Staredit Network

Didn't read anything but the first few posts, sorry.

I want SC2, but I don't want the SCBW scene in Korea to die. SC2 will be scary, and new, and may challange us to actually move on. But it also may be better, and funner. All good things must eventually come to an end. I think by the time SC2 comes out (circa one decade) I'll be ready.. maybe. You can count on the fact that Blizzard will take their time making it though.

Personally, I'd prefer a revamped editor, maybe better graphics, and more tilesets than a new SC2 right now. No gameplay change + more options (like real backwards ramps)= a lot of fun and probably a pleasent change.

Basically, I wouldn't be upset either way, they both have very appealing aspects.

PS: Part of novelty of StarCraft is that you can use it on basically any computer. I've always liked that.

Doesn't work on my computer.

Why do you go to a site for StarCraft if you can't use StarCraft? If your computer can't run StarCraft, I'm sorry, your computer is a watch.

It's not that his computer can't handle it, it's that his computer cuts off a chunk of his screen when he plays. If you look in that thread he made in null, you'll see it.

My computer is too advanced. Well, that's what I'm hoping it is.

How can a computer have too much power for a game? Wouldnt it just run better or faster. It may be just that your graphics card or something to do with its specs may not quite match it. I bought a brand new computer then a brand new game and I had to upgrade my graphics card.

It's definately not too advanced =\ A 6600 (not sure if it's a GT or vanilla) isn't that advanced, and your processor (3500+) isn't that advanced either ~.~

Yeah.............. well my more advanced computers seems to run it fine.

Maybe your computer is just..you know....different....... from the rest. Yeah....it's just uhh "special". Not worse but "special".

Or like I said one of the needed specifications in the game are not meat by your computer. You could also check maybe there is not enough space on your disk for Starcraft.

If you have a virus protector or spam protector make sure that Starcraft is accepted by these. One time my computer reset and it wasnt excepting it, took me a while to figure it out.

based in my opinion. Any computer thats over 500$ nowadays are too advanced for starcraft.

I agree that Starcraft is balanced in gameplay almost too perfectly and that's why they're such a hit in many countries and there's been so many tournaments on it. Furthermore the mapping style is just perfect because you can reach lots and lots of possiblities. This is basically the reason Blizzard is afraid of making Starcraft 2, because they are in fear of disappointing their fans, so they procrastinated by making Starcraft: Ghost.

Anyways I still want SC 2 for the storyline because I cant stand having Duran and his hybrids left unattended.

I think that if Starcraft 2 comes out and it isnt anything like the first one, half the really big fans of Starcraft 1 will just stick with it and not even play Starcraft 2 anymore.

What if starcraft 2 is SC and bw compatible. Then people wont leave. Look at SC1. Even though people want to play brood war some still stick to retail versions.

That I think is the stupidest thing. Because its exactly the same game but you have just some new units. Nothing big is different and yes it like 1.05 right so it has some different patches. The only reason why you would stay there was if you hated how stacked the units were in BW, if im wrong tell me.

Well, I don't know about the rest of you, but I find cartoony just doesn't look right for games, especially complex games like WarCraft III where they really don't have any excuse for bad graphics.

No, I said 'drawn for fewer units than it had'. They gave it fewer units than WarCraft II and StarCraft had, but even then their graphics still slowed it down.

Well, according to Blizzard, WarCraft III's requirements are:
- 400 MHz Pentium II or equivalent
- 128 MB of RAM
- 8 MB 3D video card (TNT, i810, Voodoo 3, Rage 128 equivalent or better) with DirectX® 8.1 support
- 700 MB HD space
- 4X CD-ROM drive
This computer has:
- 1300 MHZ intel celeron
- 256 megabytes of RAM
- I don't know where to find my graphics card information on my computer
- About 50 gigabytes of disk space
- Don't need a good CD drive because I run my games off virtual CDs
Seems to me the only place I could fail to meet their requirements would be a graphics card. I've played WarCraft III on two other computers, and as far as I know at least one of them was better than this one. It lagged enormously in both cases, with FPS frequently going below 1 when there were lots of units on the screen.

