User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2676 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 20, 2014
    First of all, this game is probably one of the best games I've ever played. Along with its multiplayer, competitions as well as real time strategy, it's no wonder it is one of the best Real Time Strategy games in the market.
  2. Nov 19, 2014
    All I could have asked for out of StarCraft 2, it has given me over the last 4 years.

    It gives me the same rush I had when playing the original and/or other classic RTS games from the 90s and early 2000s, but in a more refined engine where you're not having to fight the UI or able to exploit the game with turtling tactics.

    The skirmish multiplayer encourages you to be more aggressive
    than previous iterations where strong defenses would win, meaning the game moves at a faster pace. This is perfect for people looking for a quick game that's also fun and requires some intuitiveness. The custom game/modding scene has also become more robust now, with 'slower' game options available like tower defenses and rpgs.

    Mind you, I would have immensily enjoyed SC2 even if the single player was a disappointment, but I know some people are more geared for the solo experience. SC2 does a much better job than the average RTS, giving the most cinematic experience possible and having story driven missions. Blizzard was ambitious as they possibly could have for the single player campaign.

    My only disappointments are very minor, like some missions not favoring creativity (especially on brutal mode), and the sound design not being as superb as it was in the original StarCraft. Lore buffs may also be able to poke fun at the "Blizzard cliches" that are used.

    If you are an RTS buff this game should be in your collection already. I've heard that some have avoided SC2 for psuedo-political reasons. It requires an online connection, which may be a nuisance to some, but LAN play in multiplayer games has pretty much been dead for a while. I applaud Blizzard however, for doing just about everything else right in regards to accommodating the player - updating the UI, improving the chat system, playable in multiple regions, balancing the game at a much faster rate than even the original. I don't always agree with the decisions they make, but if you're in StarCraft for the long haul like I am, you can trust that they will support this game until nobody is playing it (you can still even play the 1.0 games).

    Try the Starter Edition and see if you like what you see.
  3. Oct 20, 2014
    Well first I think this is the best RTS game we have currently however there are some major problems.
    1. No Lan (It’s pathetic that hackers have made it available but blizzard has not)
    2. Selling each game separately for more $$$ is Bull****

    Now for the good in Wings of Liberty the story is epic the maps and units are as always amazing and the upgrade systems is very easy to use and
    it shows you what your actually getting before you make the upgrade with a video at least in story mode.

    I don’t really do MP all that much but it works every time I use it.
  4. Sep 29, 2014
    A really good game, a sequel to my favorite rts, they kept the competitive feel while adding more features making the game a lot better than the one in my past. It's probably the only game from Blizzard that I had zero issues with.
  5. Sep 12, 2014
    Decent campaign mode good multiplayer lackin Graphics and material for how long fans have bin waiting for this game, and how long it was in development, it lacks a lot of anything new. A pretty big disappointment for a fan waiting years for it to finally come out.

    Worth $50 Bucks only if your multiplayer fan if not than i think the games only worth $17 max.
  6. Sep 12, 2014
    I really like this game. RTS is my favorite genre, and Starcraft has always been a really cool universe with nice diverse selection of units to play with. Starcraft II is really a rehash of the original game with a major graphics upgrade. There have been some changes to the way you command and use units, but only to uniquely identify itself from the original game I feel. For something that looks and feels like a remake, it's done very well though and deserves the high if not optimal marks I give it. The combat is fun and engaging, the race, unit, and upgrade choices make for many interesting games and possible situations, and the always online play system isn't as encumbering as some people make it out to be.
    The main reason I don't give this higher marks is because it is more of a rehash than a sequel, though if you just play single player mode maybe you might interpret it more like a sequel. I would have really liked to see some innovation though, RTS desperately needs it. Especially on the scale or diversity of the maps. The maps in this game are very plain for the most part. I also think the editor and the way custom games are listed in multiplayer is a step back from the way it was organized before. There's a lot less appeal to keep playing this game.
  7. Sep 10, 2014
    I haven't really played this game a lot, only on my cousins computer for three days when I visited him. I'm not an expert in this type of games and have never played such before, but it was awesome to play it. Even as a noob in this genre this game was fun every minute I played it (SP) and I really do recommend playing this even if you don't like this type of games.
  8. Sep 9, 2014
    A huge game
    memorable and repayable campaign
    working match-making that matches you against an opponent near your skill level
    Arcade and very powerful editor (though high learning curve)
  9. Sep 4, 2014
    *sad face*
    Oh Blizzard what have you done!
    Starcraft: Broodwars, one of the classic, most played and most loved games ever made.
    This remake is nothing short of awful, the usual Blizzard cartoon graphics, (Blizzard seems to have only 1 art style)
    I always feel one should judge a game on it's own terms, so, what was Starcraft:Broodwars most renowned for? Multiplayer battles where the
    balance between the three races were unparalleled. Hours watching the pro's go at each other and seeing different races win with equal regularity. and most Importantly LAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Starcraft II, wings of liberty does none of these. absolutely none. Later patches may have fixed the balance problems since I played this, but after buying the game and wading into the multiplayer community I was greeted by the most unbalanced RTS system since Command and Conquer Red Alert. At least i could LAN it with my friends I thought.. I was sorely mistaken. THE SINGLE most important feature of Broodwars was removed... and you are forced to play online online through Blizzard servers.. (a$$holes)

    To make matters worse, the storyline was atrocious,lame in the extreme. The nice characters from the originals reappear here but only now they are generic blizzard clones, the 6ft wide unshaven, bad attitude characters that may have appealed to me when i was 10. The terrible romance that makes even the Twilight movies feel authentic. With all of the funds at their disposal you would imagine that Blizzard could have made the single player campaign story truly epic, great dialogue and voice acting etc.. they did none of these. The story feels like it was written by a boy in puberty.
    I could continue to run off criticism of this game all day but I will sum it up like this.... Blizzard spend as little money as they could on this and produced a smelly turd of a game that filled the desire of their fanboys ONLY. Blizzard have become the greedy slovenly giants of the PC gaming industry.
    After a few weeks of trying to squeeze at least some enjoyment out of this, I relented and uninstalled this game and continued to have incredible amounts of fun lanning Broodwars with my friends, and swore that I would not be spending a single cent on any of the overpriced sequels that were promised to follow.
  10. Mar 22, 2014
    An all-around great game that is also the poorest strategy game I ever played.

    Wonderful cutscenes, characters, voice acting, clearly above what the gaming industry gives, make it a game that I love to watch as much as I should love to play it.

    Fine graphics and somewhat lame sounds(I can't recall a single non-cutscene song of the game, but the sounds and noises are fine with nothing
    special) make it a very, very acceptable game despite its lack of memorable music in any way.

    The problem is with the gameplay.
    Fast-paced as all hell, it gives no defenses because it wants to keep being at top speed.
    It has a very tiny, if existent at all, growth curve and you can beat a super-army with basic units, since the game works on a painfully simplistic principle of "this unit kills that unit".
    Almost no consequential use is made of the terrain or the size of units or the size of armies: you can turn around an entire 150 population army instantly, no movement jams or slowdowns when you have 50 tanks turning around together at the same time. You can get to a high vantage point to shoot enemies and it can be proven useless in less than 5 seconds as enemies will just rush to you from an easily-accessible way up...

    The complexity of the game is quickly shown to be about knowing what units to use and where to send them. While sufficient to make Starcraft II a fun game, it makes its complexity suffer terribly and come off as a simplistic, almost boring RTS. Actually, it IS a boring RTS.
    The element that saves it is the incredibly fast pace it has.

