StarCraft II System Requirements

[Dr Super Good]

You can screenshot it to show us what you mean? Or you refering to frame rate?

 

[tagg1080]

You can screenshot it to show us what you mean? Or you refering to frame rate?

The animations and general graphics are just smoother, the animations look more realistic.

I can't really describe it, lol

 

[Rachkooo]

Im with 1.6 GHz Duo and it work fine... everything is at max

 

[Arthas]

I GOT EVERTHING EXCEPT FOR THAT GRAPHIC CARD I GONNA SOON BUT BUT IT Any WAY and start playing strcraft thx for this thread anyway cuz i am too lazy to google it :d

 

[zxzx606060]

i cant find the full version of starcraft 2 can you please post the download link ?

 

[TriggerHappy]

i cant find the full version of starcraft 2 can you please post the download link ?

Login to your Battle.net account and go to the summary page and either click "Play for Free" or "Download Client".

 

[Dr Super Good]

Login to your Battle.net account and go to the summary page and either click "Play for Free" or "Download Client".

If you do not own a BattleNet account then go create one, its free and will still give you full use of SC2 starter edition, which will soon support all Arcade maps and already does so if spawned. The version of SC2 you download is the same in any case.

 

[andreasaspenberg]

i can run it perfectly on intel core i7 2600 3,4 gigaherzt with gtx 650 ti boost and with 16 gigabytes of ram. onmy laptop however i have a gt 630 graphics card and there it lags. it is therefore able to cause lag on a weak graphics card. i am mostly running it on medium setting.

 

[pyf]

Spoiler: Necrobump!

Below are the current (2017) minimum and recommended system specifications for StarCraft II for Windows and Mac:

StarCraft II System Requirements

Maybe someone can update the OP one way or another?

 

[andreasaspenberg]

those system requirements is not up to date. the game does not work on an intel HD 3000 for example even with everything on low. on that the game is completely unplayable(its graphics lags constantly). even on HD 4600 it lags on low. my laptops have those but they also have much better nvidia gpus which was inactive because i had not installed optimus properly. that was my problem when i wrote my previus post. pyf: why are you necrobumping topics all of the time?

 

[Dr Super Good]

those system requirements is not up to date. the game does not work on an intel HD 3000 for example even with everything on low. on that the game is completely unplayable(its graphics lags constantly). even on HD 4600 it lags on low.

They are up to date. Also "minimum" means "runs" not "runs well". A system below the minimum will likely be incapable of even starting the game at all.

Notice that they do not recommend any integrated GPU at all, which fits with what you describe. Anything below the recommended settings will likely run the game quite poorly, with low graphic fidelity or frame rate.

 

[andreasaspenberg]

minimum requirements is not usually true anyway but they should list what is required for the game to be playable. final fantasy 8 for example ran on specs way below the set minimum which was not playable. same with command and conquer tiberian sun. on minimum specs according to the listed requirements starcraft 2 is not playable.

 

[Dr Super Good]

minimum requirements is not usually true anyway but they should list what is required for the game to be playable.

They have. Those are the recommended system requirements.

There is no set in stone rule when it comes to the experience that minimum and recommended give. Companies like Square Enix tend to interpret it that the minimum should be completely playable with 30-60 FPS on low visual fidelity while recommended should be capable of 30-60 FPS at high visual fidelity, however systems below the minimum requirement might still be able to run the game. Others like Blizzard list the minimum as literally the minimum required for the game to even run while recommended is when one can get a playable experience from it at some visual fidelity.

 

[andreasaspenberg]

minimum should be what is required for the game to be playable. starcraft 2 is not playable on minimum listed specs. the game could possibly run on even weaker specs than the listed minimum but anything within that does not make the game playable. runable and playable is not the same thing.

 

[HappyTauren]

I remember playing ARMA 3 and Planetside 2 on specs that are way above minimum.

100% unplayable

 

[pyf]

[...] pyf: why are you necrobumping topics all of the time?

@andreasaspenberg: I may sometimes add relevant / up to date information to long forgotten threads when appropriate imho.

This thread is stickied atm. Therefore the info in the OP can imho be considered misleading for some users.

I suggest that a moderator adds the link I provided above, since it leads to official and up to date system specifications regarding StarCraft II. I also suggest that the original specs from 2010 should be kept somewhere, for historical reasons.