Is Blizzard now giving away Starcraft Brood War expansion?
Jamie Kahn Genet
story at <http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/index.xml> right now), I
registered SC, but SC Anthology which includes SC-BW was registered
instead. Because BW has no serial of it's own?
Either way I can download the client from there, and though I've not
tested this (I've every Blizzard game ever made already installed :-) ),
it would seem if you never bought the BW expansion (but WTF not???), you
just got a download version for free.
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Joseph Nebus
>So I signed up for the new all-in-one Battle.net account today (top
>story at <http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/index.xml> right now), I
>registered SC, but SC Anthology which includes SC-BW was registered
>instead. Because BW has no serial of it's own?
Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft. My
recollection is it was a continuous-time strategy game and I don't tend
to enjoy those apart from the Europa Universalis line.
>Either way I can download the client from there, and though I've not
>tested this (I've every Blizzard game ever made already installed :-) ),
>it would seem if you never bought the BW expansion (but WTF not???), you
>just got a download version for free.
Expansion packs can be weird with serial numbers. I remember
something funny when I installed Soaked! for Roller Coaster Tycoon 3,
although I'm not positive. I think I had to guess at what the serial
number might be, since there wasn't anything on the packaging or CD
that actually said `serial number', to my frustration.
--
Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jamie Kahn Genet
> jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) writes:
>
> >So I signed up for the new all-in-one Battle.net account today (top
> >story at <http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/index.xml> right now), I
> >registered SC, but SC Anthology which includes SC-BW was registered
> >instead. Because BW has no serial of it's own?
>
> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft. My
> recollection is it was a continuous-time strategy game and I don't tend
> to enjoy those apart from the Europa Universalis line.
I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2. I need to pick up the
entire EU line and fill in my gaps. They're all dirt cheap for the PC
nowadays and I'm happy enough playing under Winblows. Still... are there
any good deals on the Mac compliations? The ones I've found are dear :-(
> >Either way I can download the client from there, and though I've not
> >tested this (I've every Blizzard game ever made already installed :-) ),
> >it would seem if you never bought the BW expansion (but WTF not???), you
> >just got a download version for free.
>
> Expansion packs can be weird with serial numbers. I remember
> something funny when I installed Soaked! for Roller Coaster Tycoon 3,
> although I'm not positive. I think I had to guess at what the serial
> number might be, since there wasn't anything on the packaging or CD
> that actually said `serial number', to my frustration.
No seriously - BW only requires the CD and a copy of SC with it's
serial. Always has :-)
Michael Emrys
Genet) said:
> I need to pick up the entire EU line and fill in my gaps. They're all
> dirt cheap for the PC nowadays and I'm happy enough playing under
> Winblows. Still... are there
> any good deals on the Mac compliations? The ones I've found are dear
Amazon is offering it for US$35.96. I don't know how that fits in your budget.
Michael
ro...@telus.net
Kahn Genet) wrote:
>Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
>
>> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
>I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
>of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
-- Roy L
Don Bruder
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> Kahn Genet) wrote:
>
> >Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
>
> Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
I'll "amen" that.
Side note...
Anybody besides me ever pay *CLOSE* attention to the final cinematic at
the end of brood war? There's a blooper - or maybe it's an easter egg -
in it...
You probably already know that the music that plays while the admiral
writes his suicide note is a piece of classical music. When he starts
the turntable, look closely at the label. Look *VERY* closely at it. The
color is right for a "London Red Label" classical album. But if you look
close, you see that they rendered the label so well you can read what it
REALLY is...
When I first noticed, I ended up doing some tinkering to freeze-frame at
the proper moment (I wish I could remember how) to see if I was just
imagining things. Turns out I wasn't - The album you see drop onto the
turntable and start playing is actually something from The Rolling
Stones! I forget which album now (It's been several years since I did
it) but the first track is "(I can't get no) Satisfaction", so I'm
wanting to say it's "Sticky Fingers".
--
Don Bruder - dak...@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info
Jamie Kahn Genet
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> Kahn Genet) wrote:
>
> >Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
>
> Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
Between Diablo 1 and 2 there was SC. That was all I played for like two
years.
