The game is still under development mate.

Hmmm, that's not that "high" of a hardware requirement, on the GPU part. I guessing almost everyone of us should be able to play Starcraft 2 , if not in max settings.

I think Blizzard wants everyone to be able to play the game (hence, more income). I mean, yea ... they can do the game with <insert whatever super mama Dx10 effect here> but not all of us have a 8800GTX in our computers.

I think you shoudn't be comparing SC2 with Hellgate:London as SC2 is RTS and Hellgate is a FPS (or is it FPS/RPG ?). I mean both games are from two different worlds apart, I'm not too wise on hardware requirement for a particular genre as in like there's a different requirement for FPS as compared to a RTS.

Should be comparing SC2 with C&C3's requirements. I'm sure almost everyone here was able to play C&C3 right, well if not in max settings? C&C3 didn't like demand those computers used in Nasa to run the game, i tried running the game on a 6600GT and AMD single core on mid settings, didn't lag at all.

I think its business strategy from Blizzard if they choose to do SC2 to be able to run on middle range PCs. Not everyone is rich enough to get a 8800 series (high end) and would opt to get a 8600 series (mid range) instead.

I dunno, its just my 2 cents

This post has been edited by TheWhacker: Sep 19 2007, 10:39 PM