Staredit Network

This is a big debate right here. I personally think Starcraft should be 2D. They would have to cut the supply to 50 or 75 if it would be 3D. It would also be harded to controll units. 3D does have it's good points. Battles would look spectacular and units would look magnificent. Now, whats is your opinion?

Starcraft is made for 2D... anything else would be a screw up for blizzard...
90% of ppl who plays sc wanna have sc2 in 2D if blizzard wont listen then.. they are stupid

2D. I like sprites.

Starcraft is 3D
.....

Shadows = 3D

hope u guys know that

im all for the 2d, Once you start with the big 3d, the terrain will be a pain to do, if its anything like the C&cC games

(WISHES HE COULD FLAME LOL JK GOLDEN)
Ok Shadows are in pictures are they three diminions? I dun Think soo SC = 2D Sprite Based Game.

(SPRITES ARE ONLY 2D)

THATS 2D


THATS 3D

3D definitly. Whoever told you that they would have to cut supply was a retard. They don't. In War3, they did it, not because they had to, but because they thought that smaller battles would be better.

3D all the way. Better graphics, more control, more modding!

our options suck..yes, no? ...unless its' referring to the QUESTION FOR THE TITLE INSTEAD OF THE QUESTION FOR THE POLL

Starcraft should be 2d, 3d has ruined WC3 (other things have too), anyone who says WC3 has better graphics is either:
- has no idea what he's talking about
- doesn't know what "good" graphics is
- doens't know what 3d is and says it's good because 'everyone' says it's good
- is blind

WC3 = bad graphics reasons: blocky, laggy, very slow, animation is unrealistic.

WarCraft3 was a good game, has a following as big as Starcraft, and got rave reviews. The graphics aren't bad, while they are blocky.

Has anyone played C&C: Generals, it was all 3D. It was fun and had amazing graphics. Has anyone seen screens of Total War: Rome? The beta was supposed to be amazing both in gameplay and in graphics.

Why are you people so close-minded? 2D graphics can only go so far as to how good the graphics look and how far you can morph the game. With 3D you can do all sorts of things, like take amazing screens, make better terrian, and have a rotational view. It would also be easier on the modder's because you wouldn't have to go through all the steps of making it Starcraft compatable.

To Golden: Actually, SC IS 2-D, but uses Direct Draw, with Shadows to make it look 3d, although it isn't.

Lets, see, I think SC2 should be 2d, for a couple of reasons:
1. 3d will run slow, and they'd have to spend so much time on it to get the models right, and then drop it because they can.
2. SC is ment for 2d, it just looks so sexy with it ^_^
3. If its 3D, My comp couldn't run it till I get a new motherboard/processor or just a new comp.

So, yes, SC2 should be in 2d.

Also, just to point out, why does the poll say "yes, no, and other stuff" shouldn't it say 3d, 2d, don't care, whatever.

Golden-fist, 3D is not referring to whether or not it LOOKS 3D. It's actually referring to the way the graphics are rendered. And, since SC uses sprites for graphics, it is a 2D game. Yes, it LOOKS [almost] 3D, but that's not what this thread is talking about.

It should be 2D. On WarCraft 3 its like all of the players build 50 monsters have a battle and the game lags badly. Personally I dont like 3D. I've found it makes my computers scroll very very slowly.

I love all Blizz games. As soon as Warcraft 3 came out, my very very bad computer basicly said 'no'. I was heart broken

I say 2D all the way. Maybe make some more graphical elements here and there, but overall 2D is the way to go.

I think it should mix 2D and 3D elements, I just don't want to see the graphics layout like WC3.

I totally agree with u dark templar... the graphics screwed up warcraft3 more than enough

I like 2d.

I agree; WC3 looks crappy.
But SC2 will probably come out late enough that the graphics can be both 3d and sweeeet looking.
However, 2d is much better, still.
First of all, it makes it easier to get pictures of particular unit frames for those without any 3d viewers, aren't allowed to dl stuff off net by their moms, and lots lots lots of other stuff, you probably don't understand a word I'm saying.

Secondly, because it would be much weirder to have squared off terrain in 3d than in 2d.
Look at SC; look at all the crap we can do that we wouldn't be able to do if it had been 3d.

Then there's teh fact that I have a crappy computer.
well, I'm done.

Your poll doesnt make sence casue it is asking should it be 2d or 3d then you have yes and no. For which one??? anywyas i think it should be 2D cause a strategy game looks screwd if it it 3d.

really i didnt get the poll. shuld sc2 be 2d or 3d? then it has yes and no. which one should u choose?

I get it now, the topic is called should sc2 be 2d?
So it should be yes/no.

Starcraft is made for 2d. The graphics are the best i've seen, not because they only look good, you can tell the units apart. Plus, it fits within the feel of the universe.

I would like it to be 3d but it may be a little slow, but if they made it for the x-box it would rock... sorry off subject, but also 2d was always a classic and it works for sc so i would vote for it to be mostly 2d with a little 3d.

I changed it to fix the typos.

Most RTS games on consoles suck, SC64 runs slow and it hard to control (But its worth like $70 bucks right now and growing, lucky me, I have a copy ^_^) and C&C for 64 sucked too. So, I don't think they should put it on XBox.

Do you think blizzard would make it 2d? At age where at now 3d i dont htink go back to old days of 3d. Im guessing would try make it as good as wc3 gfxs or better. Because noone really makes 2d games nomore =(

noooooooo 3D!!! it would be so much more awesome to play money maps if you could zoom in on your carrier swarm and watch them take out right next to them