> >I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
> >of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
>
> Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
> scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
> the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
> strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
> tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
> processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
>
> -- Roy L
OMG - you ever try it on a 68k Quadra back in the day? You could read
whole chapters of paperbacks while waiting for turns in huge galaxies to
be over :-D Weird thing is under DOSbox on my Intel Mac it's TOO fast. I
have no time to think between turns - it's all instant.
Mike Ash
Count me in as well. It is deeply flawed, but manages to rise above all
that just the same. I was so happy when I realized I could run it in
VMWare, as I had gone years without being able to run it. The trouble
being, of course, that any time I decide I should play it, the next two
or three days are automatically lost to any other activity.
I would really love a modern sequel that dumped or fixed the stupid
stuff, gave it a really good, modern AI, and jazzed up the graphics and
such.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Don Bruder
For those of us not in on it... Define "MOO2", please?
Mike Ash
Don Bruder <dak...@sonic.net> wrote:
> In article <49cae43c...@news.telus.net>, ro...@telus.net wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> > Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >
> > >Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
> >
> > Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> > other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
> >
> > >I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
> > >of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
> >
> > Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
> > scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
> > the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
> > strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
> > tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
> > processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
> >
> > -- Roy L
>
> For those of us not in on it... Define "MOO2", please?
Master of Orion II:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Orion_II
Short version: it's a turn-based strategy game set in space, vaguely
like Civilization, dating from 1996. It and the original Master of Orion
have cemented themselves as THE definitive games in that particular
genre.
Don Bruder
<mike-4A6D91.1...@reserved-multicast-range-NOT-delegated.examp
le.com>,
Mike Ash <mi...@mikeash.com> wrote:
> In article <gqg9ed$jjj$1...@news.motzarella.org>,
> Don Bruder <dak...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <49cae43c...@news.telus.net>, ro...@telus.net wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> > > Kahn Genet) wrote:
> > >
> > > >Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
> > >
> > > Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> > > other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
> > >
> > > >I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
> > > >of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
> > >
> > > Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
> > > scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
> > > the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
> > > strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
> > > tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
> > > processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
> > >
> > > -- Roy L
> >
> > For those of us not in on it... Define "MOO2", please?
>
> Master of Orion II:
Ah, OK.
Now that it's expanded, I know exactly what it is/was, although I
haven't ever played it. I just couldn't make anything useful out of the
"naked acronym".
Jamie Kahn Genet
> In article <49cae43c...@news.telus.net>, ro...@telus.net wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> > Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >
> > >Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
> >
> > Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> > other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
> >
> > >I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
> > >of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
> >
> > Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
> > scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
> > the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
> > strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
> > tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
> > processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
>
> Count me in as well. It is deeply flawed, but manages to rise above all
> that just the same. I was so happy when I realized I could run it in
> VMWare, as I had gone years without being able to run it. The trouble
> being, of course, that any time I decide I should play it, the next two
> or three days are automatically lost to any other activity.
*grins* Hey you should give DOSbox a go rather than run MOO2 in VMware.
Unless you're keeping VMware (or any another virtualisation app) open
all the time, it's a painfully slow way to run MOO2 on a whim. DOSbox
OTOH is lightning fast to launch and run - I can pickup where I left off
in seconds. I run all my DOS apps with DOSbox and reserve VMware for
Windows.
My preferred DOSbox version is Boxer <http://boxerapp.com/>
> I would really love a modern sequel that dumped or fixed the stupid
> stuff, gave it a really good, modern AI, and jazzed up the graphics and
> such.
Oh gods MOO3 was a fustercluck. I only hope someone with a clue buys up
the rights and makes a sequal that lives up to the name.
Michael Emrys
> I forget which album now (It's been several years since I did it) but
> the first track is "(I can't get no) Satisfaction", so I'm wanting to
> say it's "Sticky Fingers".
You've probably already heard about this, but I'll throw in my 2˘ worth anyway.
