Don't get me wrong - StarCraft II is a fantastic game; nay, a brilliant game in fact. What I particularly like about SCII is that Blizzard didn't try to change perfection. They took the gameplay, the same angled isometric view, most of the fun characters and extended the story into a 3-part battle the likes the universe has never seen and made it 3D.
Additional, Blizzard didn't try to remake the first or try to add any pretentious features and make a game that was a disappointment like so many sequels are these days. They kept the graphics engine accessible to majoirty of cards at decent FPS and audio to support the sensational face lift.
This blog might come a little late but I think its time.
Why do I think Starcraft I is better?
Because Starcraft I was simpler game with darker world graphics and storyline.
The storyline was a little more gritty and dark compared with the sequel and I felt that the graphics are not as edgy in a away that SCI was. I felt like I was really trapped on Auir fighting the Terran's and Zerg in SCI now I'm having a little trouble connecting with the surroundings.
There was no clicking around characters to get storyline updates or moving around a ship to get more information or unlocks - the main dashboard was easy to navigate and continuing to the next campaign was simple and there was no campaign "streams" where you can chose a path. (There's nothing wrong with it and the concept takes any linear feel away but the older I get, the less time I have to stuff about trying to play the actual game!)
AND my favourite character from SCI - the FIREBAT - is not available in MP mode only to be replaced by the Hellion. Look I'm sure its for balancing purposes but it was a facepalm moment.
So I found myself playing SCII multiplayer and custom maps for quick games rather than complete the campaign because I ended up getting rather … well, bored.
I'm left with SCI and Brood War to fill the void ... perhaps Blizzard can re-release SCI with updated graphcs that reflect the game's nature?