Starcraft and Warcraft and 1337-speak, oh my

[Zaij]

Cutesy graphics are easier to do in 3d, what do you expect?

 

[The Vault Dweller]

I really hate to say this as someone who loves games and loves this place, but I've been waiting a long time for this to come up.

I think Warcraft 3 is the best of the series. Sure the heroes change things a bit. Now mind you having a significantly smaller army to make up for a hero addittion means less combat, but also that your combat has alot more to do with micromanagement than with mass production. Now I like most of you beat all the single player missions by just churning out more units than the enemy and overwhelming them, but I always felt empty after winning. I mean anyone can just click many times to build many units. However having and using a hero properly takes alot of skill and timely execution. No matter how much more difficult it is I find it quite challenging.

Also the "questing for experience and items" was actually alot less essential than direct combat with your opponents forces. Killing neutral encampments got you experience and items. However killing your opponents stuff got you experience and caused them to lose stuff. Overrall it was alot more beneficial to attack your opponent. Thing is it adds an extra element to the game. In Warcraft 2 it was "Do I attack my opponents base or not?" Now its "Do I attack my opponent or wait to let him attack me or adventure around the map?". If you adventure and your opponent happens upon you after a battle he could kill most of your units with them weakened. However you can also do the same to him. As well if you arent discovered when you do engage you'll be just a bit better off.

I have to admit heavy bias. I have been playing Warcraft 3 online on Battlenet for four days mainly solo versus with a few teams games and custom cooperative maps. I also observe one or two matches everytime I go to play to see if I learn anything new. I've learned too much to explain in just the past four days. Needless to say I think Warcraft 3 is infinitely deeper than Warcraft 2 and somewhat deeper than Starcraft. Let me remind you that also Starcraft was and is one of the best games I've ever played...how Blizzard managed to top it just reminds me of how great they are.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[radnan]

I can see why some people dont like cutesy graphics but fact is StarCraft & Worldcraft graphics have always been cartoony and they have been quite consistent to that - they have some if not the best art direction in the field

- problem was and is i guess perception ... because back in the day if they were cartoony your imagination came in and did the !awesome! job for you...

to have dropped the cutesy style would have ment to be inconsistent to the series since then those small numbers in armies (which worked so well for gameplay) would look wierd.

in graphics there was and i still think there is this problem of going from the limited 2d detail which often asked your imagination to fill in ... to the 3d full detail - where you can zoom in and actually see all that thats there.

if anyone pulled this off proper - or can pull this off - it is blizzard .. but there will be casualties (see Warcraft3)

and i think that without proper art direction Fallout 3 will suffer a lot from the transition.

 

[Signeon]

Cutesy graphics are easier to do in 3d, what do you expect?

Yes, but there is such a thing as too cutesy.
Some of the Terran structures look like they belong in a Bomberman game.

EDIT:
I was thinking Megaman actually.

 

[zioburosky13]

There is a reason why most recent Blizzard games have 'cutesy graphic' for some:

Answer: To make it able to play on low-mid end computer so they can sell more.
Take a look at the "minimum system requirements"of starcraft:
# PC or compatible:
# Pentium 90 MHz
# Windows 95, 98, or NT 4.0
# 16 MB RAM
# DirectX-compatible SVGA video card
# Microsoft-compatible mouse
# 2x CD-ROM drive (4x for cinematics)

Now x 2 of those and you get the Recommended system requirement and it was the pretty normal computer back in 1997.

Unlike most of the recent sequel like Fallout 3 ( ) and Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, I believe Starcraft 2 is heading into the correct direction. Afterall, if it ain't broken, don't fix it.

And to say Starcraft's graphic is for kid is nonsense. It has the most violent 2D animated death animation after Fallout.

 

[Sorrow]

So basically they are making 3d graphics but can't use high-poly models that would look better than sprites?

 

[radnan]

So basically they are making 3d graphics but can't use high-poly models that would look better than sprites?

Well with animations so fluent and expressive as blizzards they dont have to.. they can keep the specs down and transmit the right character for each unit ...

high poly - stiff animation you get clay oblivion
also .. sprites look better because they have a 1:1 detail pixel to pixel

 

[Makagulfazel]

Bottom Line?

Starcraft 2 is going to be awesome. Besides the nit-picky things that people can argue about, the game is staying true to the original and is upgrading the graphics. So what if the graphics are "cutesy"? I'd rather have cutesy graphics and a good game than a graphically stunning game that completely blows(Fallout3/Oblivion).

 

[Madbringer]

Amen to that. Good graphics can enhance one's gaming experience, but they will never create it by itself.

Unfortunately, the gaming industry seems to look at it differently..

 

[Sorrow]

sprites look better because they have a 1:1 detail pixel to pixel

That's exactly what I thought when I wondered about that phenomena . I want my sprites back !

 

[Vault 69er]

You know, the irony is that with today's technology, incredibly beautiful, fluidly animated, high res sprite games can be made.
See Odin Sphere for example. It's like playing an incredibly well drawn painting.

 

[Sorrow]

You know, the irony is that with today's technology, incredibly beautiful, fluidly animated, high res sprite games can be made.

Heh. I think that while 3d offers some additional functionality like rotation and zooming, 2d is and will be the true Art .

See Odin Sphere for example. It's like playing an incredibly well drawn painting.

It looks beautiful . Too bad it's on PS2 only .