IIRC, "Satisfaction" came out in 1965. _Sticky Fingers_ didn't appear
until 7 years later.
Michael
Michael Emrys
> ...the "naked acronym".
That sounds like it should be the title of the next Steve Martin movie.
:-D
Michael
Don Bruder
Michael Emrys <em...@olypen.com> wrote:
> On 2009-03-25 22:40:36 -0700, Don Bruder <dak...@sonic.net> said:
>
> > I forget which album now (It's been several years since I did it) but
> > the first track is "(I can't get no) Satisfaction", so I'm wanting to
> > say it's "Sticky Fingers".
>
> You've probably already heard about this, but I'll throw in my 2? worth
> anyway.
>
> IIRC, "Satisfaction" came out in 1965. _Sticky Fingers_ didn't appear
> until 7 years later.
>
> Michael
Like I said, I can't remember what the actual album was all these years
after doing it. (And it wasn't particularly easy to do the
"freeze-frame" trick, as I recall. Having any keyhit end the movie and
dump to the text/credits made it tough! I actually had to do some coding
to make it happen back then, and that machine/HD is *LONG* gone, taking
the code I wrote along with it.)
Mike Ash
Yeah, I discovered DOSBox after a while, and it's definitely better that
way. Of course there's a certain advantage to having it not be *too*
easy to launch MoO2.
> > I would really love a modern sequel that dumped or fixed the stupid
> > stuff, gave it a really good, modern AI, and jazzed up the graphics and
> > such.
>
> Oh gods MOO3 was a fustercluck. I only hope someone with a clue buys up
> the rights and makes a sequal that lives up to the name.
Yeah, MoO3 was just terrible. If MoO2 is an emperor simulator, MoO3 lets
you simulate being the Queen of England. You get to go to a lot of fancy
parties and give your advice on things, but otherwise pretty much just
sit around and watch what happens.
No need to buy the rights, though. I mean, it wouldn't hurt, but a
willing company could easily produce a game that had all of the bits
that made MoO2 great without needing any of that game's IP.
EvilBill
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> Kahn Genet) wrote:
>
>> Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
>
> Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
>
I'll plead the fifth here. (Actually I won't. Age of Empires is IMO
superior. But I'm a history nut so I'm biased ;) )
>> I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
>> of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
>
> Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
> scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
> the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
> strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
> tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
> processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
>
Haha no kidding, I remember playing it on a 16Mb Windows 95 machine back
in the day and towards the endgame in a Huge galaxy, I could go and make
a cup of coffee waiting for each turn to finish!
Playing it now, there's no time for coffee, I'm too busy playing! ;) Haha!
BertieB...@gmail.com
> In article <gqg9ed$jj...@news.motzarella.org>,
> Don Bruder <dak...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <49cae43c.2943...@news.telus.net>, ro...@telus.net wrote:
>
> > > On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jami...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
> > > Kahn Genet) wrote:
>
> > > >Joseph Nebus <nebu...@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
>
> > > >> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
>
> > > Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
> > > other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
>
> > > >I'm WAY out of date with games, thanks to Blizzard and Id's domination
> > > >of my gametime, no to mention oldies like MOO2.
>
> > > Ah, another MOO2 aficionado! Despite its weaknesses (elections,
> > > scoring system, combat interface) it is still a wonderful game, one of
> > > the best TBS games ever. The depth and breadth and variety of
> > > strategy is just mind-boggling; it makes Civilization II look like
> > > tic-tac-toe. Its biggest problem when it came out -- excessive
> > > processing time -- has been a non-issue for about 10 years now.
>
> > > -- Roy L
>
> > For those of us not in on it... Define "MOO2", please?
>
> Master of Orion II:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Orion_II
>
> Short version: it's a turn-based strategy game set in space, vaguely
> like Civilization, dating from 1996. It and the original Master of Orion
> have cemented themselves as THE definitive games in that particular
> genre.
>
> --
> Mike Ash
> Radio Free Earth
>
> - Show quoted text -
Really. Better than the Civ series (which I love BTW) ?