    You will spend all your time micromanaging units cause the AI is too dumb and things such as formations, lines, organisations, or the like, simply don't exist in this very poor RTS. But micromanaging does keep you busy and you're never idle.
    You will have to constantly go back and forth between bases and front lines to direct every unit or group of units and constantly spend time changing your units or forces to fight the enemy with its current weak point. Again, poor and simplistic, but it keeps you busy.
    You will have to keep trying to amass all the resources you can and spend them in units and tech, but you will almost never decide of a good offensive or defensive position as even the hugest possible army can be wiped out in less than a minute and your main job is not to strategise or fool the foe but to keep mashing buttons so that you get all your units in their spots where you need them for attack or defense...

    Every unit's capacity has to be micromanaged and you'll have to shift between them to use them all, adding even more stuff to do, which keeps you busy, but taking away even more capacity for complex thinking or setting up intricate strategies as AGAIN, this game isn't, and doesn't even try to be, a strategy game, as much as it tries to be the fastest-paced "unit creation and control" game there can be.

    Best example I can find to define this game's problem as a strategy game is the missions: you'll have tons of varied and fun objectives and some nice bonuses in all of them, but in almost every single mission without exception, your strategy will be: learn their units, get the units that kill them, keep getting resources and don't stop till victory.
    All the missions are nice and varied, but all the strategies are the same, save a few very rare cases.

    While indiscutably fun and memorable thanks to its great cutscenes and characters, SCII WoL is also the poorest strategy game I've played in my life, and compared to the Command and Conquer series, the Total War series, or other non-"Blizzard RTSes", this is truly the worst strategy game I've played.

    Still loved the cutscenes and effort, still finished it several times, still think it's an all-around very fun game. But it has sucked the soul out of strategy to become another look-at-me-I'm-so-fast-I'm-so-fun game, with simplistic gameplay and functionalities, way less elements of growth or complexity, and way less long-term value than many real strategy games.
  11. Mar 15, 2014
    This is the best RTS game I have played. The gameplay is amazing with the best SP of any RTS game I have played. The multiplayer is also very good with the three different races that play differently and unlock a whole lot of strategic potential. It is very fun, satisfying and rewarding to learn to use all three. The plot is very well done and the characters are great and there is lots of humor in this game. Expand
  12. Mar 12, 2014
    Blizzard has done it again. After playing and being hooked on the original playing starcraft 2 was great. Playing the campaign was fun. It brought back many old units and introduced some new ones to go along with the mix. The greatness of the original story continues here with Jim Raynors story. Adding difficulty levels is nice as well to make the game itself a little more challenging. The landscapes an movies in the story are great and overall the improvement from 1 to 2 is easily relevant. Online multiplier is also fun as well. Expand
  13. Feb 24, 2014
    While continuing the story of Starcraft, Starcraft 2 is a modernization of the original title. With other RTS games offering innovations in the way RTS are played, emphasizing on the strategy, Starcraft 2 offered a clean UI & intuitive interface but nothing new. Having good marketing is important, the popularity of this game proves it.
  14. Feb 15, 2014
    Major probleme of this episode is the lack of identity of creativity. Story didnt have the charm of Starcraft 1, and looked like a cliché story of a american hero saving the world. Also, gameplay should have been more easy and casual friendly. Starcraft 2 asks to much commitment to be enjoyedin multiplayer, and fails to attract average players. This is why people stop playing it after finishing campaign. Expand
  15. Feb 6, 2014
    Starcraft 2 is a very bland, and overrated game. The graphics look pretty, and the controls flow like water, I love being able to use shortcuts to micro my tasks. Even though this game has its perks, I see more negatives with this game than positives. My list of positives would be the graphics, controls, fluid gameplay, Very well balanced, great mod tools, great UI. The negatives however, in my opinion outweigh this. My list of negatives are as follows. The game lacks varieties of units, even with the expansion pack the game has a depressing selection of bio units, tanks, and aircraft. The game has only 3 factions, as opposed to nearly all other strategy games having 4 or more. The game has replay value to an extent, and major replay value if you want to become professional, and set yourself a goal, however for casual gamers this has little replay value due to its uninspired map design, lack of units and factions as stated above, and slightly repetitive gameplay (If you play custom maps on arcade mode this can hold your attention longer than regular gameplay at times). Another con to this game is the matchmaking, early on you will be facing incredibly strong opponents, this will not be so much of a problem as you progress and increase in rank, however for early SC2 players this can be troublesome.

    If you want a good strategy game, try Age of Empires 2, Supreme Commander 1, or Battlezone 2.
    If you want a strategy game that has more fighting, and commanding than base building and factional differences, then you want Starcraft 2.
  16. Feb 6, 2014
    Blizzard did again awesome job. They done awesome strategy game with great storyline, which is one of the best in sci- fi genre. But thats not only thing which Blizzard did awesome. Awesome is soundtrack, where you listen classic country and rock music with epic tones in cutscenes. But there is other things, which are great, but that things I not going to tell, cause you must play this game, for better understanding. Expand
  17. Jan 24, 2014
    I was bought this for my twenty seventh birthday by my friends and initially I thought the mechanics were weak - throw down some 'rax and hold 'a'... follow this up with an all in at 5 or 6... This tactic was applied by and against us successfully until we became able to defend and give a proper account.

    The on line matchmaking works well - much less than a minute waits. In all honesty
    sometimes you take a few panning's in a row and other times you'll find it well controlled and a deserved win. The matchmaking gives you a 50/50 win rate over time which helps you to improve your game. When you're taking a real beating it just takes a win to get you back in love with the title.

    If you enjoy single players and you enjoyed the original you'll enjoy this. It's a reasonably interesting story with some good twists. I don't tend to play the campaigns but I completed and replayed this one. The campaign is limited to the Terran race, but the expansion 'Heart of the Swarm' introduces a Zerg campaign along with new units and extra features.

    I can say in all honesty this is my favourite game of all time across all platforms which me and my friends play to this day.
  18. Dec 22, 2013
    WTF was dat O_o How people calling RTS game that even don't have any strategy mechanics inside, it's more third person shooter then RTS, Blizz what you did with Starcraft, where are freedom, hard game, unit uniq systems Just good visual game, with quite boring gameplay system, and too way EASY, still can't get how Blizaard making so easy game started from Diablo II... Warcraft and Starcraft waws so amazing games so what happened with them nowdays... Great graphics will never hide boring gameplay, and more: Good Graohics all the time stealing place from in game freedom and flexible gameplay...
    Sorry to all of you, but more people who like SC 2 didn't play SC in original so for me it's big fail after so many years of wating, more when you pay so much for it...
    sry for bad english.
  19. Dec 2, 2013
    I generally wait a long time after playing a game to write reviews. As with anything in life, I think time can change the opinion dramatically. Starcraft 2 is one such game where, unfortunately, it just does not stand up well upon further reflection. Failing to do anything memorable to change the RTS landscape, and in general providing a fun but not engrossing single player campaign, the game does little more than represent a fine example of using an established formula well. It's a good game, but when compared to other games that have moved their respective genres forward (and thus warrant higher ratings) Starcraft represents more of the same. Assuming you like what has come so far, you'll like this. If you don't, this will not change your mind. Expand
  20. Nov 24, 2013
    Starcraft 2 is really a great game. Story mode is really great and multiplayer is old Starcraft with better controls. I was really hoping for some new race, but in the end it does not matter and old races are enough.
  21. Nov 18, 2013
    Single Player/Multi Player (2/2) (If the single player is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no multplayer) (If the multiplayer is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no single player) Gameplay (2/2) Visuals/Story (2/2) (If the visuals are better than the story, review this section as if it had no story) (If the story is better than the visuals, review this section as if the visuals didn’t matter)

    Accessibility/Longevity (2/2)

    (Review this section only on Accessibility if the game has no longevity) (Review this section only on longevity if the game isn’t accessible)

    Pricing (0/2)

    Wildcard (-1)

    This is a guideline for how to properly review games. Many reviewers like to get a “feel” for a game, and arbitrarily give a game a score that they believe it deserves. This results in wildly different scores between different reviewers, and vastly different scores between similar games. This guideline addresses these problems and scores games fairly and consistently. This guideline also gives scores that are usually similar to the metacritic score.

