EPT[Translation] StarCraft 2 - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ram
Lithuania602 Posts
| ||
|
TheosEx
United States894 Posts
On April 26 2007 05:14 Pretorian-[DMK] wrote: @TheosEx Two different games? Uhmm no, I hate to say it, but every RTS game is measured to the standard of Starcraft: Brood War. So we have to compare a possible Starcraft 2 to SC:BW. Another argument why SC2 has to follow it's predecessor is because of it's name. If they want to create another RTS with different elements and want to test shit out, simply call the game Herocraft or something like that. But not starcraft, that name should not be abused for some testgame. True the original starcraft team has left blizzard (which is a shame), but that doesn't mean they can recreate such a setting and gameplay. They have to, I mean it is starcraft! It is not a warcraft game or something boring as that. Furthermore I do not understand why you use an argument about Halo, that game and it's successor suck compared to other less hypes FPS games. Another reason why you can't compare HALO to Starcraft is the same as you can't compare chess with checkers. Ofcourse if you really really want to, HALO would be tic-tac-toe, warcraft 3 checkers, and starcraft chess. Dude, wtf are you talking about. It is clear to see that you are not a TRUE gamer, but simply a StarCraft player. StarCraft is a great game but you need to face reality and see that it is only one game in the masses. Everything you say is only based on your limited knowledge of all other games and on your personal preferences. First, it is what WE (StarCraft players) say... that is that StarCraft is the perfect game. Yes, I honestly believe that too, and so do many other people. But other people believe "their" game is perfect too. Just look at the success of other RTS games like Age of Empires and Command and Conquer. That is how WE judge games... based on our standard of StarCraft. That's not how EVERYONE does it. Second, you think Halo is a horrible game? Okay buddy. That's why the thought that Halo 3 being released on the same day as PS3 was such a big deal last year. I bet if you made an online poll of how many people would buy an XBox 360 just to play Halo 3, you'd see some pretty big numbers. I know StarCraft is big, but that's because it's had nearly a decade to develop. Halo hasn't been out that long and it receives nearly as much attention as StarCraft. Obviously, the two games are different genres and natures, so there's no point in comparing the two, but you need to stop thinking your opinions are facts. I think that you just don't understand what I was trying to say. What I was trying to say is that if StarCraft 2 is a success, regular StarCraft will dwindle eventually and noone will talk about it as much. If StarCraft 2 is a failure, then sure it will be compared to regular StarCraft, but then that subject will also eventually dwindle. They would be the same title, but ultimately different games. | ||
|
eChoWns
Germany168 Posts
 WC3 is delicous to play it stoned u wont get stressed up ...i also like the units and abilities in war 3 more e.g. dispell with whisp and mass militia its just great haha But regarding the play modies u are right... i hardly play one 1on1 in wc3 per month... only 4on4 and 2on2 and then some footy too. BW 1on1>1on1 TFT. I cant understand people who think its easier to play wc3. There are just more aspects u have to concentrate on while playing e.g. heros upkeep and so on. So why are more creterias = easier to handle? If you want to be good in WC3 u have to find the perfect way to use heros(which one) and find the right time for exp/tech/... but maybe its more of a task in 4on4... because there are much more things which can happen...But BW is by far the most clear and fine tuned game...yeah it is nearly getting perfect. | ||
|
Pretorian-[DMK]
Netherlands49 Posts
Just as I stated earlier, HALO is just a hype, it is not a great game. That most people like fancy graphics and a simple repetitive gameplay, fine, that is what the mob wants. That doesn't make the game good, just popular. True, Starcraft will dwindle down, with or without starcraft 2. My point I was trying to make is, starcraft 2 should have the same gameplay and elements and not be an entirely different game. They tried it with war3 and according to me and a lot other gamers the game is not as good as it could have been. | ||
|
Hans-Titan
Denmark1711 Posts
I, for one, is looking forward to it. With all my heart. And hey, it's your decision whether SC:BW dies or not... | ||
|
Dexxus
United States329 Posts
The best part is that this is all happening around my B-day :D EDIT: Also, I'm not that worried about SC2 being bad at all. Consider that in the creation of this game they are collaborating with Korean e-sports, OGN and MBC, as well as the global SC community. I have to say with all of this input that chances are good that it will be at least fun to play. I BELIEVE. | ||
