|
On April 27 2007 07:05 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2007 21:00 [X]Ken_D wrote:On April 26 2007 19:28 Sadist wrote:
i cant believe someone said D2 was a bad game
;(
d2 was fun and simple, how was it bad? When people think their opinion is "fact"  . Blizzard never release a bad game. Their products get rave reviews and sell tons. 3D doesn't make units slow. The unit speed is set by the developers to probably make it is more realistic in scale. Tanks don't go 100 mph in real life. The response time is due to the animation. Units going 180 in 2D is instant while in 3D, it has the 'turn around animation' to make the transition look smooth. Units in SC also don't turn instantly  Most units turn around 30-40 degree per frame, so for a 180 degree turn they need 4-5 frames(0.16 - 0.2 seconds on fastest game speed), so it's not because of the animation, but because of the intended the game pace
Comparatively with other 3D RTS, BW's response is practically instant
We'll agree that an action for 3D games have a lot more frames hence a more delayed response. Perhaps game developer doesn't get enough complaint on the unit control to warrant any fixing. Most casual gamers are more focus on the supposed "strategy" than the unit control to notice their units are responding a few millisecond late.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
you can in fact change these figures like turning speed in custom editors, even for w3. i mean there are custom maps for w3 out there that make certain units turn instantly.
this is not really a 3-d or whatnot issue but something that can be changed if enough people complain about it, or tehy find it is no good to gameplay during testing
|
On April 26 2007 21:00 [X]Ken_D wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2007 19:28 Sadist wrote:
i cant believe someone said D2 was a bad game
;(
d2 was fun and simple, how was it bad? When people think their opinion is "fact" . Blizzard never release a bad game. Their products get rave reviews and sell tons. 3D doesn't make units slow. The unit speed is set by the developers to probably make it is more realistic in scale. Tanks don't go 100 mph in real life. The response time is due to the animation. Units going 180 in 2D is instant while in 3D, it has the 'turn around animation' to make the transition look smooth.
Starcraft didn't get rave reviews.
|
On April 27 2007 15:31 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2007 21:00 [X]Ken_D wrote:On April 26 2007 19:28 Sadist wrote:
i cant believe someone said D2 was a bad game
;(
d2 was fun and simple, how was it bad? When people think their opinion is "fact" . Blizzard never release a bad game. Their products get rave reviews and sell tons. 3D doesn't make units slow. The unit speed is set by the developers to probably make it is more realistic in scale. Tanks don't go 100 mph in real life. The response time is due to the animation. Units going 180 in 2D is instant while in 3D, it has the 'turn around animation' to make the transition look smooth. Starcraft didn't get rave reviews.
But it sell tons  ?
|
It's like the tectonic plates of Blizzard moved just a little bit and now the simple villagers of the island nation of TeamLiquid are drowning in a nerd tsunami or something.
|
|
|
wc3 is hard to broadcast??!?!?!?
|
testie the old testie from DS way back in the day?
|
On April 27 2007 15:31 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2007 21:00 [X]Ken_D wrote:On April 26 2007 19:28 Sadist wrote:
i cant believe someone said D2 was a bad game
;(
d2 was fun and simple, how was it bad? When people think their opinion is "fact" . Blizzard never release a bad game. Their products get rave reviews and sell tons. 3D doesn't make units slow. The unit speed is set by the developers to probably make it is more realistic in scale. Tanks don't go 100 mph in real life. The response time is due to the animation. Units going 180 in 2D is instant while in 3D, it has the 'turn around animation' to make the transition look smooth. Starcraft didn't get rave reviews.
It was a little underrated at the time compared to how well it's considered now, but it got pretty good reviews on release nonetheless.
|
well, it better be good, it could ruin BW
|
Anyway, I hope it can run on my computer.
Hm... but W3 couldn't run on.
|
YES! finally all the people with crappy computers and 56k modems can't play cause they cant afford a decent computer. No more lag! Horray!
