Pretty sure you are going to need to be connected, since they've been hyping it as an 'always connected' experience.

http://www.starcraft2.com/features/misc/battlenet.xml

 

Yeah that's insane.  Only time I really get in to single player games is when I can't get a net connection.  And I certainly wouldn't buy SC II for the multiplayer 

You don't have to login to play starcraft 2:

"You don't technically have to (login), but you'll want to. You can play in offline mode if you want - I just don't think you're going to want to. You'll be giving up lots and lots of features, and why would you want to be giving up features?" - Rob Pardo, Vice President of Game design, blizzard entertainment.

 

You can't get a competitive game of single player in a strategy game. At this point, AI can't mimic the ability of a human player (without cheating.) There's no point in playing the single player after the campaign unless you're really, really bad. Besides, with the new match-making on BNET, you can actually get competitive games instead of always winning or always losing.

 

Achievements   Gonna get every single one of'em and show of      (I'm addicted to achievements )

 

I think it'll take you atleast three days to beat the campaign if playing on any serious difficulty. I plan to atleast start with Hard and later I'll for sure take on Insane (though Dustin Browder have said that Insane difficulty are for people that want to be stabbed in the eye )

 

http://www.starcraft2.com/features/misc/battlenet.xml

"In the past, Battle.net was presented as a multiplayer option off to the side, off of the main menu of Blizzard Entertainment titles. That is all changing. With the new Battle.net experience, the service and the game are now interwoven into one experience. Whether you are in single-player or multiplayer StarCraft II, you are always connected, and enjoy a bevy of new and enhanced functionality."

Blizzard can take Starcraft 2 and their 'always connected experience' and SHOVE IT UP THEIR ASS.  

Goddamnit. 

I just looked at the 'make a battle.net account' screens.  Name, address, and PHONE NUMBER ARE REQUIRED FIELDS.  HAVE THEY LOST THEIR MINDS?

Between this, Steam, 'EA requires login for C&C4', and Ubisoft PC gaming is really taking it in the shorts lately.   Thank goodness for Stardock.   It's nice there's one company that isn't run by jerks.

 

 

It works for me  

But, I think it's disabled for 2 reasons.

1. They don't want people playing as guest during the Beta, the point is to stress test the BNET servers
2. They don't want hackers to have too easy a time getting to the game without the BNET servers

BTW, you can get achievements while online.

@vandenburg really? First of all he's running that video in fast forward, so it might seem fluid, but if you look closely there are many occasions where they all bounce off of each other and run around in circles for a bit before reorienting. Supcom 2 on the other hand has a very good pathfinding system that actually works well when they run into other groups of enemys and such. take a look at  this. You'll notice its not fast forwarded so you can actually see what happens.

It lets you play single player so that you can come up with strategies so you don't get your butt kicked by all the good players from the beta. It also lets you watch replays, which is nice.

i have a sc2 beta key, i think i played one online match, got stepped on, and just played a few skirmishes against the ai, currently the ai is pretty much sandbox tho, i hope later on they add ones that acually attack you. sofar i dont see anything really special about the game, its just starcraft one with a few abilitys added to renamed units (firebats jump over obstacles and do extra damage to buildings, etc) units like seige tanks and the colossus dont shoot while moving? i haven't seen a strategy game in like a decade that did that. actually i dont think any units shoot while moving, but i havent tested them all. i guess i shouldn't be surprised about blizzards lack of innovation, i just was hoping for a bit more new, not just yellow rocks, sensor stations, and some loose rocks. EDIT: there are paragraphs in my post, i dont know why it looks like a huge wall of text

Except we can't compare the two because we can't use both of them at the same time

 

But I will admit, this does look like they are basing themselves off the same flow-field pathfinding system (and damn, I wish I could find a good report about how to implement that so I can compare it to A* !)

did but the ai thats around for it is bad would be better to just wait or play starcraft 1 all that starcraft 2 is just a massive rebalance of the first which is much better done then the first.

Numerous things missed though. Yes playing against a human tends to be more challenging without cheating, however against the computer you know what you're getting - you can have a challenging battle without the risk of facing someone who can crush you so comprehensively it robs the game of any fun. You can also set up an easier battle to try out fun combinations that wouldn't work in a fully competitive battle but are still entertaining. You can also save the game, pause it, etc. whenever you want. The AI in some games is also very good, and can give you a competitive battle without needing to cheat. Meanwhile you don't have to worry about rage quits, faulty connections, or the opposite of having someone who can crush you, having someone who doesn't have a clue how to play.

Ultimately though, people play to have fun, and people tend to enjoy winning and not enjoy losing. You can win a far greater proportion of games against the computer than against a person (although on the other hand beating a tougher challenge is more rewarding).

I'm one of those people who has bought demigod+sins and not played online (although in demigods case I probably will when I get round to it, since I liked DotA, assuming the connection issues have been fixed now). I enjoy campaigns much more than multiplayer in the majority of games I buy. That said, I do still play multiplayer in some games, but I tend to avoid it because it usually requires me to spend lots of time getting to know the specific tactics that work well in multiplayer and having to use a few specific styles of play. For example I tend to enjoy a 'turtle' style of play that is fine against the computer but is usually going to be completely destroyed by any semi-competant human player. To play online means I have to play with a different style, which doesn't always make it more entertaining for me.