LightPhoenix
First Post
Whoops, my bad about the beta test thing, that's what I meant, of course 
As for Blizzard... they pretty much IMO define a genre (RTS), I think that makes them one of the best. There are other good companies, no doubt, but when you think of real time strategy, the name that usually comes to mind first is Blizzard.
There are several areas Blizzard needs to improve badly, don't get me wrong. I think many people can agree that Battle.net is quite flawed with every game they've put out (hopefully changing with War3). Diablo is indeed a click-fest, and really doesn't offer anything new after you've played through it a few times. They're rather narrowly defined - only Diablo, Diablo 2, and World of Warcraft (Blizzard's upcoming MMO"RPG") aren't RTS games. All of them strongly rely on the online component.
And yes, I have issues with both the term RPG (a misnomer of epic proportions) and the idea that MMORPGs are in fact RPGs, but that's another topic.
LightPhoenix

As for Blizzard... they pretty much IMO define a genre (RTS), I think that makes them one of the best. There are other good companies, no doubt, but when you think of real time strategy, the name that usually comes to mind first is Blizzard.
There are several areas Blizzard needs to improve badly, don't get me wrong. I think many people can agree that Battle.net is quite flawed with every game they've put out (hopefully changing with War3). Diablo is indeed a click-fest, and really doesn't offer anything new after you've played through it a few times. They're rather narrowly defined - only Diablo, Diablo 2, and World of Warcraft (Blizzard's upcoming MMO"RPG") aren't RTS games. All of them strongly rely on the online component.
And yes, I have issues with both the term RPG (a misnomer of epic proportions) and the idea that MMORPGs are in fact RPGs, but that's another topic.
LightPhoenix