Also to all the idiots that think they need to spend $2000 for a computer...truly morons. You can build a VERY HIGH end comp for around the $1000 makrs. Thats with like a intel e6600, and the best video card available 8800GTX 768mb video card now. cpu= $230, video card = 600$ hard drive 50$, mobo 100$, ram 100$ there you have best comp for less than 1200$. If you are cheap build a 500$ comp..with a 200$video card and cheaper cpu. dual cores as cheap as 80$.
Also to the other idiotic group of people that crys "boohoo its going to be crappy 3d like w3 engine and units will be slow and big in my face", wth would they use a old ass engine to make a new game...please think before you speak. Also theres a difference between 3D GRAPHICS and PERSPECTIVE. Just cause a game is 3D, doesnt mean its going to be like some sort of first person shooter view or a rotated view...They can DESIGN the perspective to whatever they like, even a top down look..They can also design the physics, the way units move, the speed, everything dumbasses. Do you expect a game in 2007 to be in f***ing 2D? go live in a cave if you do.
Some guy mentioned "they gonna use w3 engine cause its the best one available for rts now"...WOW more stupidity. Have you seen command and conquer 3? Conclusion: You too dumb to play starcraft 2. THE END
|
On May 02 2007 07:41 FLW-Shinobi wrote: . Do you expect a game in 2007 to be in f***ing 2D? go live in a cave if you do.
|
Thanks shinobi.
Of course it will play much smoother than wc3. Besides, nobody except for SC:BW fans will buy a 2d game nowadays.
|
On May 02 2007 07:41 FLW-Shinobi wrote:
YES! finally all the people with crappy computers and 56k modems can't play cause they cant afford a decent computer. No more lag! Horray!
Also to all the idiots that think they need to spend $2000 for a computer...truly morons. You can build a VERY HIGH end comp for around the $1000 makrs. Thats with like a intel e6600, and the best video card available 8800GTX 768mb video card now. cpu= $230, video card = 600$ hard drive 50$, mobo 100$, ram 100$ there you have best comp for less than 1200$. If you are cheap build a 500$ comp..with a 200$video card and cheaper cpu. dual cores as cheap as 80$.
Also to the other idiotic group of people that crys "boohoo its going to be crappy 3d like w3 engine and units will be slow and big in my face", wth would they use a old ass engine to make a new game...please think before you speak. Also theres a difference between 3D GRAPHICS and PERSPECTIVE. Just cause a game is 3D, doesnt mean its going to be like some sort of first person shooter view or a rotated view...They can DESIGN the perspective to whatever they like, even a top down look..They can also design the physics, the way units move, the speed, everything dumbasses. Do you expect a game in 2007 to be in f***ing 2D? go live in a cave if you do.
Some guy mentioned "they gonna use w3 engine cause its the best one available for rts now"...WOW more stupidity. Have you seen command and conquer 3? Conclusion: You too dumb to play starcraft 2. THE END
I think that tl.net is not a good forum for you, you know? gg.net may be better for you.. go there and you'll find people with the same opinions like you..
gl.
|
3D means one aditional dimension.
In my book, that means a potentially very interesting gameplay. it doesnt mean the game will slow down, they just need to do it right.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On May 02 2007 08:55 niteReloaded wrote:
3D means one aditional dimension.
In my book, that means a potentially very interesting gameplay. it doesnt mean the game will slow down, they just need to do it right.
Every 3D RTS to date has failed professionally (one could argue that CnC3 is doing ok, but the complete lack of micro is it's downfall). I have faith in Blizzard however, and KNOW that they can pull this off.
|
i hope that it will run on old comps good because i do not want to buy one just for one game, though i probably would do
|
They can pull off something great for sure. The fucking nuance almost nobody here seems to understand is that it's almost impossible they pull something AS good, considering the nowadays constraints.
How many guys will come saying the same "they always released great games" bullshit. WTF ? Thats true but thats not the question. They will probably kill the genious game to put something good instead, weeeeee. As for renewing the community, whats the point if its for a poor or less good game ?
Now if you are happy with something decent because it changes, go for it, like millions did with W3. Thats stupid but i assume thats the way most of the kids see the things nowadays. But dont come here trying to convert people before we actually see the game.
|
United States7166 Posts
i hope the programmers have figured out a way to get around the lag that 3D rts games all have in terms of unit responsiveness
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
