|
However, though the game will be playable on both WindowsXP and Vista, Starcraft II, in its current early state, does not support DirectX 10. The artist tempers his description of the advanced graphical effects by explaining that although the game will feature advanced graphical effects, it will scale, to some extent, downward to still allow players who don't own cutting-edge PC hardware to play the game.
I just came.
|
On May 20 2007 10:07 fanta[Rn] wrote:Why shouldn't it be SC anymore if there's no archon? -.- Anyway, cool article THANKS so much, this made me sleep easier tonight. data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt=""
Because the archon is one of the most characteristic units in Starcraft.. at least for me.
Power Overwhelming.. Destroy T_T!
|
I always thought the zergling was the most characteristic units in Starcraft. Without them, nobody would fear "LING RUSH KEKEKEEKEKEK!!"
|
Netherlands19129 Posts
Awsome find, really good read and it reassures me even further with an increase in expectations!
|
Excellent stuff, thanks. I'm suddenly way more enthusiastic.
|
Wow, I have high hopes for this game.
A lot of this information is really reassuring, cant wait.
|
Ah... Man I wish they add moving terrains :D
Man I'm cool with everything cept the design on the zerglign T_T
|
Starcraft II, [Blizzard is] really going back to its roots to make a true sequel to Starcraft"--a sequel where resource management will be much more central to gameplay, with less micromanagement of different units with special abilities, and in which full-on early-game "rushing" (making an all-out assault at or near the beginning of a new game session) will be much more viable. In fact, the VP goes on to state that the game will probably offer more early "tech tree" optons--different development paths players can take by building different structures and researching different upgrades--which will make early-game scouting more important, and will make early-game rushing a more-diverse and deeper strategy.
i keep hearing good things from this team.. they really want to keep the pros/semi-pros/wannabe-pros happy... CANT WAIT TO PLAY!!!
|
These two articles really show that Blizzard fully understands what made SC what it is. It just gives me further confidence that they'll hit the mark. More distinct races, a better looking game that will garner more attention from sponsors, fast-paced play, better match-making systems on b.net, better map editor and moddability... I just can't see whats not to like here
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 20 2007 11:24 evanthebouncy~ wrote: Ah... Man I wish they add moving terrains :D
Man I'm cool with everything cept the design on the zerglign T_T Speaking of moving terrain, what does everyone think of attacks affecting the terrain (at least visually)? Too cluttered maybe?
Burning trees might be cool at least (had it in earlier - alpha, beta - versions of SC :D).
|
On May 20 2007 08:57 Kwark wrote: I disapprove of hard counters. While hydra - storm would seem an obvious example of them in starcraft bw always evolves into highly mixed armies in which no one unit dominates. Instead you react by slight adjustments to the composition of your mixed force. I don't want it to become A<B<C<D<E<F<G all the way down the tech tree where the game becomes a predictable mess of counters. word what makes bw so special? what do all have games have in common? unit x rapes unit y if you press attack move on it simply because it is the counter to it. how about in bw? you can give same army to 2 people and one can win with either army simple due to superior army control, there are some rules but who sais marines/medics can't rape lurkers? lurkers are like supposed to balance the edition of medics to the terran army but you can see 4lurkers raping 24mm and you can see 12mm raping 4lurkers, there are no certain rules, rules are made by players, who sais you have to use dragoons vs tanks&vults, hell i've seen players have 5groups of zealots+just one group goons against 200/200 NaDa on luna and raping him, it all depends on how you use your units, and if in sc2 they make that stereotype "pikemen counter horsemen so don't try killing an archer with a pikeman" it will suck.
|
On May 20 2007 11:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 11:24 evanthebouncy~ wrote: Ah... Man I wish they add moving terrains :D
Man I'm cool with everything cept the design on the zerglign T_T Speaking of moving terrain, what does everyone think of attacks affecting the terrain (at least visually)? Too cluttered maybe? Burning trees might be cool at least (had it in earlier - alpha, beta - versions of SC :D). I think they should get rid of burrow holes at least. Especially if they include lurkers, all of the terrain is just going to be holes.
Also, I'm not too sure about the new high terrain advantage, this is going to make cliffed tanks so much harder to deal with.
And please cool it with the laser noises, less laser blasting units and more unique ones from now on!
