A new record!

[The Ginger Dude]

Yeah it does dosen't it, oh well, starcraft2 will be epic and Blizzard will be jumping around with benjamins around them, and the world keeps on going and Diablo 3 will sck because no one will keep up with s2, not even wow.  

[nitnit]

You can say I'm a**l if you want, even though you're using the term incorrectly (it's supposed to mean extremely neat). (Wonders if someone will understand the underlying humor there or not)

Anyways, it's just the simple fact that you're most likely going to be proven wrong. Diablo 3, World of Warcraft, and Starcraft 2 all cater to different markets. As for Stacraft 2's potential quality, I'm defending it pretty vigorously because I played the original starcraft for a combined time of over 400 hours. Call it unhealthy, I'll agree with you, but 8th grade sucked, and that game helped make it bearable.

Having said that, I'm of the belief that Starcraft 2 will indeed be a worthy successor. Will it be as good? Well, who knows. That's hard to say, especially since we all have a tendency to give older games a certain degree of reverence, but one thing's for certain - nothing from what has been shown to us makes the game look any worse than the original. The only complaint that the hardcore SC players have so far is that there is less micromanagement, something that I don't think is actually a bad thing.

As for you saying D3 > SC2. That's just simply a stupid thing to say. That's like if I said FF13 > GoW 3. They are two different genres of gameplay. Diablo 3 is your top down hack and slash dungeon crawler. Some people like that, do I? only for about 2 hours, then I'm done. SC2 is an RTS with a multiplayer function that allows for amazing custom game maps. Is that what I'm interested in? Hell yes.

I'm going to go as far as to say that I'll probably not spend any money on a game until SC2 comes out. (Not including gamefly fees =P ).  

[Jonnnn]

Soul Calibur 2 IS better than Diablo 3, though.  

[nitnit]

I lol'd  

[The Ginger Dude]

Ok