WHY I HATE STARCRAFT 2 - Page 5

Ghost-Flight · 08-02-2008, 04:32 PM

Hmm sounds like OPs colorblind and jealous of all the colors in Sc2

Astrish · 08-03-2008, 05:45 AM

SC2 HAS BEEN FULLY PAID FOR IN ADVANCE.
Shabam, I'm so excited.

nb)infront · 08-03-2008, 06:01 AM

Too much light effects.
Zealot's sword in sc1 for example, is just sword with a little bit of light on it. Its realistic. But SC2, its like zealot has soft or round light around his sword, makes it look not sharp and realistic at all. Its just look too soft and dull and too bright as it swings. When there is mass battle, give us confusion where the zealots are, but only things we see is bright mass swords being swung by mass zealots and visually DULL and not entertaining.
Only thing sc2 did good is probably the background and map, especially the space part where you can see Saturn. But units and buildings need to be definately fixed. SC1 , even if its 2D, it has huge effort on its detail. Just by looking at sunken colony, u feel like the real tongue is coming out.
SC1, such as siege tanks or maybe marines, and some of units look kinda cartoony, but rests are pretty much real. Such as Battle crusiers and defiler, they look pretty much real . Also archon or high templar is described as pretty much mysterious and realistic with best effort of 2D.
SC2, on other hand, its like every buildings of them are all cartoony. None of them follow the realism.
If Blizzard wants SC2 to be 3D, least try to put more effort to make it look MORE realistic. And please consider other concepts for buildings, many people saying its ugly and childish. Thanks!

Dick · 08-03-2008, 06:02 AM

Where'd you pre-order yours? I know I can get a -$10 deal at BB but at the same time its $10 cheaper at EB and GameStop.

OmegaMatrix · 08-03-2008, 06:05 AM

My only problem is the grittiness of the original is lost thanks to the new graphics.

exzapel · 08-04-2008, 04:20 AM

I still can't get over you nubs calling SC1 realistic looking, it's cartoony as hell.
I do agree that it's a bit flashier, but that's because of the shift from 1998-class 2d graphics to 2008 level 3d. There's a huge technological difference which impacts the kind of graphics allowed now compared to back then. The buildings and units aren't too stylistically different, one is just a modern 3-dimensional reinvention of the original.

Khamul · 08-04-2008, 06:06 PM

Get the fact straight. These people hate Warcraft and SC2 is like Wc3.

Astrish · 08-04-2008, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick

Where'd you pre-order yours? I know I can get a -$10 deal at BB but at the same time its $10 cheaper at EB and GameStop.

I reserved it at EB.
You just have to go in and ask to reserve it, most don't have signs up for it yet.

MH-c1 · 08-05-2008, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick

Where'd you pre-order yours? I know I can get a -$10 deal at BB but at the same time its $10 cheaper at EB and GameStop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astrish

I reserved it at EB.
You just have to go in and ask to reserve it, most don't have signs up for it yet.

If you guys don't feel like talking about whats wrong with starcraft 2 you could go and do so elsewhere.

anyway the guys at blizzard has realized that the colors was ****ed up.
And I think they have doing some efforts to make the colors less shiny (plastic).

This is BEFORE:

and here is now:

I must say that its an improvement!

just look and compare the marines, first they where RED AS HELL. Now they looks more realistic and less plastic.

I just hope blizz keeps making more graphical improvements now to make the game even less plastic/cartoonish.

exzapel · 08-06-2008, 02:25 AM

The game is a work in progress dude, they don't even have a release date, of course the graphics were bound to change. You were just caught up in the weak lighting effects and low-quality meshing.
It's still cartoony and will remain that way, as the original was.

Astrish · 08-06-2008, 02:40 AM

for once I will second him.
seriously guys, sc2 is gonna be sweet.

No video game should ever be 'realistic' that ruins the point of a video game.
Is sc realistic?
NO.
Why should sc2 be realistic?

Is warcraft realistic?
NO.

What good video game is realistic?

ProtomanMt · 08-06-2008, 03:12 AM

Realistic may not be the word. What they're refering to is to make the game less cartoonish and more serious. Using the pictures as a reference; the game looks like child's game. We want the Zerg to apprear more violent and threatning. According to what i've been researching, the Zerglings appear to be more like playful dogs nibling at the other units. Overall, Starcraft 2 should be way better than Sc1.

MH-c1 · 08-06-2008, 05:51 PM

No doubt starcraft 2 is gonna be sweet but not too sweet if they **** the look with out good look they destroy much of the feeling too.