Mike Ash
<df63e052-c2c5-455a...@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
"BertieB...@gmail.com" <BertieB...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Really. Better than the Civ series (which I love BTW) ?
Well, *I* think so. Obviously tastes may vary.
It's a little less micromanagement-heavy than Civ, especially late in
the game. It still gets pretty bad if you have a big empire, but not
nearly as bad. It has a big screen where all your colonies can be
manipulated at once in basic ways, which helps a lot. Also, it's not a
requirement to have a giant empire late in the game to be competitive.
There are strategies that can make you effective with a small number of
colonies right through to the end.
The way MoO2 deals with units, in this case ships, is also pretty cool.
Unlike Civ, where you research technology and then get new units you can
build, MoO2 has you research technology which gives you new kinds of
stuff you can put into your ships. But the actual design of a ship is
entirely up to you. You can stuff it full of missiles, or go with
lasers, build a fat, heavy, expensive ship crammed full of weapons or a
light, fast one that can dodge enemy fire better. Your technology
determines what items are available but it's up to you to decide which
ones you want to actually use.
This can also be a downside, though, because the AI is kind of dumb and
will build dumb ships. If you have half-decent ship designs, you can
beat an AI with a similar force because his ship designs will be much
less effective.
Another neat thing is tactical combat. If you turn it on, you get full
control over each battle, deciding which ships to send it, what they
should fire, how they should move, etc. This can get tedious in the end
game, but you can also just tell the computer to take over control if
you're confident enough.
All in all, it's basically "Civilization... in SPAAAACE!" but with some
nice differences to set it apart. Will *you* like it better than Civ?
Hard to say. But IMO it's well worth a try.
ro...@telus.net
wrote:
>ro...@telus.net wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:49:03 +1300, jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie
>> Kahn Genet) wrote:
>>
>>> Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh, uhm. Hm. I don't know; I haven't played Starcraft.
>>
>> Oh, you are definitely missing something. IMO and that of a lot of
>> other gamers, SC is still the best RTS game ever made.
>
>I'll plead the fifth here. (Actually I won't. Age of Empires is IMO
>superior. But I'm a history nut so I'm biased ;) )
AoE has some very good points, but the AI just sucks, and a lot of the
very nice realism in the graphics just makes some things look stupid,
like ships crossing dry land and cannon balls flying about as fast as
a tossed beach ball.
-- Roy L
ro...@telus.net
<BertieB...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 26, 4:13=A0pm, Mike Ash <m...@mikeash.com> wrote:
>> In article <gqg9ed$jj...@news.motzarella.org>,
>> =A0Don Bruder <dak...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>> > For those of us not in on it... Define "MOO2", please?
>>
>> Master of Orion II:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Orion_II
>>
>> Short version: it's a turn-based strategy game set in space, vaguely
>> like Civilization, dating from 1996. It and the original Master of Orion
>> have cemented themselves as THE definitive games in that particular
>> genre.
>>
>Really. Better than the Civ series (which I love BTW) ?
IMO, yes. The way tech affects micro, strategy, ship design, combat,
etc. is deeper than anything in Civ. You also know what techs the AIs
have researched, so you can custom-build ships to work better against
particular races.
-- Roy L
Jamie Kahn Genet
Different, not necessarily better I'd say. I love both :-) Oh gods, the
nights (and next mornings) I spent conquering the Earth or building an
Antaran homeworld invasion fleet... I'm afraid to know exactly how much
time I've spent playing Civ I & II and MOO I & II (the best versions of
both IMO) over the years :-D
Defence and attack are less constrained by terrain in MOO2 (as you'd
expect in space). You have the odd gas cloud and black hole that prevent
travel, but by and large in once a system is within range it's open
season and you better have decent defences or at least early warning
systems and a fast nearby fleet.
Also - you cannot attack a fleet until it drops out of FTL at it's
destination. It's not like Civ where you can intercept units before they
reach your city. Best you can do is know they're coming in MOO2, and
prepare a welcoming committee.
These two key differences make for a very different style of play, and
switching between the two makes for a refreshing change IME.
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet