EPTA ton of Starcraft II videos from Gstar - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
mmp
United States2130 Posts
| ||
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
| ||
|
Malingo
United States45 Posts
| ||
|
cerebralz
United States443 Posts
Still waiting for zerg games where harassment/drop/nydus is used more effectively. It will probably be paramount for the zerg to keep the pressure up on t or p, instead of turtling so hard in the early mid game | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
| ||
|
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
Actually... there really is tones of them after the pics at http://gall.dcinside.com/list.php?id=starcraft2&no=7817&page=1&bbs= | ||
|
onmach
United States1241 Posts
| ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
| ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
 and Archons really deal 2x damage o.O | ||
|
Deviation
United States134 Posts
New Sunken Colony attack looks kind of shitty compared to everything else. Just kind of 'awkward' looking, unnatural. Subterranean tentacles superior imho. Ultralisk attack animation also suffers from this slightly, although not as bad. Game speed looks faster.  | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On November 30 2009 10:19 DeCoup wrote: + Show Spoiler + 1 more from G-Star not in your OP post atm. ZvT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIunQUE-cB4&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUo3qesHONA&feature=player_embedded Actually... there really is tones of them after the pics at http://gall.dcinside.com/list.php?id=starcraft2&no=7817&page=1&bbs= Thanks :D Zerglings!... watch out for friendly fire D: | ||
|
grunter
Romania11 Posts
| ||
|
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
On November 30 2009 17:34 grunter wrote: why don't blizzard launch this game on the market....??? or release a demo...why those chinese,koreans or what are they play this wonderful game?? is not fair ! The game itself is ready, the reason for the delay was because battle.net is not ready. The game is playable but the entire matchmaking system / xbox live style is not. Altho I personally would be very happy to get the game now with very limited connectivity and wait for a hotfix with the battle.net system later, the vast majority of customers would not see it this way. Battle.net has to be perfect on release for the game to be as sucessful as Blizzard want it to be. | ||
|
Schezar
United Kingdom16 Posts
thanks | ||
|
ghermination
United States2851 Posts
| ||
|
SWPIGWANG
Canada482 Posts
| ||
|
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
Also note, that if they are recording for standard definition TV or anything lower than a 720p video the in-game output will be lowered aswell. Watching a vid which was recorded at 720p then downscaled to 480i always looks shit, but if you record at the output quality then it looks fine. | ||
|
ghermination
United States2851 Posts
On November 30 2009 21:02 DeCoup wrote: Yeah the only problem at all with the graphics comes from its dodgy recording method. If you look at some of the ZvP in this collection even the disrupters just look like a glowing white object if facing up or 45 degrees in either direction of that, and almost white in any other direction. With the exception of the brightness of high contrast colours and the blur of the camera it is quite understandable even with this shitty camera work. In game and from a replay or live recording (like the current tournaments are) will be very easy to understand. Also note, that if they are recording for standard definition TV or anything lower than a 720p video the in-game output will be lowered aswell. Watching a vid which was recorded at 720p then downscaled to 480i always looks shit, but if you record at the output quality then it looks fine. Obviously lowering the quality of a recording will lower it's quality. Are there any video that have been recorded at a better quality than what is generally on youtube etc? You would think someone at blizzard would have made digital recordings directly from the computer itself - I assume they have to be around somewhere | ||
|
Excelsior
United States46 Posts
Another thing that I'm sort of concerned about is that all of these matches sort of play out like a PvP. I'm a Protoss player and PvP is fine and all as ONE of the matchups, but the issue that I think is causing every single SC2 matchup to play more like a PvP is the lack of advantage that the defender has over the attacker, which is how it tends to be in PvP, the fact that usually as the defender you don't really have THAT huge of an advantage as you would as Terran (siege tanks, mines) or Zerg (lurkers, super fast reinforcements at home base). I would actually say that Zerg plays closer to the original, but especially Terrans with Terran vs. Protoss, it just feels a lot like SC1 PvP - both players have to maintain huge standing armies all of the time to avoid losing to a frontal attack. Finally it's unfortunate that tactical positional advantage in battles also seems to be playing less of a role - does anyone else have any thoughts / observations about this? It might be just me, but it seems that because of the way the units move / clump together, the angles of attack and surrounds (especially in larger scale battles) are less important than before. | ||
|
SWPIGWANG
Canada482 Posts
Finally it's unfortunate that tactical positional advantage in battles also seems to be playing less of a role I think tactical positioning is as important as ever, but not in a "fortress TvP" way. (unless slow push makes a return in one of the matchups) It is more like bio TvZ where positioning is critical but the battle is dynamic and timing is just as critical. Just look at the force field abuse in one of the vids on how such an advantage can happen in battle, and defender's advantage in this case may be something like ability to cut the attacking force in half with a force field or something after careful positioning of units. The tank, nydus and moving sunkens can be buffed if the game becomes too unstable with regard to midgame map control battles as well.... Its probably not a bad thing, since watching 13 minutes of camping into a one-ko punch isn't that interesting anyways. | ||
| ||