    The review score is based out of 10 points. There are no “half” or 0.5 increments. It is impossible to have a score above 10 or below 0. The review score will change as the game gets new dlc, drops in price, or if more secrets are found through the game increasing its appeal.

    The scoring is split into 6 sections. The first five sections can add a possible 2 points to the final score. The first 5 sections are Single Player/Multi Player, Gameplay, Visuals/Story, Accessibility/Longevity, and Pricing.

    Notice that 3 of these sections have two parts. These particular sections will be scored based on the stronger part of the game of the two. For example, if a game has a lousy single player campaign, but an excellent multiplayer component, that section will be based solely on the multiplayer as if the single player did not exist. This allows games to be based on their own merits, as many unnecessary features are shoehorned into video games by publishers to reach a “feature quota”. Games that excel in both areas of a section don’t receive should be noted in the written review, but cannot increase the score past 2 in that section. However, it can be taken into account in the final section

    The final section can add 1, add 0, or subtract 1 to the final score. This final section is the “wildcard” section. This section is for how the reviewer “feels” about the game, but limits this only to this section, rather than the entire 10 point review. This section can include any positive or negative point that was not covered in the previous 5 sections.
  22. Oct 30, 2013
    A stupidly fast paced over hyped mediocre RTS with no real creative flair or potential. Unless your a die hard fan of Starcraft don't waste your time or money. Play CoH 1 Instead.
  23. Oct 29, 2013
    At first, if you weren't good at RTS games, it was going to be hard. However, after some time, the game gets funner the better you get. Even the Campaign was good. It was a continuation from Starcraft, and Starcraft: Brood Wars. The Arcade games are good, however, there are few good games around, however I'm sure there will be more good games coming out. The Races you play on Multiplayer, or even single player (not campaign) were really good and fun and all equal, however with other bonuses. Expand
  24. Oct 29, 2013
    It's a great game but Blizzard made it a bit, well: they removed some lovely characters that are in the first StarCraft, it's overpriced, short campaign, and overrated.

    Other than that, great gameplay, great voice acting, great plot/story. Good job Blizzard for making such a nice game.
  25. Oct 24, 2013
    Their hardest mode is called "Brutal" mode. It is EASY. Not even what you would expect from a normal mode. The story isn't as bad as I expected, but nowhere near as good as SC1. My biggest issue is multi-player. It rewards spamming single units with no real strategy or mixed unit combat. The very little strategy it has is rock-paper-scissors type stuff. They also cut down on units so that they can add them back in expansions. Half the units in single player aren't even in multi-player... In addition to that half of the units you are given are just useless because they are too weak or too expensive in any situation. This game is terrible. Why does it have so many good reviews on here? Expand
  26. Oct 15, 2013
    A job well done Blizzard, this is everything a fan of Starcraft can dream of, the graphics, the animations, the effects... everything is just amazing, the story is simply great very addictive, i don't see a point of writing a long thought out review about it's pluses and minuses... cause i simply like everything about this game.
  27. Sep 22, 2013
    Absolutely amazing, The best RTS ever made!
    Awesome cinematics, Cool story, Intense gameplay, A bit outdated graphics but great particle effects and AMAZING sound design and music :D
    Nuff said, Best RTS ever made!
  28. Sep 17, 2013
    The definition of what a RTS game should be. As simple as that. I play it at minimum graphics: makes it run exceptionally fluid and it even looks better. No crappy 3D orientation in here. It's almost as you were playing a good old 2D Engine again: As it should be.
  29. Jul 23, 2013
    The best game ever if you do not buy it you are a casual and dont even deserve to play it. I havent even played the campaign yet and it has the best multiplayer i have ever experianced
  30. Jul 22, 2013
    Positives: - looks cartoony but appealing and still serious enough to enjoy - most unit portraits are well made and have a good design - Multiplayer! This is about Multiplayer - frequent balance patches - Modability! This is a great plus for me. You can make basically everything in the GalaxyEditor. One can make entire new games within Sc2. Awesome! - active Community: be it Forums or the constant flow of new custom maps. With a community that big that has access to advanced moding tools such as the fabulous editor this game won't get boring too fast :)
    - the campaign missions are designed fun and diverse

    - Music. Except for the Terran music I consider the soundtrack of part 1 to be the superior one. The great terran music in Sc2 is en par with the terran music in Sc1. They even captured the whole 'space cowboy' theme a little better this time around.
    - Story: The campaign didn't touch me or anything. The whole atmosphere wasn't as unforgiving, cold and gruesome as in Sc1. In Starcraft 1 the cold depth of space was present. The terrans were rugged, slightly degenerate nihilist basterds in Sc1 and it suited them. They were space dark, weird space humans. In the multiplayer of Sc2 everything feels alright about the terrans but in the campaign they're all too shiny and perfect at times. The dark awesome feel of part one is absent during Sc2's campaign. Still, the missions were fun and diverse (see above)
    - Protoss: when have the protoss become singing moral elves? Really they once were awesome radical superbeings who felt superior to everyone because they were. They had awesome big ships and erased entire planets with their radical advanced technolgy if it served their interest. Besides they had other faces and looked way more awesome. Now they just look... I don't know. Their faces are to edged, the eyes to little. I preferred the design in Sc1. It was simpler but it looked way more natural. The way an intelligent alien race should look. Besides, in Sc1 Protoss didn't wear shiny cute crystals everywhere. What happened to the Protoss? They were cool once...

