StarCraft II Beta Signups Open

motang writes "StarCraftWire reports that Blizzard has started taking beta sign-ups for StarCraft II. Quoting: 'Interested parties must simply visit their Battle.net profile page, choose to opt-in for the beta, and re-submit their current system specs by way of a small downloadable piece of software.' Blizzard's Chris Sigaty said in an interview, 'As with previous betas for our real-time strategy games, the StarCraft II beta test will be multiplayer only, and players will have access to all three races — terrans, protoss, and zerg — and all of their units. We'll include a selection of multiplayer maps, but they won't necessarily include all of the maps that will be in the final version of the game. We're making some great progress on the single-player campaign, but we don't plan to do a public beta since we want to keep the story under wraps until the game's out.'"

I signed up yesterday

[orclevegam]

I signed up for this yesterday but so far haven't received any notification. My guess is Blizzard will just select from the pool of everyone that applies, possibly selecting based on hardware specs for a wide variety of system configs.

Back into the Internet Lexicon...

[GPLDAN]

I was beginning to feel old when I used the term "Zerg Rush" to describe anything involving lots of people swarming to get at something. By younger IT colleagues would roll their eyes at the "old man" with his dated terms.

Now there will be a new generation of geeks who will learn the power of the Zerg...

Beta Codes

[AAMP31B]

If you have the cards from Blizzcon or the World Wide Invitational you can use those for this beta too. Just use mine so once invites start going out should be getting mine.

Re:Late

[ouimetch]

I am personally glad that Blizzard decided to put a lot of extra time into this game. The longer the better in my opinion. Too many gaming sequels have been short changed because of a such a rush to get a product out there while the market is still hot(first one that comes to mind is Halo 2).

Starcraft 2 is going to be an excellent sequel because of the fact that they are not rushing it.

Re:Late

[khellendros1984]

Are you kidding? Starcraft is remembered more for its multiplayer than for its story.

Re:Late

[VeNoM0619]

The reason Starcraft's multiplayer is so well renoun is because of the near perfect level of balance it had.

Which kept getting updated and updated and updated... every Blizzard game has "balancing fixes" with each update. Starcraft has had plenty of updates as well. Sure, it's nice they try to keep the game balanced over time, but after a while it's like "how are they changing the gameplay this time? what are they going to nerf?" Too many of one character (or too many victories from one class) to them means it's overpowered and needs adjustment, because it's not a 50/50 split.

Re:No Linux?

[AaxelB]

Well, some number of us would certainly be happier if they shipped a linux version. They've always been about making the best product they can (and making scads of money in the meanwhile, of course), and it could be worth their while, though it's hard to estimate how many linux users would buy it.

That said, there's no point complaining, so I'm hoping to get it working in Wine, or else I'll throw a spare hard drive in my desktop and install Windows.

Re:Late

[twidarkling]

Actually, since Blizzard only has 3 IPs, or 2.5, if you wanna consider Starcraft an offshoot of Warcraft, Blizzard should care that I don't care. If there's going to be 10 years between installments, they need to bring something new to the table. The same 3 races with the same basic attributes are not something new. People will just find equivalents to the old units, and the game will feel much like the first, with prettier graphics. You know the first bit of excitement I had over SCII? The April Fool's Day prank about the transforming base. I knew it was a prank, but I wanted it to be real, because that'd be something new. It wouldn't even be a precident, really, since they have units that combine to new ones (Templar to Archon), buildings that receive add-ons, (Machine Shop to Factory, for instance), and units that changed attributes on deployment (Siege tanks). So takes those ideas together, and make it so you need to build the components together, and they need to deploy, and take time to change. It would be a magnificent addition. Late game high-tier unit rushes would be counterable by making your base defend itself!

Instead, they take the idea, and make it a joke.

So, we have nothing substantially new gameplay-wise in SCII. WoW means we won't see a Warcraft IV for ages (WCIII sucked. I like massive battles. An 80 unit cap is unacceptable. Otherwise, it tried new things, so I can't completely hate it.) Diablo III again looks like more of the same, right down to including a bunch of the same classes. Blizzard's stagnant, and should hear from fans as to why they lose interest. I literally put hundreds of hours in to each of their previous games. I WAS their core audience. Delays may make for a better game, sometimes, but if they're not using that to innovate, but instead just polish the pixels, how many others are just going to shrug to themselves, and joke about how that's "so 90's."?

Re:Back into the Internet Lexicon...

[BlitzTech]

Watch some of the pro replays. There are people worlds better than your friend, than you, than me, and than most people you encounter online. Your blanket statement is patently false, as evidenced by these replays. Zerg can survive and win late game.