Starcraft is more realistic than warcraft 3 ever was.
Warcraft 3 was never as big of a success as starcraft.
Dont take the ****t up concept from warcraft and add it to starcraft.
If you do you will create starcraft-wars 2.3 with many things not matching.

With realistic I don't refers to it looking like realistic.
I believe the units must should fit in to their particular game.

they TOTALY ignored starcraft 1 when developing starcraft 2 and said:

"HEY LETS REMOVE ZERG SLIMYNESS AND TERRANS HUMAN LOOK. WE DO THEM ALL CARTOON STYLE. OH WAIT WE GOT WARCRAFT WE CAN TAKE THE LOOKS FROM THERE TO SAVE MONEY AND LETS PUT IN SOME BIG UNITS TOO, AND LETS MAKE UNITS AUTO MINE. THOSE NEW FUTURES WILL MAKE THE CROWD GO YAY AND ALSO STARCRAFT 2 WILL HAVE SOME NEW COOL THINGS STARCRAFT 1 MISSES."

Its sad that blizzard forget that this game is based on starcraft 1.
Right now many of the zerg units looks like something that can't kill you.
I always thought zerg was a bit scary and slimy, the new design makes them look stupid and not so animalish or dangerous.

starcraft 2 is not so much starcraft as I was hoping for.
But its getting there hopefully if they fix some things.

But I guess you can always play as protoss if the game turns out as it is now.
It will be a extra reward in my brain every time I kill the ugly stupid designed zergs/terrans.

nuff said =)

exzapel · 08-06-2008, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MH-c1

No doubt starcraft 2 is gonna be sweet but not too sweet if they **** the look with out good look they destroy much of the feeling too.

Starcraft is more realistic than warcraft 3 ever was.
Warcraft 3 was never as big of a success as starcraft.
Dont take the ****t up concept from warcraft and add it to starcraft.
If you do you will create starcraft-wars 2.3 with many things not matching.

With realistic I don't refers to it looking like realistic.
I believe the units must should fit in to their particular game.

they TOTALY ignored starcraft 1 when developing starcraft 2 and said:

"HEY LETS REMOVE ZERG SLIMYNESS AND TERRANS HUMAN LOOK. WE DO THEM ALL CARTOON STYLE. OH WAIT WE GOT WARCRAFT WE CAN TAKE THE LOOKS FROM THERE TO SAVE MONEY AND LETS PUT IN SOME BIG UNITS TOO, AND LETS MAKE UNITS AUTO MINE. THOSE NEW FUTURES WILL MAKE THE CROWD GO YAY AND ALSO STARCRAFT 2 WILL HAVE SOME NEW COOL THINGS STARCRAFT 1 MISSES."

Its sad that blizzard forget that this game is based on starcraft 1.
Right now many of the zerg units looks like something that can't kill you.
I always thought zerg was a bit scary and slimy, the new design makes them look stupid and not so animalish or dangerous.

starcraft 2 is not so much starcraft as I was hoping for.
But its getting there hopefully if they fix some things.

But I guess you can always play as protoss if the game turns out as it is now.
It will be a extra reward in my brain every time I kill the ugly stupid designed zergs/terrans.

nuff said =)

Your inability to form English sentences invalidates whatever amalgamation of words/opinions you put together in place of said sentences. Those Indian outsourced tech support agents have better English than you do.

Abrupt · 08-08-2008, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MH-c1

"HEY LETS REMOVE ZERG SLIMYNESS AND TERRANS HUMAN LOOK. WE DO THEM ALL CARTOON STYLE. OH WAIT WE GOT WARCRAFT WE CAN TAKE THE LOOKS FROM THERE TO SAVE MONEY AND LETS PUT IN SOME BIG UNITS TOO, AND LETS MAKE UNITS AUTO MINE.

they have automine now? i dont think so.