    This is a multiplayer game so the minus of the story is a relatively unimportant one. The protoss problem is a question of personal preference of course. Don't like them? Play another faction. Overall they fit in with the other 2 (way more badass) factions well enough. So this minus is rendered rather meaningless, too. The music, while not as good as in part one at some points (again the Protoss music is my least favorite...) overall is still a solid piece of work and the terran theme is awesome. Zerg is cool, too, sounding very organic and aggressive which suits this race perfectly.
  31. Jul 20, 2013
    10/10. This game was great. There is a great multiplayer ranking system. Each game lasts about 10-25 minutes on average. I would often play 2 games after work and then I was able to put it down. Many games got my heart racing. The single player campaign is excellent.
  32. Jul 16, 2013
    Well balanced strategy game (like Sc1 and Bw). The single player Campaign was excellent! Even thou the story does`nt "top" the original SC1 story, its a good continue, and the game itself has renewed the way the campaign is build up. You can develop in different directions, between missions, and have to live with the choices you make. It has different difficulties, which makes it fun no matter the level your on. (my friend has to play it casual to enjoy the game, i need more challenge and go hard, and if hard is to hard, then i can take this one mission easier, and go back to hard on the next mission again). The game also has 3 alternate challenges within each mission, which you don`t have to take to succeed, but which makes it fun to play the same mission again several times to reach this goal as well.. And of course, the graphics is up to date Excellent game, MANY hours of fun, even after single player campaign is through, you can play it again, or enjoy the best multiplayer strategy game of all time Expand
  33. Jun 30, 2013
    It was easy to predict Blizzard's downfall the moment of SC lls first revelation.
    Cartoonish graphic that doesn't fit at all the attempted sincerity of SC universe.
    Dumbed down, uninteresting, cliché story with disgustingly dumb simpletons as protagonists with outrageously flat lines. It is so embarrassing you want to unhear/unsee it.
    Game itself is not bad, it's that the single
    campaign is so bad it hurts physically. Expand
  34. Jun 29, 2013
    Starcraft 2 was a geat game at the beginning, could run max graphic, then the updates started, cant play it anymore now at lowest graphic. So at start i would give this game a solid 8, now i give it 1
  35. Jun 26, 2013
    The several year-long wait for this game has gotten me impatient, but it's a great game. The storyline could be better and is not as good as HotS storyline, but is a great one still. The game its self does need some tweaks (what game doesn't), but the reason I switched from BW to SC2 was because the BW graphics were killing me. Drones the same size as siege tanks!? It's a great game with plenty of hours of gameplay and epic cinematics that will keep you loving it for a long time. Expand
  36. Jun 23, 2013
    A superb game that was worth the wait, it dealt with any issues that most people except hardcore players (like me but i dont care either way) liked like the 12 unit max and difficult pathing. This is easy to play, campaign is phenomenal and so many options plus the arcade that is pretty much unlimited. Unfortunately Activision screwd with Blizzard and forced region lock and account stuff but isnt enough to lower score, but just a warning Expand
  37. Jun 2, 2013
    Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty. Where to begin. I love the campaign, even though it's really really really really long, but worth it in the end. Then you have to get Heart of the Swarm. The arcade games are fun too. So, I will give it a 9 because in squad td, you can't really do much after getting to prestige 15
  38. May 29, 2013
    Now i personally hated this game, but I can't deny that the core gameplay and visual looks are good and give the game the fresh look that was needed since the first game. I have never gotten into RTS style games so i don't know how good this actual game is when compared to other games, but for those looking for a widely played RTS game here is a good choice.
  39. May 24, 2013
    1999, something big was born: StarCraft: BroodWar. But a long wait for a beautiful licence, and finally, 11 years later, StarCraft continue with Wings Of Liberty. With graphics that worth a 2013 game, I guess. It's optimized so the HD 4200, and even below, can easily run it. more Things to do, a great campaign with lots of achievements that will makes the campaign longer. StarCraft II aims the pro-gamer thanks to the Rank system, but aims the others to, even -With arcades and training, the casual -to initiate them to difficult games. However, has too much security. I know it's normal but still, I had problems for weeks because of that. And StarCraft II, with its extension, cost around $80, which is too expensive for a 3 y/o game. SCII doesn't worth a 10 out of 10 because of, but a good 9 out of 10! Expand
  40. May 16, 2013
    I often hear people say, "Hitler was a good guy, he built a lot of roads." I also have heard people say, "Starcraft II is amazing, the gameplay is fun and very balanced".
  41. May 15, 2013
    This game is excellent. It's one of the best RTSes that have been made recently. A dynamical storyline, which also gives western adventure theme from the start of the game. Three races that we fell in love when we first met them, Protoss, Zerg and Terran, the main part of StarCraft, are here. Even though the campaign only features terrans (plus a spoiler bonus part, that I won't tell), it allows to make us closer to the main character of the Wings of Liberty Jim Raynor. Multiplayer is very competitive, highly skill-based and really fun to play, as it's really interesting to test ourselves against other people or to improve yourselves. Overall, buy this game, as it's really great. Especially, if you are a fan of StarCraft or you just like RTSes. Expand
  42. Apr 14, 2013
    Good game, but falls short in comparison to legendary StarCraft: Brood War. Even though Blizzard improved a lot of things from their original title, they failed to make a great competitive great Brood War was.
  43. Apr 7, 2013
    Old school Real Time Strategy at its best. RTS gamers certainly enjoy it.
    Despite the fact that the player can't control hero units, experience gained by units is almost meaningless, and a group of units are not arranged and they get all together without formations, it's the perfect game.
    Good graphics for a RTS, Very interesting campaign, perfect gameplay and enough variety between each
    of the 3 races to keep you playing it over and over again. Skirmish matches provide limitless game experience, so a gamer can play it almost for ever!
    But that is expected. I still play Warcraft 3, after almost 10 years, and that's what I expect to be the time I'm going to play SCII.
  44. Apr 1, 2013
    Initially I had second thoughts about this game, and I really hated it.
    However, the day I bought the game, I was pretty much unable to put it down.
    The gameplay is simply awesome and it has a great multiplayer base to back it up.
    10/10 at least.
  45. Mar 28, 2013
    Been playing this off and on for 2 years and I can say for sure that there is virtually no limit to the amount there is to learn about it. It's huge, it's a lifetime game, getting to know it feels like I'm getting a small Degree for a university course. I would say getting to know the technical (controls/interface) is bigger than some entire games, and then getting to know the technicality of each race (builder order/units/uniqueness) is like 3 full other games (3 races), and then actually getting good at the game is like 10 full other games. So you're basically getting 14 games worth in this one game. That's actually not even an overstatement because I'll be playing this for 5 years and I'll probably get 14 times the number of hours I get out of most games. Wow, I just realized that I'm not in hyperbole. Expand
  46. Mar 25, 2013
    This game is beautiful. And that's it. If that's enough for you, I'm fine with it. I for one can't believe one can actually give credits for the story. It defiled the legacy of the previous games, period. Shallow characters, meaningless battles, nightmare-ish story, and so forth. Blizzard can't care less.
  47. Mar 17, 2013
    This game is great from almost every perspective. Multiplayer, single player, and the story is fairly engaging. Its incredibly hard to pull off 3 different balanced races in a multiplayer strategy game and truly make them different. If you are looking for something truly new though, this is not the game.
  48. Mar 17, 2013
    I was introduced into the gaming world when I was very young with the original Command and Conquer and have been casually playing RTSs for the past 20 or so years. With so much hype, I got S2 Day-One as I had never played the original. To be honest, I thought it was slightly above mediocre. I had more fun with the single player than playing competitive multiplayer. The graphics are nice, menus are slick, and the three classes are very distinct and balanced. There's no one obviously 'better' class, which is something I cannot say for just about every game out there. Overall, the game feels polished. The menus and game have been updated for added intuitiveness. Despite this, I just couldn't play it for long hours. There was just no 'hook' for me to get sucked in and want to learn all the strengths and weaknesses of all the units, etc.

