not 2 hours ago thanking the reviewer for his dissenting opinion (in that it stimulates game improvement), but also asking the reviewer to abstain from comments regarding the economic motivations of the developer (as the goal of all developers, including indie ones, is to make money) and it was taken down without any explanation.
Why is the penultimate paragraph of this review so controversial?
Just as reviewers should have and present conflicting, and candid, opinions regarding games, we should be able to comment freely about the reviews.
I rate Tom as a critic not because he's objective (he's not), but because he lays out so clearly where he's coming from. I constantly disagree with his conclusions but I can nearly always tell from reading him whether or not I'm going to like something or not. I'd much rather have that then some misguided attempt at objectivity masking bias.
No comments have been taken down, Mr. Caveman. On the contrary, I even manually approve the comments that find their way into Disqus' mostly forgiving filter, usually because they consist largely of profanity.
Furthermore, I can see the comment you're referring to right now. Have you tried the F5 key?
I think it's safe to say that the e-sports side of it creates hardcore superfans and the campaign doesn't, but I suspect the campaign might shift more actual copies. I wonder how many people would buy HotS if their sole experience of WoL had been three games against the AI and then getting pulverised by ladder players.
But either way, Blizzard spent a lot of money on the SP campaign, and you could hardly leave it out of the review.
Oh, I get plenty of enjoyment out of Starcraft, and particularly 2v2 with friends, either against each other or the AI. I just don't think the expansion is a significant factor in that. :)
Thanks for the review Tom. You're always able to put into words exactly what it is that bothers me about particular games. (Your 2 star review of Uncharted 3 is one of my favorites ever: "you push Drake up a wall much as you might push a child up a jungle gym to help him feel a sense of accomplishment." And maybe you can explain why, after completely agreeing with you regarding that game, I'm actually enjoying the new Tomb Raider so much.) Honestly, just the thought of HOTS makes me tired; I have no intention of dipping my toes into more SC2, but it's nice to know what I'm not missing.
I find myself questioning whether I have it in me to get back into laddering shape. However, I am on the LinkedIn Starcraft team as the old timer that beats all the young engineer/coders, so I feel that pressure to keep up. I'd rather play the more relaxing games I've been missing for the past 3 years; working my way through the Mass Effect trilogy, Skyrim, Battlefield 3, Crusader Kings 2, etc.
There is no such thing as objectively reviewing a game. It literally does not and cannot exist. Anyone who has ever told you it can was a self-interested liar looking to boost his or her credibility undeservedly. Chick has never claimed his reviews were anything but his own experience and opinion.
Furthermore, a game shouldn't be spotted 6 or 7 points out of 10 just because it boots up and your guy does stuff when you press a button. There is no universal rule book that says score X means ABC. It's all interpretation.
I think I could have enjoyed the campaign a lot more if I didn't play zerg. Playing from 2 bases just never felt right.
Did the game ever suggest getting a macro hatch? If not did anyone play without building one?
Starcraft 2 gameplay needs to go back to the late 90s where it belongs.
"what does it say about me that I consider the skirmish and multiplayer the “actual game”, but I’m not dedicated enough to make any sort of meaningful judgment about how the new units affect balance?"
"I don’t play Starcraft II skillfully enough to know what they accomplish in the overall picture"
You then questioned a commenter if the reviewer were responsible for completely understanding the balance of the game. The answers yes! But your opinions aren't the issue. Its metacritic. It might not matter to a company like Blizzard but what about the smaller developer. It matters to them, to receive a fair assesment of their blood sweat and tears. Do the right thing and make a statement, remove it from metacritic.
Utter tosh, ive never read so much crap in all my life absolutly terrible this guy hasnt got a fuckin clue what he is talking about i am literraly gobsmacked.
If you attribute crappy motives to people ("Heart of the Swarm feels obligatory, as if it was done for Activision’s shareholders instead of Blizzard’s fans"), you're bound to find people attributing crappy motives to you.
That said, the idea that someone who doesn't like a game writing a review in which he explains why he doesn't like a game is really engaging in a cynical ploy to gin up web traffic is stoopid. This review's perfectly in character.
Peoples' tastes evolve over time. They learn to appreciate different things. 15 years ago, I thought SC was absolutely incredible. I didn't even play the demo of SCII because I know that's not the kind of game I really like anymore. I could give a much longer and more involved explanation as to why I don't like this kind of game, and some people who really like this kind of game would get mad at me because I was shitting in their corn flakes.
This expansion took a game that Tom thought was just OK and added more of what he thought was just OK about it. This is not newsworthy.
Played and got amazed, is not as good as WoL, but is 90/100 game, not a 40.
Sorry, but last time a see your webpage.
This review is a very straightforward description of why Tom doesn't feel SCII to be very exciting. If you read the other reviews on this site and examine the things that Tom actually gets excited about, you'll see that they're a different set of things than those that you get excited about. People have different tastes.
This is the first time I've ever seen the word "shitstick" posted in one of your comment threads. Achievement unlocked!
Why does Metacritic still use this site as part of it's aggregate ratings? The reviews on here seem more fit for the unprofessional and idiotic user reviews section.