08-02-2008, 04:32 PM	#81 (permalink)
Ghost-Flight Zealot Join Date: May 2004 Location: In the Void Posts: 644	Hmm sounds like OPs colorblind and jealous of all the colors in Sc2 __________________ Dont forget to +Rep people! 500 Posts 08/11/2008
$Ghost-Flight 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-03-2008, 06:01 AM	#83 (permalink)
nb)infront Deviant Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 73	Too much light effects. Zealot's sword in sc1 for example, is just sword with a little bit of light on it. Its realistic. But SC2, its like zealot has soft or round light around his sword, makes it look not sharp and realistic at all. Its just look too soft and dull and too bright as it swings. When there is mass battle, give us confusion where the zealots are, but only things we see is bright mass swords being swung by mass zealots and visually DULL and not entertaining. Only thing sc2 did good is probably the background and map, especially the space part where you can see Saturn. But units and buildings need to be definately fixed. SC1 , even if its 2D, it has huge effort on its detail. Just by looking at sunken colony, u feel like the real tongue is coming out. SC1, such as siege tanks or maybe marines, and some of units look kinda cartoony, but rests are pretty much real. Such as Battle crusiers and defiler, they look pretty much real . Also archon or high templar is described as pretty much mysterious and realistic with best effort of 2D. SC2, on other hand, its like every buildings of them are all cartoony. None of them follow the realism. If Blizzard wants SC2 to be 3D, least try to put more effort to make it look MORE realistic. And please consider other concepts for buildings, many people saying its ugly and childish. Thanks!
$nb)infront 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-03-2008, 06:02 AM	#84 (permalink)
Dick Senior Member Evangelist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Cow-Hampshire Posts: 1,185	Where'd you pre-order yours? I know I can get a -$10 deal at BB but at the same time its $10 cheaper at EB and GameStop. __________________
$Dick 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-04-2008, 04:20 AM	#86 (permalink)
exzapel Eater of Lions. Gold Member Enlightened Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,999	I still can't get over you nubs calling SC1 realistic looking, it's cartoony as hell. I do agree that it's a bit flashier, but that's because of the shift from 1998-class 2d graphics to 2008 level 3d. There's a huge technological difference which impacts the kind of graphics allowed now compared to back then. The buildings and units aren't too stylistically different, one is just a modern 3-dimensional reinvention of the original. __________________ New and improved exzapel™ Now with more sociocidal tendencies!
$exzapel 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-04-2008, 06:06 PM	#87 (permalink)
Khamul Disciple Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 390	Get the fact straight. These people hate Warcraft and SC2 is like Wc3. __________________ You have your experiences, I have mine.
$Khamul 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

Remove advertisements Sponsored links
BWHacks Advertisement

08-06-2008, 02:25 AM	#90 (permalink)
exzapel Eater of Lions. Gold Member Enlightened Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,999	The game is a work in progress dude, they don't even have a release date, of course the graphics were bound to change. You were just caught up in the weak lighting effects and low-quality meshing. It's still cartoony and will remain that way, as the original was. __________________ New and improved exzapel™ Now with more sociocidal tendencies!
$exzapel 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-06-2008, 03:12 AM	#92 (permalink)
ProtomanMt Advocate Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Computer Posts: 219	Realistic may not be the word. What they're refering to is to make the game less cartoonish and more serious. Using the pictures as a reference; the game looks like child's game. We want the Zerg to apprear more violent and threatning. According to what i've been researching, the Zerglings appear to be more like playful dogs nibling at the other units. Overall, Starcraft 2 should be way better than Sc1. __________________
$ProtomanMt 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-06-2008, 05:51 PM	#93 (permalink)
MH-c1 Deviant Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 124	No doubt starcraft 2 is gonna be sweet but not too sweet if they ** the look with out good look they destroy much of the feeling too. Starcraft is more realistic than warcraft 3 ever was. Warcraft 3 was never as big of a success as starcraft. Dont take the **t up concept from warcraft and add it to starcraft. If you do you will create starcraft-wars 2.3 with many things not matching. With realistic I don't refers to it looking like realistic. I believe the units must should fit in to their particular game. they TOTALY ignored starcraft 1 when developing starcraft 2 and said: "HEY LETS REMOVE ZERG SLIMYNESS AND TERRANS HUMAN LOOK. WE DO THEM ALL CARTOON STYLE. OH WAIT WE GOT WARCRAFT WE CAN TAKE THE LOOKS FROM THERE TO SAVE MONEY AND LETS PUT IN SOME BIG UNITS TOO, AND LETS MAKE UNITS AUTO MINE. THOSE NEW FUTURES WILL MAKE THE CROWD GO YAY AND ALSO STARCRAFT 2 WILL HAVE SOME NEW COOL THINGS STARCRAFT 1 MISSES." Its sad that blizzard forget that this game is based on starcraft 1. Right now many of the zerg units looks like something that can't kill you. I always thought zerg was a bit scary and slimy, the new design makes them look stupid and not so animalish or dangerous. starcraft 2 is not so much starcraft as I was hoping for. But its getting there hopefully if they fix some things. But I guess you can always play as protoss if the game turns out as it is now. It will be a extra reward in my brain every time I kill the ugly stupid designed zergs/terrans. nuff said =)
$MH-c1 15 0FF11\|\\|3$