    The DRM with Blizzard games really don't bother me. The games have such a good community surrounding them that I think I may even prefer it. I can log in anywhere that has the game downloaded and play my account. For less than $40, I think it is well worth a try. RTSs and this game in general has a very wide demographic. It is widely loved, so I think just about anyone can get some enjoyment out of it.
  49. Mar 14, 2013
    Starcraft 2 is simply a better, modern Starcraft 1. An improvement in basically everything that made SC1 the greatest competitive RTS ever made. Now, the campaign is personally not my taste, because considering the wonders you can do (in terms of Sci-Fi story) with the Starcraft universe, they wen't with the worst possible writing, which is a "love story" single characters focus, instead of focusing in the massiveness and epicness of the fight for survival between 3 alien races. However, the campaign is not what you judge Starcraft on, it would be silly. The rest of the game looks extremely polished, fun, and most importantly keeping the basic Starcraft formula that made it so successful. I'm glad Blizzard went with the good ol' formula that works and improved it, not hired a new team and went on it's own shenanigans with a "new modern version" of the game, like they did to Diablo 3 and destroyed the franchise. So yes, Starcraft 2 is and will be the greatest Competitive RTS just like Starcraft 1 was. And without the competitive side, it's still a great RTS, second only to Company of Heroes maybe. The no LAN, new battle net, controlled modding, etc, should not be a reason to deduct points from this masterpiece, because...well...times change, and if you are still living in your basement hoping the 90s era of PC gaming continue to exist, then you are in for a surprise. Expand
  50. Mar 12, 2013
    It improves on every aspect of the original. Beautiful graphics, fantastically told story... What really blew my mind? How every single cutscene is so beautiful. My favourite scene was hands down the recreation of Sarah Kerrigan's death. It was flawless. There's just nothing quite like StarCraft.
  51. Mar 11, 2013
    Yes, there are some features missing. LAN would be nice. Share replays would be nice. But the competitive online experience is far beyond anything achieved by any other game. No matter how many tens of thousands of games you play, there will always be room for improvement, for evolution, for trying new things and finding new ways to have fun.
  52. Mar 9, 2013
    Even though the campaign story was a bit disappointing this is still one of my favorite games of all time. The campaign though having a bad story is still quite fun the first couple of playthroughs. The multiplayer is fantastic and even though the constant cheesing can be annoying, the macro games are so much fun and very different from game to game. The arcade is also much fun if you get tired of melee matches, and even though the maps aren't nearly as good as the ones in Warcraft 3, they're still pretty good. I will be playing this game for years from now on so even though the story was poor i'm still gonna give it 10/10. Expand
  53. Mar 5, 2013
    Sweet game. Almost as good as Brood War. The ladder functionality is nice and polished and works well. You get value from their online service but you're still able to play offline if you want to. The game play is fun, entertaining and smooth. I've got Heart of the Swarm on pre-order now.
  54. Feb 26, 2013
    I love Starcraft, I have played the first one and the expansion for many years. That game was great and ran like a charm. Then (after much long awaited anticipation) this game got released. Expecting such greatness, there was no way they could reach it. but despite that it is still a good game. This game is so similar to the original, it felt like a waste. The only changes is 3 changed units on every side, some not replaced, a HUGE graphics update, and revised terrain (the landscape) properties, such as high ground, and tall grass. Then, unlike the original and the expansion, there was only one story-line; instead they are selling each as their own separate game. Expand
  55. Feb 18, 2013
    Starcraft 2 is miles above other RTS games on the market. The campaign is amazing, it is the perfect length and the missions are very well thought out. Starcraft 2 adds to the story that the original created, and that store continues to be the best I have experienced in any RTS game and many games in general. Blizzard does an amazing job telling the tale of Jim Raynor and Raynor's Raiders. When it comes to multiplayer it is the most popular RTS game in e-sports with a huge following. I can not find anything wrong with it. The graphics are great. The sound is great. The game-play and story are great. If you do not already own this game you should. Everyone should experience the Starcraft universe at some point. Expand
  56. Jan 27, 2013
    This is easily my favorite RTS of all time, and I've played most major RTS games released in the past 20 years. All three races are very well balanced while still being extremely different, and as an E-sport this game is amazing to watch other people play. On top of a well balanced and entertaining multiplayer experience the single player campaign is also very well done. Choosing missions and customizing your own forces gives an RTS campaign some of the feel of an RPG experience. On top of a great out of the box experience tons of player designed maps are available through Battlenet, providing players with an endless supply of additional content at no extra cost. As long as you enjoy RTS games this is a must have, and is a worthy successor to what I previously considered the greatest RTS of all time.

    The one downer is the lack of LAN play, which can be a pain for many players and ought to have been included to tournament play and for friends at LAN parties who shouldn't have to experience lag when playing against each other in the same room.
  57. Jan 22, 2013
    Clearly the definitive strategy game of the decade. Inevitably all other strategy games produced these next ten years will be compared to this game, just as they were for the first Starcraft over the past ten years.

    Starting with the campaign, this game is flawless from a strategy gamer's perspective. Not only do you have the classic RTS elements in every map, but you have to
    strategize about how to upgrade your forces and what missions and research to focus on. Each mission is uniquely challenging and never feels repetitive because of the interesting new game elements it introduces. There is a real sense of progress through the accumulation of upgrades and units from previous missions. Aside from gameplay, the story is also engrossing and interesting. It kept me interested throughout the campaign and almost always seem to leave a cliffhanger after each cutscene.

    Multiplayer is, of course, genre-defining. It isn't the world's number one e-sport for no reason. The simplicity of the gameplay and yet endless variety of approaches make it a great experience for any strategy gamer. The only difficulty is that multiplayer is extremely intimidating for new players to get into. Even the beginner league is full of very strong players, so the learning curve is very steep. If you can keep up with it, though, you will have a great time.
  58. Jan 14, 2013
    The gameplay itself is probably a 8-9 and not that bad. I got on to give this a six because I have an eyefinity setup and they purposefully limit the res to 1080p. C'mon Blizzard, we spend $400 extra for these setups and you won't even let us play against the AI with triple monitors. You should be able to register what type of play you want to do; stats accumulation or just fun. If it's just for fun then you can have control over your gave without this psychotic big brother monitoring. Ridiculous. Expand
  59. Jan 13, 2013
    I've sunk hundreds of hours into this game and I still love it. Most of the haters on here are fanboys from the original series who aren't happy with the game going mainstream.
  60. Jan 10, 2013
    I played this game before playing SC 1 or Brood Wars, but I immediately enjoyed it and became hooked on the game and the lore. The campaign is admittedly easier than Brood Wars, but the difficulty levels can accommodate anyone; from a weak player like myself to seasoned gamers. The intertwining stories of the deadly Zerg, the plight of the Protoss, and the raging rebellion within the Terrans can easily entertain a fan of the series. While I found the ending to be slightly anticlimactic, I very much enjoyed the lore. For me, a game doesn't have to challenge me (I'd prefer it if it DIDN'T), it just has to entertain me. I enjoyed the variance of units, the depth of the story, the characters and personal plotlines, and the game experience. I'll admit, the online gaming can be slightly daunting, but I have found that the StarCraft II community is one of the most polite and helpful communities in gaming. In a personal account, I was getting wrecked by an online opponent, and he stopped his onslaught and started ordering me on builds so that I stood a chance. Ultimately, it is an excellent game. No, it is not the greatest game to ever be played, and no, it is not a difficult challenge, but I cannot say I've played an RTS that I enjoy more than StarCraft II. Expand
  61. Jan 2, 2013
    This game has sucked my life away for a full year. The game is fun but nothing special, while the online multiplayer is a fascinating world where one can lose himself in the hardcore strategies as one tries to rank up from bronze to grandmaster league. I had a great time learning new skills to beat my friends. I do not recommend playing this game unless you are looking for a hardcore experience that will consume your life, but if that is what your looking for there is no better game than this. Expand
  62. Dec 26, 2012
    Best game ever made period, if i could score it an 11 i would.
    In all my years of gaming i have never played a game as addictive as this.
    This game literally created a new hobby for me and i will continue to play it for the rest of my life, absolutly incredible game.
  63. Dec 26, 2012
    Blizzard took so long to create just a more casual and worse balanced younger brother for StarCraft and Brood War. Ok, this game is good and all, but it's far from reaching it's predescesors level of fun, intensivity and skill-depth. On the other hand it's casualised gameplay should attract a lot of new blood into the game.
    For a good gameplay, mediocre and horribly easy campaign, decent
    multiplayer matchmaking system and very easy user interface I gotta give it no less then an 8. Expand
  64. Dec 18, 2012
    The game has several technical issues not related to the actual gameplay. The installer and updater are very complex and bug prone, after my first install off dvd, the game auto updates. However the auto update is huge and if it fails mid way your install may be broken to the point where you have to uninstall. The uninstall will fail as the updater is a background process that you will have to quit using the task manager, this auto updater also installs to a location on your hard disk other than the one you tell starcraft to install to. Your best bet is to install from the weblink provided by Blizzard, however that requires several hours and a good internet connection as the game is quite big. Which brings me to my second point that since you are unable to play the game without internet you can forget about sitting in the yard with your laptop, or playing it in the summer cottage. This also has the implication that you can't borrow or trade your 60$ game to a friend after you are done playing it. The good news for all this is if you happen to loose your disk you can download the game from blizzard, however I can't say I've EVER lost a DVD I paid for. A good game wrapped in very brittle and overbearing installers and drms, in the end I spent just as much time installing as I did playing.