|
Equinox_kr
United States7395 Posts
| ||
|
fatguy_owns
14 Posts
| ||
|
Tracil
Australia505 Posts
Games like C&C generals and C&C 3 have proven to me that you can have very slick and speedy control in a 3d environment. That's not to say it can't be improved upon with more intense unit-vs-unit micro or large differentials between races, but I've got no evidence that a 3d game can't do either of those, only that they haven't been done *yet*. | ||
|
marquis
United States109 Posts
Think of all the RTS games recently that have used Havok - AOE3 (I think a few of CC3/COH/ROL). It certainly won't look like War3 though - where the graphics and physics engine was made by Blizzard. In terms of artistic direction the question is between cartoony/stylized vs real. I think stylized but not cartoony would work great - but for example, Ghost was a bit too cartoony. | ||
|
Myxomatosis
United States2392 Posts
On April 25 2007 13:10 MaGic~PhiL wrote: im more afraid of SC2 than happy.. really. qft | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
I have faith in that Blizzard, knowing that they are able to make special and entertaining games which they have proved so many times over the years... And it will be nothing like Warcraft III. | ||
|
Pretorian-[DMK]
Netherlands49 Posts
And the control in the CNC games, I just don't like the interface, way too much tabbing. Instead of direct hotkeys. Please let me be wrong and we maybe get a great game About the relaxing part, I think both of us really really want to see this game and have fun with it, that we discuss about some things. Well, that is part of it  | ||
|
Dendra
Croatia801 Posts
On April 26 2007 06:21 TheosEx wrote: Dude, wtf are you talking about. It is clear to see that you are not a TRUE gamer, but simply a StarCraft player. StarCraft is a great game but you need to face reality and see that it is only one game in the masses. Everything you say is only based on your limited knowledge of all other games and on your personal preferences. First, it is what WE (StarCraft players) say... that is that StarCraft is the perfect game. Yes, I honestly believe that too, and so do many other people. But other people believe "their" game is perfect too. Just look at the success of other RTS games like Age of Empires and Command and Conquer. That is how WE judge games... based on our standard of StarCraft. That's not how EVERYONE does it. Second, you think Halo is a horrible game? Okay buddy. That's why the thought that Halo 3 being released on the same day as PS3 was such a big deal last year. I bet if you made an online poll of how many people would buy an XBox 360 just to play Halo 3, you'd see some pretty big numbers. I know StarCraft is big, but that's because it's had nearly a decade to develop. Halo hasn't been out that long and it receives nearly as much attention as StarCraft. Obviously, the two games are different genres and natures, so there's no point in comparing the two, but you need to stop thinking your opinions are facts. I think that you just don't understand what I was trying to say. What I was trying to say is that if StarCraft 2 is a success, regular StarCraft will dwindle eventually and noone will talk about it as much. If StarCraft 2 is a failure, then sure it will be compared to regular StarCraft, but then that subject will also eventually dwindle. They would be the same title, but ultimately different games. let me just kill your post right here. i'm BIG fan of AoE series, I've played it all, from aoe1 to the newest aoe3. Best one for me was aoe2:the conq., I grew up with C&C(not red alert,but the one even before it), etc. and I simply can't compare sc:bw to aoe for example. It's billion times harder. So, it's not like we all say the game we love is the best - we're being realistic, sc:bw has been crafted into one of the finest RTS games ever, mostly thanks to the players. Just like chess, people developed it, made it so perfect. | ||
|
Konni
Germany3044 Posts
| ||
|
tehsex
296 Posts
3d would be horrible imho. for 3d to be effective game needs bigger zoom which would suck. | ||
|
useLess
United States4781 Posts
Anyway, I expected the hostile and negative comments. Its hard to imagine how a new game (albeit a decade later with far vast techs at their hands) can improve on such a bestselling classic. However, because bw was such a hit, there will always be someone who will find something to argue about. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
| ||
|
[angst]chraej
1445 Posts
for the loss. if scII looks anything near the load of terrible horse feces which is war3 i will puke out of my eye sockets. this is no joke, i wont even buy it. | ||
|
AC3
Canada337 Posts
On April 26 2007 06:55 Hans-Titan wrote: Some of you need to relax. You haven't even seen the damn game yet. I, for one, is looking forward to it. With all my heart. And hey, it's your decision whether SC:BW dies or not...  | ||
| ||