What's everyone's opinion about the laser beams? Like the Colossus attacks where the beam is always, uh...beaming when attacking. I can really see how that might get in the way.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 20 2007 11:41 Dendra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 08:57 Kwark wrote: I disapprove of hard counters. While hydra - storm would seem an obvious example of them in starcraft bw always evolves into highly mixed armies in which no one unit dominates. Instead you react by slight adjustments to the composition of your mixed force. I don't want it to become A word what makes bw so special? what do all have games have in common? unit x rapes unit y if you press attack move on it simply because it is the counter to it. how about in bw? you can give same army to 2 people and one can win with either army simple due to superior army control, there are some rules but who sais marines/medics can't rape lurkers? lurkers are like supposed to balance the edition of medics to the terran army but you can see 4lurkers raping 24mm and you can see 12mm raping 4lurkers, there are no certain rules, rules are made by players, who sais you have to use dragoons vs tanks&vults, hell i've seen players have 5groups of zealots+just one group goons against 200/200 NaDa on luna and raping him, it all depends on how you use your units, and if in sc2 they make that stereotype "pikemen counter horsemen so don't try killing an archer with a pikeman" it will suck. There's just no pleasing certain people - first there's too soft counters, then too hard.... All you guys realize that BW is probably considered a hard counter game, right? I'm pretty sure micro will be important.. On May 20 2007 11:44 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 11:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:On May 20 2007 11:24 evanthebouncy~ wrote: Ah... Man I wish they add moving terrains :D
Man I'm cool with everything cept the design on the zerglign T_T Speaking of moving terrain, what does everyone think of attacks affecting the terrain (at least visually)? Too cluttered maybe? Burning trees might be cool at least (had it in earlier - alpha, beta - versions of SC :D). I think they should get rid of burrow holes at least. Especially if they include lurkers, all of the terrain is just going to be holes. Also, I'm not too sure about the new high terrain advantage, this is going to make cliffed tanks so much harder to deal with. And please cool it with the laser noises, less laser blasting units and more unique ones from now on! What's everyone's opinion about the laser beams? Like the Colossus attacks where the beam is always, uh...beaming when attacking. I can really see how that might get in the way. The burrowholes disappear as soon as the lurker is burrowed I assume? Or were the holes still visible when the lings unburrowed in the videos? As for the colossus attack, yeaaaaah, not loving it - the constant sound is a little annoying, same for the warpreys. Doesn't feel all that protossish either I think. I mean, it doesn't look bad, just out of place I guess? EDIT: I've probably made a 100 posts in the starcraft 2 forum now haha :D
|
On May 20 2007 11:44 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 11:44 mahnini wrote:On May 20 2007 11:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:On May 20 2007 11:24 evanthebouncy~ wrote: Ah... Man I wish they add moving terrains :D
Man I'm cool with everything cept the design on the zerglign T_T Speaking of moving terrain, what does everyone think of attacks affecting the terrain (at least visually)? Too cluttered maybe? Burning trees might be cool at least (had it in earlier - alpha, beta - versions of SC :D). I think they should get rid of burrow holes at least. Especially if they include lurkers, all of the terrain is just going to be holes. Also, I'm not too sure about the new high terrain advantage, this is going to make cliffed tanks so much harder to deal with. And please cool it with the laser noises, less laser blasting units and more unique ones from now on! What's everyone's opinion about the laser beams? Like the Colossus attacks where the beam is always, uh...beaming when attacking. I can really see how that might get in the way. The burrowholes disappear as soon as the lurker is burrowed I assume? Or were the holes still visible when the lings unburrowed in the videos? As for the colossus attack, yeaaaaah, not loving it - the constant sound is a little annoying, same for the warpreys. Doesn't feel all that protossish either I think. I mean, it doesn't look bad, just out of place I guess? EDIT: I've probably made a 100 posts in the starcraft 2 forum now haha :D Hmm, didn't really pay attention to if they disappeared or not, come to think of it most of the stuff does disappear. Even the nuke holes, I don't mind it all too much, I guess.
|
United States7166 Posts
On May 20 2007 11:41 Dendra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 08:57 Kwark wrote: I disapprove of hard counters. While hydra - storm would seem an obvious example of them in starcraft bw always evolves into highly mixed armies in which no one unit dominates. Instead you react by slight adjustments to the composition of your mixed force. I don't want it to become A<B<C<D<E<F<G all the way down the tech tree where the game becomes a predictable mess of counters. word what makes bw so special? what do all have games have in common? unit x rapes unit y if you press attack move on it simply because it is the counter to it. how about in bw? you can give same army to 2 people and one can win with either army simple due to superior army control, there are some rules but who sais marines/medics can't rape lurkers? lurkers are like supposed to balance the edition of medics to the terran army but you can see 4lurkers raping 24mm and you can see 12mm raping 4lurkers, there are no certain rules, rules are made by players, who sais you have to use dragoons vs tanks&vults, hell i've seen players have 5groups of zealots+just one group goons against 200/200 NaDa on luna and raping him, it all depends on how you use your units, and if in sc2 they make that stereotype "pikemen counter horsemen so don't try killing an archer with a pikeman" it will suck.