    Lets talk a bit more about the game, it really feels like starcraft 1 with slightly improved graphics. SC2 completely misses all the great game play advances other RTS's have made in the last 15 years. Graphically you need at minimum the recommended graphics card to play the game, I have something slightly below the recommended and it looks terrible. This is due to the shadows, I can have all settings maxed out, but as soon as shadows go from low to medium the game is choppy(20-30fps). The low shadow quality runs fast but has horrendously poor quality. Rise of Nations looks better on an old computer than Starcraft does on my much newer computer.

    I had high hopes for this game as the first Starcraft had groundbreaking game play and graphics for the time, so many other RTS's have come since then and made valuable additions to the genre, SC2 cannot hold a candle to them and I am very disappointing.
  65. Dec 13, 2012
    I think Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty is the best RTS at the moment. It's a Classic Blizzard game with great campaign and definitely deserves 10/10.
  66. Dec 12, 2012
    After so many years all, this company, has to offer is better grafics...? This games gentre is Not rts. Its probably fps just because the only the player has to have lighting reflexes. The strategy negligable and is repeat it again and again. Well the funs must be happy because in terms of gameplay nothing have changed. For old school strategists AVOID this game.
  67. Dec 10, 2012
    I'm seeing a lot of idiotic user reviews here. Truth is this isn't a horrible game and it doesnt deserve anything less than a 5.... but its a **** RTS compared to Starcraft: Brood War. Singleplayer-wise, the story is god awful (seriously blizzard just hire a good writer) and the dialogue is pitiful. But the gameplay is a fun blend of RTS and RPG. If you turn your brain all the way off its decent singleplayer, nothing to write home about though. Now the multiplayer is frought with problems. According to Dustin Browder the design plan in this game was to "make cool units" and worry about the numbers later. This is pretty apparent in the multiplayer where its a circus of stupidity with units. Also, because the engine makes units clump, there tends to be big balls of units that smash into each other in an A-moved orgy. Add in a lot of cheesing, and you get one of the messiest multiplayers around. Sorry Blizzard, this game is average. Expand
  68. Dec 9, 2012
    Story: Huge letdown. Terribly cliched. You could tell the writers were too used to working on Warcraft fantasy when they started work on SC2. Too many things come down to space magic. Storyline is not engaging whatsoever and lack of CGI cutscenes made the game less enjoyable as it had in SC1 & Broodwar. All the characters from Raynor to Mengsk are extremely boring. Lorewise lots of things don't make sense such as: What the hell happened to the UED? They are never mentioned whatsoever.----------------------------------------------------------------------Multiplayer: Worst ever. One of the greatest things I loved about SC1's replayability was UMS maps. Players would design some extremely fun & popular maps you could download ingame by joining. In SC2 there is a terrible quasi-matchmaking system ranked by popularity that just doesn't work. Games autolaunch when they have a certain amount players & there is just no feeling of community anymore. Its a good example of "Do not attempt to fix what isn't broken". The games created by players coming up in a server list worked perfectly and there was nothing wrong with it whatsoever. Somewhere someone decided they knew better. They didn't.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Conclusion: Ripoff. Played for a few weeks after launch, have never touched it since which is a telltale sign something is wrong considering I played SC1+BR for countless years. Expand
  69. Dec 9, 2012
    Where should I start. Most BW fans were disappointed with the game and Blizzard just did a horrible job with this game. BW has a far higher skill-cap and feels more fun, WoL is a watered down version of the game. Even as a non Starcraft/RTS player, you'll probably easily understand the advantages, vulnerabilities and mechanics of WoL, it's just really simple and barely requires mathematics unlike BW. So... you have to pay for another account in a different region...if you're playing on a foreign region then your ping is terrible even though the ping was perfectly fine in the beta. The lack of social interaction is a big issue which they are only now coming to address. They removed units from the game itself from BW and changed the meta to encourage turtling. That being said, it is more balanced than BW and it is better spectator-wise which was the main problem with BW. Now the the single-player, with a bad story and less memorable characters than in SC1/BW. All in all, Blizzard tried to capitalize on old franchise (as they did with Diablo 3) and it was just a waste of space. Expand
  70. Dec 8, 2012
    Outstanding game, my only complain would be that the campaign is raher short. I'm looking forward the expansion(s). Multi-player gaming would justify the buy on its own.
  71. Dec 7, 2012
    First and foremost, I am an avid Starcraft fan and have played the original Starcraft as well as Brood War countless times for many days worth of hours played. That said, I was also a little skeptical at first about how the new Starcraft game would turn out. The campaign was... not as great as I thought it would be. The story was somewhat blah and predictable. As far as presentation and graphics, the game gets an A+ (at least compared to the old Starcraft; in terms of comparisons to other games today, it's about average I'd say). Multiplayer is still fun, but one thing I really did not like was the inability to have local LAN play instead of having to connect to the Blizzard servers all the time. The greatest thing about Starcraft's continued replayability all these years was that you could get a bunch of your buddies together or go to an internet gaming cafe (anywhere besides the US) and play Starcraft on a local network without having to deal with lag or server downtimes or malfunctions. You used to be able to play offline, even though it was supposed to be a online-only experience. Now it appears they've taken away offline play, so that docks more points from the rating. You shouldn't need an internet connection in order to play the game, it's that simple.
    To conclude, I am happy with the game but not as happy as I expected to be. Still would recommend getting this game, and hopefully with Heart of the Swarm they will have made a better game.
  72. Dec 3, 2012
    Outside of SC:BW, it's the best RTS out there. I've put hundreds of hours into this game and enjoyed almost every minute of it. Right now zerg is super imba, (I play random), and the game seems to suffer from waves of imba ness.
  73. Alu
    Dec 3, 2012
    It was hard for me to read low scores from users - I dont understand it at all - Are people really that intentionally destructive ? Do you do it for shock value? what makes you tick? This is a great game in every way it was meant to be. The storyline - not the most riveting - but not terrible as some of you shock turkeys suggest. Campaign was great - I had a blast playing it - again, I dont know what the rest of you turkeys felt was wrong with it. Finally, Multiplayer - what it basically all comes down to for Starcraft players - It is perfect in my opinion - Balanced and full of depth. This game is not about leveling up your "character"/"force" so it should not be rated poorly because of this. You will find yourself fine tuning your "build" in conjunction with your matchups constantly. This is the beauty of Starcraft 1 and Starcraft 2 - Blizzard has done a great job with this game. Some of you wanted more races - and for each race to have a complete campaign. You feel everything should come in one installment. Whats great about starcraft 2 is it does not give into this idea - It preserves its quality over quantity guarentee. And I for one look forward to buying each expansion (most likely 2 more) with campaigns for zerg and protoss on the horizon; each packed with quality. Honestly, rate a game accurately. If you played this game and have half a brain you know its just deceptive to others. Expand
  74. Dec 2, 2012
    Was what I expected: good story, good gameplay... New is good I think, press button, wait awhile and enjoy game. Looking forward to HotS and continuation of story line.
  75. Nov 28, 2012
    This is, and without a doubt, the greatest RTS game ever made.

