|
I don't have the beta, but I have seen some replays :o, wanted to share some thoughts because surely others agree:
Terran:
Everything (buildings) looks like a squeezeable toy. Out of the three races, Terran DOES look the best, but that's only because the other two are bad.
Siege tanks look horrible, ESPECIALLY in siege mode.
Comsat Scanner is horribad, it looks like a badly drawn time-warp
Thors are too large, while this may add to realism it makes it impossible to count infantry (which by the looks of replays look irrelevant in the midgame)
I like the MULE because I welcome macro mechanics, but the idea itself is fucking retarded. Call down a special miner that will self-destruct after 40 seconds? Please.
Protoss:
Every building looks the same, aside from that "dark shrine". Too much gloss and shiny on the exteriors.
Too many fucking flashy effects from the buildings, its easy to become jaded watching them
Unit sounds? Jesus christ. Pew Pew lasers
Zerg:
Zerglings look like small flies.
Definitely satisfied with some units, like the ultralisk, but bases do look cluttered.
In general, maybe this is just a disadvantage associated with "3d" RTS (never played C%C or w/e), is that it's just frustratingly hard to tell what's going on. If someone like me, who is familiar with the mechanics and such in SC cannot tell what is going on, then how can it ever be accessible to a novice audience.
Anyway, do reply if you agree/disagree strongly with any of the mentioned complaints. I hope enough of my stated points are valid that this doesn't get locked :o.
 
|
What settings are you using? You could try changing settings up or down, that will get rid of some of the shine and stuff on things.
|
MULE does seem like the most contrived macro mechanic of the three, and the zerg's announcer sounds are probably the most annoying... :S
|
I disagree with almost everything, except for the unit sounds and sieged tanks. Tanks in tank mode look AWESOMELY but sieged look just as if they broke and this cannon just doesn't feel powerful like in sc1 :/
Zerglings without speed look more like rabbits IMO and i don't find this any bad. Also for me mules being able to only sustain production for 90 seconds is nothing wrong - that's why they are called experimental workers
|
|
|
Everything should be bigger in my opinion (except ultralisks), I liked SC1 much more (I know it's the resolution, but still.)
|
yeah, I was inspired to write this after seeing that thread
would really appreciate if they could value the power of each individual unit instead of forcing people to mass up and have 25+ groups of people
of course the game won't be strategically broken down so beautifully (hopefully) for years like BW, but stuff like tvz 1vulture expand, the power of even one vulture in a protoss base, the intense micro involved in small groups of ranged vs ranged / melee
all seems to be lost in the mass vs mass where it is just simply action-ineffective to micro
|
I think starcraft 2 is beautiful. The graphics maybe could be better, but the quality of the art and animations makes the game look incredible. Blizzard games never look the best, but there is something about them that makes them look good forever.
|
I pretty much feel the same than you exalted.
My other big concern is the fact that every unit seems to have the exact same range.
|
Looks fine to me.
Shame I'm gonna have to lower the setting a bit. Things were starting to chug in big battles.
|
Thors should definitely be smaller, for the size that they are they die way way too easily. You'd think they have at least the HP of a building with their size, but currently they just look like they occlude your view with their size more than anything.
|
People should really play the beta before they comment on gameplay.
would really appreciate if they could value the power of each individual unit instead of forcing people to mass up and have 25+ groups of people
of course the game won't be strategically broken down so beautifully (hopefully) for years like BW, but stuff like tvz 1vulture expand, the power of even one vulture in a protoss base, the intense micro involved in small groups of ranged vs ranged / melee
all seems to be lost in the mass vs mass where it is just simply action-ineffective to micro
Watching 15 replays doesnt give you the perspective to comment on "the value of power of each individual unit". The more you play around with the game, you see there is a whole hell of a lot of potential to do all sorts of tactical and micro plays, as well as the obvious massing and a-move.
|
Anyone tried swapping out the standard VGA cable for an HDMI cable? It certainly looks different, especially at 1080p with everything on ultra  (aka VGA is bad)
|
I agree that I was disappointed with the beta, but I was disappointed from a gameplay perspective. The control of the game felt clunky and stiff. I got rung out for it in my blog a little bit, I guess you can't say anything about the beta unless it's positive.