Before whining I advise you to read more carefully please, he said it's going to have the same kinds of hard counters as the original starcraft has, and then he gave the example of psi storm vs zerglings. So his definition and your definition of a hard counter seem to differ here, he is not saying the hard counter is an end-all counter based system where good control cannot counter act, he even gives the example of storm vs zerglings and good control can counter that also. Anyways he says it will be like the original SC so stop worrying otherwise.
|
On May 20 2007 11:59 Raist wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 11:41 Dendra wrote:On May 20 2007 08:57 Kwark wrote: I disapprove of hard counters. While hydra - storm would seem an obvious example of them in starcraft bw always evolves into highly mixed armies in which no one unit dominates. Instead you react by slight adjustments to the composition of your mixed force. I don't want it to become A<B<C<D<E<F<G all the way down the tech tree where the game becomes a predictable mess of counters. word what makes bw so special? what do all have games have in common? unit x rapes unit y if you press attack move on it simply because it is the counter to it. how about in bw? you can give same army to 2 people and one can win with either army simple due to superior army control, there are some rules but who sais marines/medics can't rape lurkers? lurkers are like supposed to balance the edition of medics to the terran army but you can see 4lurkers raping 24mm and you can see 12mm raping 4lurkers, there are no certain rules, rules are made by players, who sais you have to use dragoons vs tanks&vults, hell i've seen players have 5groups of zealots+just one group goons against 200/200 NaDa on luna and raping him, it all depends on how you use your units, and if in sc2 they make that stereotype "pikemen counter horsemen so don't try killing an archer with a pikeman" it will suck. Before whining I advise you to read more carefully please, he said it's going to have the same kinds of hard counters as the original starcraft has, and then he gave the example of psi storm vs zerglings. So his definition and your definition of a hard counter seem to differ here, he is not saying the hard counter is an end-all counter based system where good control cannot counter act, he even gives the example of storm vs zerglings and good control can counter that also. Anyways he says it will be like the original SC so stop worrying otherwise. Sounds like Dendra agrees with Kwark to me.
|
well of course they Say it's going to be like starcraft. i like that they seem more specifically than just in general to be trying to make what starcraft is, but i think for alot of people here faith is coming into play. they're a good company but you have to remember that they're still tryign to sell this game, and alot of this "it will be a revolution in professional gaming" crap can just be trying to take a new angle on the market, not necessarily doing it right. also applies to specific elements of the game, like it being "less micro-oriented than wc3 and more economic based." i sort of like this idea, it should be that way, they mention multitasking that's great. i just hope it's not like mulitasking by sending armies in a bunch directions on attack-move, at a fast pace. economics strike me as potentially a concept of strategy coming before micro -- if done a certain way to contrast wc3 too much for the sake of doing so -- as some new-age rts newbs talk about from time to time. There are a couple things that bother me at the current stage of their programming which may or may not get better. the way the zealots in that one gameplay video during the charge special ability demonstration, just lept onto their targets and seemed to surround them automatically, seemed a little crappy. there's also something strange and lame about those immortals vs tanks that i just can't put my finger on. for one thing i guess like 5 of them taking on 6 or 7 tanks and still having 4 left in the end. and i may just be clinging but i hope they invent a new ranged unit that has to rush up within tanks' minimal range to define owning or getting owned 'cause that's really fun. I dont' like how they referred to broodwar in the past tense as having been a great game. who knows if the guy was supposed to put it that way or not but it seems iffily suggestive of bw and sc2 supposing not to coexist in progaming. we could always use another amazing professional title, i dont' see why there can be only one. Awesome that workers can stack. where'd you see that? i am much more enthused than i was before. it's just that all i see here are mostly purely positive faithful comments, with a couple scattered short, bashed sketicisms. so most of what i have to contribute is negative.
|
If they had a white flash of light all over the map the moment the mothership was completed, it would make for an awesome "Oh, fuck" moment.
|
United States7166 Posts
On May 20 2007 12:37 fusionsdf wrote: If they had a white flash of light all over the map the moment the mothership was completed, it would make for an awesome "Oh, fuck" moment. haha that would be really cool and scary
sort of like hearing Nuclear Launch Detected, you should be able to see the coming of a mothership from anywhere on the map
|
yeah, when i first read the two gamespot Q&A articles, I was extremely extremely happy that Blizzard seems to know EXACTLY what the Starcraft fans want... I have SO MUCH more confidence in them now
|
|
|
|