    Those who try very hard to be cool and buck the mainstream would beg to differ, but morons like that beg to differ about everything.

    This game is popular for a reason, people. There simply isn't a better RTS game available right now.

    Not an opinion. Fact.
  76. Nov 28, 2012
    Starcraft 2 is the sequel of the greatest RTS game in the world. The Expectations on Blizzard were very big. But thes did their Job very well und created the new Star at the RTS-Heaven. I only give 9 of 10 because i don't like the Story-Mode. Starcaft is a Only-Multiplayer-Game
  77. Nov 15, 2012
    This game is a poor mans Warcraft 3 in terms of the custom games. Based purely on competitive 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4 games I found command and conquer 3 to be more enjoyable.
  78. Nov 12, 2012
    Starcraft II delivered everything that was promised. Amazing game with excellent gameplay (as expected), great story, great characters and overall campaign. Can't wait for the next installment.
  79. Nov 6, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Starcraft 2 is a great game for everybody! It`s probably a must have game for all strategy-fans. The tree races of the game are very interested and motivated too become a pro gamer. The "Arcade" mode is excited to play too other players. I mean that the story mode is interested too.
    Because of this it`s at moment my favourite strategy game. Like!
  80. Nov 4, 2012
    In one word: Amazing! The anticipation for Heart of the Swarm is killing me. I love the game, watch all the professional matches, and this from a guy that never even played Starcraft 1! Every gamer needs this in his staple of classics.
  81. Oct 26, 2012
    This game has great graphics and detail to each unit being used and also good map designs. But I did not like the single player campaign at all. The missions are very short and almost every mission had a time limit on it. So this limits me on what units I can use that are cheap and can do the job in completing that particular mission. The original starcaft game, including the add on Brood Wars, rarely had a time limits and I could take my own pace in completing a mission. The new one is no fun at all, you are too much in a hurry to finish the mission to enjoy any part of the game and the extra units that are playable are a waste, because I never get enough time to use a new unit to their full Potential. It seems the new units were only created to be used for multi-player and were just added to single player for their introduction. I never did like multi-player because I die to fast and I never have enough units to defend my base. The first game will alway be my favorite because you do have to be online to get the ok from Blizzard that I can play my game on my PC. Furthermore, the units on the first game had more uniqueness that they don't look out of place and actually help the player in winning a game. This will be my last starcraft game until blizzard makes a more compelling game that is fun to play like their old games were. Very disappointed about this game. Expand
  82. Oct 10, 2012
    Just what I wanted from the sequel to Starcraft, this installment is basically the old game with new graphics and a few minor improvements. The campaign isn't that great but the multiplayer is good fun especially if you got friends who play. The worst part about this game is the terrible match making and ranking system... as with all Blizzard games your rank means nothing and hidden match making value is all that matters which is annoying. The ranking system promotes time played and not skill as with all Blizzards games unfortunately. Still a good game though but I am very much against the multiple releases for the different campaigns and am not so sure if I will get the expansions. The campaign is not really worth the cost of the game. If multiplayer is not your thing, there are much better games then this for you. Expand
  83. Oct 8, 2012
    While The game is good, it definitly is far wors than its predecesor. Facts to sustain my claim: No lan; internet connection required for single player (if not connected says launcher did not update); after a bit more than a year, users droped from around 9 million peak to 800.000 peak; unfriendly and isolating interface.
    Now, on the opinion side: Unit counters are far too strong (build
    order loss is almost always game loss); Imbalances (there are many, but very hard to actually point out); Very bad Matchmaking system (especially in team games); Frustrating disconects and server errors.

    Apart from those, the game is great, and quite fun. Definitly better than your averege game.
  84. Oct 1, 2012
    The game was clearly improved on some parts, but the idea for a forced online gameplay and the lack of "computer" enemies like it used to be on Starcraft 1, make this game really annoying to play. The missions are fun and really interesting, the units are new an unique, but the always online to play something else make me put it a 7 as score. It misses a lot of what made Starcraft 1 real fun.
  85. Sep 29, 2012
    I played the original Starcraft and spent many late nights playing, only to be made aware of how long I was playing by the sun coming in through the window. LOL! I was very impressed with the quality of this game. The updated graphics retain the quality and feel of the original and the addition of achievements and portraits give you some added incentive to keep playing in Multiplayer. Fortunately, Blizzard gives new players of the franchise several flashbacks of what happened in the original game, so you won't be completely lost. If you get bored with multiplayer, there are many player-made arcade versions of the game that are high quality and ingeniously made. My only gripe is the cheating in the multiplayer leagues - diamond/platinum players who play professionally deliberately qualify for lower leagues so they can farm portraits and achievements, so it makes it more difficult for people in the bronze/silver leagues to progress as far as standings/achievements go, but hopefully that will end once these players with insane talent get their achievements and move on. LOL! Overall, a fantastic game. Expand
  86. Sep 27, 2012
    If you like an RTS that requires no strategy-- literally the best strategy is massing any unit and overwhelming your opponent-- then this game is for you.

    If you want an RTS that requires strategy-- aka military units to take out certain enemy units and siege to take out infantry-massacring buildings, then any of the Age of Empires games are for you. Unfortunately stupid masses flock
    to Blizzard's remake of SC:BW. They know not that Blizzard is owned by some dumbass French company. Expand
  87. Sep 20, 2012
    This is the serious competitive electronic game to play. Disregard the cheesy action movie campaign, online multiplayer... online multiplayer - this is what Starcraft is all about. If you like any sort of strategy in your video games Starcraft 2 is the cream of the crop of it's genre. One of the best games ever made with infinite replayability.
  88. Sep 18, 2012
    I waited over a year after release to buy this game when it went on sale for 50% off. I was a fan of the original game, and decided to give this one a shot when the price hit my "sweet" spot. Gameplay is right where it should be; great. The only negative was no real support for LAN play like the original Starcraft offered. Graphics are good, but not great for what I would consider to be a modern game. Overall worth a buy if you are an RTS fan, if you can find it for a good price. Expand
  89. Sep 10, 2012
    Overall a disappointment. I've notched off a rating for everything I found wrong.

    1) You know what I liked most to do when I was tired of gaming, or searching for a new one? I sat in chat rooms. I joined clans, I talked, trash talked, or watched other people have their own conversations. It was great, I possibly had more fun in chat rooms than in the actual game. 2.0 has removed this, and otherwise killed that part which I liked best.

    2) Originality: There is surprisingly very little which is original in sc2. If you played wc2, and then wc3, you will understand. I mean, sure they added reapers and queens and stuff, but honestly, they added about as many units when frozen throne came out, and that was just an expansion! SC2 just seems like a $50 SC expansion with very little new. I would have loved to see more play within the environment, or an added race, or even totally revamped races, but no... you just get reapers.

    4. Graphics: Face it, sc2 graphics are the same as wc3 graphics. Don't get me wrong, I love wc3 graphics, but it's 10 years old! Man, when I first got sc1, I couldn't believe how bloody and dark that game was, so I expected sc2 would be similar. Instead I see these cartoonish units with this fake blood, in a children's atmosphere! Terrible.