I don't really have a problem with the graphics though, although the amount of lasers is funny.
|
I'm not going to agree or disagree but the way they feel when you order the units (mostly terran here) feels great and the squishy factor goes away into a more tactical frame of mind. The response is just great.
|
On February 24 2010 07:28 Salv wrote:
I agree that I was disappointed with the beta, but I was disappointed from a gameplay perspective. The control of the game felt clunky and stiff. I got rung out for it in my blog a little bit, I guess you can't say anything about the beta unless it's positive.
I don't really have a problem with the graphics though, although the amount of lasers is funny.
I think the competitive background of people here on TL is just making the game less enjoyable than it should be.
I got my invite last night and to be honest I felt completely overwhelmed in my first game. I didn't know what to build, what was effective, what units were good against what, what upgrades were where and what the hell they did.
Minerals and gas were stacking up and I was behind -- it didn't feel good.
That doesn't mean the game isn't well made, it just means that I need to open my mind and accept that this game is a sequel and not a just a graphical leap. It's a new title, not a replacement. It's different.
So I'm going to go ahead and stop comparing this to Brood War and start playing it as another Blizzard game.
|
sc2 should ditch the whole 3D thing, seems bad and pointless imo.
|
totally agreed, i prefer SCBW graphics over this 3d non sense -0-.
|
yes, a good way to alienate most of the playerbase they are going for. as cute your idea is, if they actually did make the game 2D a LOT of people would not be buying it.
|
More nostalgia glasses pl0x.
|
I've seen replays on the mostest lowestest settings (yeah, onboard Intel GMA 950 256 MB ftw!) and i really like the zerg models, all of them. To my eyes they look very organic and alive.
Terran also look good, but not as good as zerg, except the Thor which looks like a megazord.
Protoss buildings are just ok, cybernetics core looks awesome, but the cannons are too childish to me. Ah, the nexus looks like has a bull head and i cant unsee that -_-
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Actually one of the only things I really liked about the looks of SC2 was the zerglings looking like "flies". It reminds me of locusts or other insects swarming, and it has a nice feel to it.
I agree with the rest.
#lol at the bull head, it's totally there
|
i think the siege tank is fucking awesome
|
I love the look of the game. Apparently, so do most of the people actually playing it. Take that for what you will.
|
if they dont revamp the graphics starcraft 2 has no chance in hell of replacing BW on the competitive scene. in 5 years BW will have more ppl playing then SC2, plus WTF is up with the whole "3 new games" the first being wings of liberty. theres just no way sorry.
|
Germany2762 Posts
the comsat animation looks horrible if you ask me... really don't like it all.
|
I think they really nailed the look of the protoss units and buildings. Their glossiness and uniformity makes them a bit tough to distinguish, but I'm sure once we're used to it it won't be an issue at all. Terran units I generally like, but the buildings look way too much like preschool toys. Worst design feature of the game for me BY FAR. Especially the engineering bay. Zerg stuff I'm split on. I think most of it's pretty good, but hatcheries and zergings are a bit ugly IMO.
|
I am quite satisfied with the graphic. The thing I don't like is taht the took away lurker and reaver  Also I think the seige tank in seige mode is awesome but a bit cartoonish in normal mode
|
On February 24 2010 09:15 jhNz wrote:
the comsat animation looks horrible if you ask me... really don't like it all.
Ask people who have never played sc1 what they think.
|
Personally I think Protoss builds need more effects. I love shiny. They need player color glow back though.
But Zerg are all brown. Very boring. Models are great though.
Game needs more glowy, more shiny, more effects. Less brown. More blood. Make it extreme-level effects so guys with bad eyesight don't have to have them on. Easy for me to tell what's going on. Some units need a bit more collision size.
Just wish the game actually stressed my hardware and took advantage of the engine's capabilities. Only geysers seem to drop my fps, otherwise 80fps all the time even in big fights without fraps recording.
