That's it, I'm not looking at this any longer because my computer will not be able to run this thing and it's breaking my heart.

Seeing that many zerg brings back some BAD BAD memories. D:

It looks like theres even more than before now. Double D:

Damn it I think I will have to get a new PC for this

@Sollus: That's it, I'm not looking at this any longer because my computer will not be able to run this thing and it's breaking my heart.

Personally I'm not looking at any more SC2 screenshots because I'm already sold on day one. My criteria: "It's a Blizzard game? Ok, sold on day one."

This will finally be the game which forces me to upgrade my PC. It's been 3-4 years.

@Witzbold: I know you don't venture to the top floor of Kotaku towers but can you get someone to do something about this horrible site redesign? It clips images and that nasty bug that doesn't remember your screenshot resolution between transition is back. oKenny is a sad pervert :(

Am i the only one not impressed at the graphics difference between this and the original? Don't get me wrong, i understand it's not what counts but it seriously looks like an update and not a full step up. C&C looks prettier than this.

I am losing as many babies as there are Zerg thanks to these screens. :(

@Fukanzen: No, it looks BROWNER than this. There's a difference.

@Fukanzen: I was about to say the same thing. Im beginning to regard this the way I regard CS, a dinosaur from another era, stuck in time, while new games like Supreme Commander pioneer the new direction for the genre.

I... am probably not going to make friends with this, but... I didn't GET Starcraft. Mainly because I tried to take the game's advice and play as Humans first, kept getting stuck on one level, and then stopping playing for two years.

I don't have the mind for RTS games. No mind for RTS games at all. New screens sure look purdy though. Mighty purdy indeed.

@okenny :): Dont like the "new" club tell the manager not the bouncer. ;D

In other words mail Crecente about your concerns.

Personally Im not having any probs with the new designs, asides from the fact that now in our profiles the messages from friends is a bit more spaced out than before.

@2NinjasTapedTogether: Yeah I hear you there. I personally enjoy Company of Heroes far more than I did with Starcraft.

@okenny :): It's brand new. Tech will still be ironing out the kinks. Give it a day or two, and if it's still giving you hassles, email us about it.

@okenny :): Dont forget to include what browser / OS you are using also.

As for myself I use Firefox latest version. And Kotaku seems to work pretty well with it. A lot better than IE anyways. :x

Zerg Rush?

both screens and kotaku look nice in safari ;)

hope my macbook air will be able to play this game. fingers are crossed.

I just picked up a new blu-ray packed Vaio for this game. Knowing Blizzard, they'll make the game as compatible as possible; from weak to strong rigs.

just displaying these screenshots caused my monitor to spontaneously combust...

...that's right...i'm typing blind here
:-P

I think I speak for everyone when I say, "kekeke".

@sascha23: Yeah since Bliz always seems to be good about making high quality games that can run on most systems.

Which quite a few devs nowdays are forgetting. :/

@Luke Plunkett: @Witzbold: Thanks for he info. I'll wait it out then and see where things go. Though I'm using Firefox, I seem to be the only one bitching but hopefully it will get better.

@okenny :): *the

@okenny :): nah dude it bugs me too.

clicking on 1280 and getting half the picture due to this site's dimensions makes me sadface

Firefox and ie look the same. please don't make me open ie again

I welcome the Brawl like levels of hype that have now been shifted onto this game.

@ProfWho: I hope I'll need to upgrade my PC for this. If not, then they didn't upgrade the control cap and change the graphics.

They promised me epic battles, these screens don't disappoint.

@NitrousO: If SupCom becomes the new direction in RTSes, I sadly will stop playing them. There are so many problems I have with that game I won't even get started. It was a huge disappointment.

@Witzbold: CoH on the other hand, now that's some good stuff. We get in a game at working during lunch almost every day. I have to say though, I think CoH gets a little too micro-heavy sometimes. Starcraft still holds a place in my heart though. It's funny, whenever I go back to where I grew up for Christmas, I get together with a couple of my high school friends and we play Starcraft almost exclusively.

Let the computer building Begin.

I'm starting to dislike the game. The other starcraft games had an art style of their. Starcraft 2 doesn't have a style of its own it burrows heavily from Warcraft unit style and i dislike that. The units look weird and big like warcraft units. That to me is a turndown. Before this game had its own thing but now blizzard is just making a warcraft 3 game but in space with same unit styles. Blizzard probably shouldn't of let the same people that made Warcraft 3 work on starcraft 2.

@Fuxion: Is it me or do the units have no sense of scale?

@Fuxion:
1. you can probably zoom in and out, like most modern rts games, which would solve the units looking 'big'
2. sc2 looks as much like wc3 as sc does to wc2.
3. wc3 in space? the dynamics of the game look completely different in sc2. look at the screens, that many units in wc3 will probably blow up your computer.
4. a lot of people who worked on wc, wc2 worked on sc also.

however i do kinda agree on the scale bit. the units all look pretty similar in size to each other..

@Witzbold: I also play CoH but the balance is blatantly off. Allies can only win VP control games. Axis may have higher resource requirements, but they also produce higher production pt per min and their armors are actually worth getting. I haven't even talked about the superior mortar and mobile arsenals.