    5. Noob-Friendly: This is an issue Blizzard really wanted to solve. As I see it there are two ways to handle it: a) Provide in-depth help explaining all the features and game mechanics, allowing the player to review this easily whenever he/she desires. Also could have given scenarios with computer scripted responses based on real players so that noobs could learn what a rush is or fast expand, and which is good for which. OR b) do what blizzard did and make guys like me dislike the game further.
  90. Sep 5, 2012
    I will have to admit I was extremely skeptical that this game would be better than the original Starcraft. After its release and playing for an extraordinary amount of time, I can say that SC2 is an amazing game. It is fair to also assess that it is the same level of quality as the original. This is an exceptional level of quality because Starcraft is truly in my opinion Blizzard's gem and a revolution in pc gaming. Let it be known that there are people who devote their lives to this game, expect to get schooled in multi-player. If you do play for a while though, practice makes perfect, you will improve significantly over time. SC2 is remarkably flexible and balanced and every battle is a fight to the end. There are so many different strategies at your disposal, and even if you don't want to fight others you can team up against the computer or join one of the HUNDREDS of AWESOME UMS games that are provided. UMS for those who don't know means USE MAP SETTINGS, and is pretty much where the players create a map for others to play. I absolutely love defense UMS games such as turret defense, they are so simple yet totally satisfying. You will need a good PC to run SC2 on FULL settings, but if you qualify the reward is terrific. Blizzard truly did an excellent job making this game a successful predecessor to one of the best games ever made, too bad that didn't happen with Diablo 3 :) Expand
  91. Sep 4, 2012
    The overall score for this game is between 6 and 9. Compared to war 3, the latest rts from Blizz, I would say that Starcraft 2 was a letdown for me. Even more if I think that I was in-loved with SC1.
    The graphics are nice, the gameplay even better, but the whole game made me start hating on blizz developments. In hindsight, after the D3 fiasco, I see that I was right then as I am now. My
    first few hours spent on SC2 were with the campaign. I am sorry to say this, but the design, the story and the entire feeling after I've finished the game was of disappointment. I would rate the campaign with 3. Went through it only in the memory of SC1, with the hope that will get better eventually. It didn't. The multiplayer is good, but the lack of offline gameplay angered all my friends, thus my hours spent on reached not more than 15-20 since I`ve bought the game. I won`t buy the sequel. Even if it were for free, I wouldn't spend any more time on blizz poor developed games. I am sorry Blizzard, in my eyes you are heading atm straight to the EA levels. 7/10 Expand
  92. Aug 23, 2012
    Starcraft was my favorite RTS of all times. And now I can say it's Starcraft II. Amazing gameplay, story and graphics. I just can't wait for the sequel.
  93. Aug 21, 2012
    So my account just got blocked because of suspicious activity, because blizzard wants me to buy their authenticator. This is mainly because if you join a public game in D3 it gives people your ip etc so its really easy to hack your only numbers and character password..Not to mention the fact the blizzard has completely destroyed so much game play at the expense of balance when not necessary ghost/reaper/the list goes on and on hellion as a result of the queen and on and on. Then they have this huge update for custom games that people who play the game don't even care about. All we want is land and other gaming ladders stuff that was supported way back in 1998 but by all means they can't do it now because that would be too difficult. Also They start updating units to bring them back from when they were destroy because of balance in WOL for 40$ and they're going to add other types of competitive match making to fix problems that were created by themselves with 2.0, They still haven't realized how seriously they are **** up or they just don't care because they are getting infinity money from wow and daiblo and people are just going to buy their games regardless how much the customer is getting **** over. Expand
  94. Aug 5, 2012
    Starcraft is just the best RTS out there. Just that! The custom games make the game already worth, with the ladder the game is perfectly complete. You should try this game , you not gonna be disappointed.
  95. Aug 5, 2012
    Starcarft 2 WoL, has a good story. The always online DRM is a very bad idea and I hate it very much! The only good thing starcraft had going for it was the custom maps. And now even that has been killed off thanks to bean counters at Blizzard. Thanks you greed corporate AssHats! The only reason I am giving at a low score is because of the replay ability factor is low. This game gets very boring after you beat it a few times. I hate the online play and I hate the lack of good maps due to the fact that the Editor is very limited now compared to what it was ones before. So this piece of trash gets a very nice 0 out of 10 from me! You failed yet again Blizzard! Expand
  96. Aug 2, 2012
    Don't let the number '2' fool you, it's just the original 12 year old game with 1/3 the content. If you're not familiar with SC and are considering buying this get the first one instead; the gameplay has changed little plus you get more for your money.
  97. Jul 30, 2012
    Great Game and Huge replay value, one of the few Game's i played through not just once but 3 times just to get all those shiny Achievements ;)

    Also has one of the best Multiplayer Mode's and Communities in the gaming industry. The Multiplayer matches are highly entertaining, not only to play for yourself but also to watch. Great game overall and lifes up to the first starcraft
  98. Jul 21, 2012
    I am amazed by all the negative reviews saying it is similar to the first.. OF COURSE IT IS, its a sequel. I enjoyed the single player and have probably sunk about 40ish hours into it, but remember this is primarly not a single player game. Community made content (UMS games) kept the first starcraft alive and Blizzard actually did an alright job showcasing user made games. Ladder games have kept me coming back to this over 2 years, any game that can do that has done a good job. It looses a point because blizzard seems a bit over zealous wit no LAN, but it is way more free than Diablo, mainly because (my opinion) this was made before activision got their hands in the pile. Good game, great multyplayer, huge player base, 3 different yet equal races, and an amazing community. Expand
  99. Jul 11, 2012
    Starcraft 2 is the best of it's genre, but the focus is relatively narrow. It's more or less entirely skill based when it comes to online 1v1 play which is very impressive. I didn't think the campaign was that good though.
  100. Jul 5, 2012
    Star Craft II: Wings of Liberty is the first part of Starcraft II. Blizzard is planning on releasing several Star Craft II games with each of them having a a different story. They decided to do this to make more money. Instead of buying one game with a lot of campaigns you will have to buy multiple games. A lot of people love this game. Game Informer gives it a 10/10 (the last one given in three years). They way I look at it is that if you don't already have this game and are planing to play online you should not get it. I got it about a month after release and I am do terrible online. The game give noobs like you and me fifty warm up rounds (I skipped them and did the five games that places you in a bracket). I some how managed to win one of the five games. Now when I play online I usually lose in fifteen minutes. In other Real Time Strategy games like Age of Mythology and Age of Empires it usually takes at around twenty minutes for the first attack. In Starcraft II you are attacked after ten minutes of playing the game. As for me, I like to make an empire, get resources, get all the upgrades, and so on. Maybe RTS games online are not my cup of tea. The graphics are good along with the campaign. What I like most about the campaign is that in between missions you are on a ship and you can get upgrades and talk people. (This is unheard off in an RTS). I also liked when you are on a mission you get people communicating with you about the mission of the left side of the screen. The story was okay but I never played the first Starcraft (that may have helped me understand it). The graphics are good but I have seen better. With this game being pushed and pushed for a release date you would expect the graphics to be at least as good as Red Dead Redemption. One positive thing was that you did not have to pay a monthly fee like World of Warcraft. I would have played even less of this game or may have not purchased it if had Like I said, if your not already playing online then expect to get you smashed in. Expand

Universal acclaim - based on 82 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 82 out of 82
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 82
  3. Negative: 0 out of 82
  1. Jan 18, 2011
    "Quotation Forthcoming"
  2. Jan 18, 2011
    If you are into real time strategy in any form, it's hard to ignore Starcraft II.
  3. Dec 24, 2010
    Perfectly balanced multiplayer with old school elements intact, and rich and dynamic single player campaigns. [Issue#244, p.102]