Terran factories bounce when they build stuff. What the fuck. The lights are enough, guys. Factories don't bounce.
Now the sounds... the zerg sounds are awful. Love the squishy noises when they die. Everything else needs to be completely redone. Attack sounds are very weak and uninspiring, unit sounds all sound the same.
|
Dominican Republic825 Posts
i remember when i saw Sc1 for first time, i said this game have bad graphics but when i got used to them it was ez cake, this is what happens with sc2
|
I guess i'm one of the few people that really like the Zerg announcer, it sounds so gritty and sinister, kind of like a bat, perfect in my opinion!
|
Take a good look at SC1 graphics for a second or two before you post something this bad >.<
Siege tanks in bw = horrible
vultures = triangles..boring and not remotely bad ass
firebats = a marine with some stuff spilled on his suit (whatever color the team is)
overlords = before i got used to them they were just lol
carrier = cool interceptor swarm but the thing itself looks like half a banana
dragoon = the spidery way it walks is cool but other than that its a totally boring unit with no personality
etc etc etc.
edit: my only problems visually with sc2 is the way the factory/barracks looks, and the way that the satellite on the CC looks, i guess the planetary fortress could be made to look more dangerous then it currently does too...also I dont like the way cloak looks on some units
I could probably find a couple more if i tried hard enough
|
On February 24 2010 10:43 grobo wrote:
I guess i'm one of the few people that really like the Zerg announcer, it sounds so gritty and sinister, kind of like a bat, perfect in my opinion!
yeah i think they nailed it as well
|
On February 24 2010 10:45 ShaperofDreams wrote:
Take a good look at SC1 graphics for a second or two before you post something this bad >.<
Siege tanks in bw = horrible
vultures = triangles..boring and not remotely bad ass
firebats = a marine with some stuff spilled on his suit (whatever color the team is)
overlords = before i got used to them they were just lol
carrier = cool interceptor swarm but the thing itself looks like half a banana
dragoon = the spidery way it walks is cool but other than that its a totally boring unit with no personality
etc etc etc.
edit: my only problems visually with sc2 is the way the factory/barracks looks, and the way that the satellite on the CC looks, i guess the planetary fortress could be made to look more dangerous then it currently does too...also I dont like the way cloak looks on some units
I could probably find a couple more if i tried hard enough
i dnt know about siege tanks, cus they had the coolest look/sound in siege mode and looked incredible when sieging imo.
i liked the way vultures looked cus you could see the smartass driver in there.
firebats meh,
overlords, they sound funny thats about it
carrier , they look like giant fish..
dragoons - awesome
|
As soon as I started playing all of my complaints about the graphics evaporated. Maybe they will for you too.
|
I absolutely love the way protoss looks in this game, the most aesthetically pleasing race by far.
Terran buildings irk me, they're angled in a way where it appears blockier than it should be, and not really a whole of surface area to appreciate, especially the barracks. The units look nice though, although I hope they reshape some of the mechanical units proportionally.
Zerg buildings are all great, love the building drone animation in between, but the size of small-medium units makes it hard to distinguish from each, I wish they had more distinct features.
There is only one nitpick I'd like to make abou the terrain though. The ramps are unnaturally symmetrical, I wish they would give some ramps at some angles different looks but possess the same spacing in between, an asymmetrical look to them.
|
if u play on ultra or high the game looks so beautiful.. its unbelievable
|
On February 24 2010 08:29 Pulimuli wrote:
i think the siege tank is fucking awesome
Hell yes.
I like everything except the Thor. It looks big and badass but it crumbles so quickly, kind of disproportionate.
|
On February 24 2010 13:44 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2010 08:29 Pulimuli wrote:
i think the siege tank is fucking awesome Hell yes. I like everything except the Thor. It looks big and badass but it crumbles so quickly, kind of disproportionate.
it doesnt die fast at all. ive used it enough to know ;D
it just seemed like it i suppose from how there games played out
|
Ya I agree the graphics are pretty crap. I hate the fact lings look like locusts and mules are the dumbest idea I've ever heard. The more I watch sc2 the less interested I am in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/5633/nexusd.png)