It's possible. StarCraft is based on an underlying DOS system, and I believe there are certain patches for Windows XP that prevent it from running, literally because it's too advanced. Windows XP has problems with WarCraft II as well.

Personally I'm hoping neither the hybrids nor the xel'naga are a melee race in StarCraft II. Campaigns, maybe. UMS maps, maybe. But in melee I think both of them would just end up too much like one of the existing races and spoil the way each race is unique.

Well that bonus mission make it as if there IS a StarCraft 2. By the way, did anybody manage to get the bonus missions in the Terran Race in StarCraft? (Not Broodwar)

Yeah thats were the debate on starcrafts main plot leads to Duran and his protoss/zerg hybrids, thats yet what everyone wants to see.

Basically this is what people expect for the next starcraft

• A brand new Starcraft editor
• New graphics most likely an upgraded warcraft engine like what they did with WCII
• New units
• Protoss/zerg hybrid
• A new race
• What will become of kerrigan
• Nova from starcraft ghost
• New Tilesets

Both computers probably have an integrated intel graphics card. Which.....how can I put it... umm... yeah.... Blows, Sucks, any other bad word you know of here. The GPU plays probably the most important role here. Hell my cousins computer lagged in footman wars(god damn..) so I told them to buy a $50 graphics card....now everything except maybe 250+ units on screen at once.....is very smooth.

Also what were you playing? A custom game? The Campaign? Wc3 ladder? Custom Games like XHero Siege....you can get easily looking over 1000 units. I mean you get one person who can't clear his damn lanes and boom next thing you know he has 1000 damn units by him and then he dies and you have to rush over to stop the damn units from killing the castle. Hey 1000 units fails to lag my computer.

What were your settings? Remember those are the minimum requirments and therefor you should have minimum settings on to play it with some lag.(very low resolution and everything lowest). Also your processor....no offense...is complete crap. Celerons are one of the worst architectures intel ever designed(P4 was crap but much better than a celeron). You ram therefor is quite slow too.


"Advanced" isn't the right word.
"Different" however is.
I believe they were also talking about a hardware level not software level.

That's a user issue, not an issue with his computer. Properties >> Check "Force 640/480" That will probably fix it.

Learn to troubleshoot =P It's not too advanced, the user just isn't so great with computers.

ADDITION:
A toaster is more powerful than my computer, and it can run it.
[attachmentid=21839]

What bonus missions? I've never heard of any. The Allen Schezar campaign was separate from the actual terran campaign.

Makes sense, I don't know for sure that either of them were ever upgraded.

Oookay...

It didn't really matter. Any large battles either in the campaigns or under melee settings would quickly start to lag, and as for Footman Wars and Tower Defense, they would practically stop. I wasn't exaggerating about the <1 FPS.

I forget. Probably either the default or the lowest available.

Yes, but...three times worse per MHz? Is that physically possible?

Which, StarCraft or WarCraft III?

Theres bonus missions. If you played the campaigns in the right order, you would have gotten ALL The bonus missions ( that includes not playing with cheats that skip levels )

I'm still having trouble believing this. Link please.

You've missed A LOT. I can't even understand why you are in a Sc2 thread. The bonus mission was in Brood War beating the 2nd to last zerg mission with I think 5 minutes still on the clock.

The bonus missiong involved you playing the Protoss(Zeratul) and you were looking for Artanis and went to this moon that was emitting high amounts of energy. You find out that Duran was never under kerrigans control, infact...you don't really know what he is. Duran is geneticially combining Zerg and Protoss DNA. It's figured Duran is part of the Xel'Naga.


Well I play games where unit amounts can reach 1000+ with minimal lag.

but yeah... your computer really needs some new tech.


Yes. Celerons do minimial per cycle. The P4's DO MINIMAL PER CYCLE lol.

Thats not to say they do 3x less per cycle. But heres the thing, the CPU accounts for a medium amount....the GPU accounts for a lot.

I know all about that one. However, that is in the expansion zerg campaign. KrAzY was talking about the original terran campaign, which as far as I know doesn't have any secret levels.

Knowing Blizzard, he probably is. However, in terms of the story alone, I would actually say that Duran is probably not a xel'naga.