I can see the reasoning behind Axis' better quality units which is historical accuracy, and relic is only keeping up one side of the bargain. US Sherman tank's advantage lied on sheer numbers. As of writing, this is impossible and makes an entire doctrine completely useless.

It's a pretty established fact within the CoH community that there's far more balancing issues to iron out.

Balance and a shabby online network is my main gripe about CoH, something that Blizzard RTS has always made its #1 priority.

On first glance, I thought the Moon and rocks in front of it were a giant bunny. What a let-down.

@cmoody17: Good to know someone else saw it.

Keep the screens coming! I know my alias my hint at my bias (and I haven't played Extreme Commander yet) but Starcraft is still the most balanced of any RTS that I've ever played. It's extreme longevity is a testament to this.

Comparing Supreme Commander to Starcraft is rather like comparing a busy gourmet resturant food to an extremely good diner. One of them takes a long time and ultimately delivers, even if it's taste doesn't appeal to everyone and it takes a ridicliously long time.

The other is a friendly, no frills atmosphere that delivers fast food and doesn't require all the set up time. Also, I know the waitresses, and have had a good time there before.

I also have been known to take metaphors too far though.

@Fuxion:

You do know that the guys that worked on WarCraft 3 also worked on StarCraft Original right? The art director of StarCraft 2 is the same guy that has done art direction for Blizzard since WarCraft 1, Samwise Didlier.

He admits that since they jump around projects, a lot of the styles get mixed, but that he does work to give StarCraft its only aesthetic while keeping it close to his own style. I think it looks great is you ask me, it stylish and nice of the eyes while not trying to be top of the line.

I can imagine a new meta-technique of very high-end PC users being Zerg and swarming their opponent for the simple reason of lagging him to hell =/

Well, that's for online play anyway.

@Evdor: @darthmole12:
Hmm, I should have elaborated. I meant to say that while games like Supreme Commander, Company of Heroes, Sins of a Solar Empire, etc., are trying to change the genre, Starcraft 2 looks to be a clone of the original with better graphics and more troops. Not necessarily saying thats a bad thing, but that it seems (to me) to be stuck in time.

@NitrousO: You have a point, but as an avid RTS player, I value balance above all else. I find it a bit interesting that all of the games you have mentioned indeed brought significant changes in the genre for the cost of gameplay and balance performance one way or the other.

Besides, this is Starcraft II, it's meant to be a sequel that stays true to the core Starcraft gameplay. There is a clear demand for a sequel that doesn't tamper too much with a proven formula.

I'm not being a fanboy here. I've played SC, WC3, AoM, AoE3, C&CG, and CoH competitively and I personally went back to SC more than any other game because of its rock solid balance. The balance keeps me motivated to keep improving my play.

I spend more time playing CoH now because as you mentioned it's a very nice game with neat mechanics. But I get disappointed every match because I feel frustrated for losing or winning a match simply due to balance issues.

The fact that these great games don't receive as much Pro-League exposure to SC and WC3 also seems to show that professional RTS gamers find these games to be more balanced and suitable for competitive play. That is the core of Starcraft.

@Sobe318: Hmm, I guess I was wrong in that respect. Having not played any of my RTS's online since Red Alert 2, I always forget about game balance. I see it in other games though and will never forgive Battlefield Vietnam for giving the NVA the bigger, better airforce (Historically incorrect, AND unbalanced hurray!). I guess in that sense, the starcraft series did evolve through patches to create a relatively well balanced game which, considering their major following in competitive gaming, I can understand them not wanting to destroy.

The single most anticipated game OF ALL TIME for me. Can't fucking wait.

@NitrousO: It's not just balance, there isn't any good RTS without some "big new feature" that just detracts from the core gameplay.

CoD4 or GoW weren't innovative, they were just good games.
In much the same way people liked these two, a lot of people want RTS games that are just GOOD, it's been 10 years and we only got Starcraft. It's about time we get a second true RTS ;)

Ya i cant wait for the game. I still have Starcraft and Warcraft II but as long as the game doesn't go in the same direction as Warcraft III ill get it. In my opinion, WC3 was nothing more than an "ok" RTS.

Damn this game looks good. Maybe blizzard will jump on the jubblies band wagon and give Kerrigan giant knockers...

Ahem... I'll stop there.

I'm very content with how much it actually looks like StarCraft.
So glad they didn't change the visual appearance, they just made it look more awesome.

WHEN WHEN WHEN WHEN WHEN
I can't take it no mo.

I'm really liking the look of the unit shadows (random, I know). It adds a very nice degree of realism to a game whose graphics are drool-worthy. In my opinion, the style has been updated perfectly - just enough to look awesome and new, but not lose that perfect Starcraft feel. Bravo Blizzard. Where can I mail my 50 dollars now?

What is the deal with people trying to find the smallest problem with this game :P get with the picture people if you like RTS you are going to like SC2.
Even though we haven't played it, but has blizzard disappointed us in the past ?
No, they haven't even though I don't like WoW that much, got bored with it but the 10 million say otherwise so I would say it's a good game.

If you are not convinced in wanting SC2 because of some small detail you dont like, you will be missing out on the fun. :D

@Mibu1: I agree on all accounts. In fact, I didn't care for WC3 or WoW, but that was for personal reasons (Heroes for the former, grinding for the latter); nonetheless, they are both great games.