Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Games -> Don't want SC2?

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-23 at 02:01:41

What he said is so true. I wouldn't have cared if starcraft were stick man

Report, edit, etc...Posted by green_meklar on 2006-11-23 at 10:41:57

QUOTE

8...?... Starcraft ORIGINAL released on 1996.

o.O Last I heard it was released in 1998. Blizzard agrees with me, too.

QUOTE

c) a better editor would be nice. Nothing wrong with the functionality and power of the Warcraft editor.

Hell, it should be better than the WarCraft III one!

QUOTE

Wonderful that you guys think that Starcraft graphics suck.

Oh, they suck all right. 2D? 256 colors? Limit of 600X480? StarCraft having good graphics is a physical impossiblity. WarCraft III's graphics are far, far better than StarCraft's. Poor StarCraft is just totally obsolete and can't compare to WarCraft III's advanced 3D engine.

StarCraft looks nicer, yes. But it's graphics are still much worse.

Blizzard, if you're out there, start thinking. Hard.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by KrAzY on 2006-11-23 at 11:16:47

QUOTE(Lithium @ Nov 21 2006, 11:24 PM)

8...?... Starcraft ORIGINAL released on 1996. which makes it 10 years old. Theres no engine change to the expansion, and the engine dates back to 1994.
[right][snapback]593133[/snapback][/right]

So you think that all of my typing is all wrong? If it WAS 10 years old, then they would definently change it much differently.

By the way, StarCraft in 1996 was much different, similar to WarCraft II except taking place in the future. The Zerg has A LOT of ugly tentacles.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-23 at 12:33:26

and from what I see, blizzard will make big changes to the graphics because in 2 years, graphics change dramatically.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cole on 2006-11-23 at 16:45:12

QUOTE

Wonderful that you guys think that Starcraft graphics suck. Well who says that they have to be the best. I say that graphics are only important when it comes to FPS games and other close combat games. In games like Starcraft what is available is enough!

I think that graphcis are never really important only the artistic style behind them. This goes for any game.

However better graphics are a nice addition. I mean my $1400 home-built computer has taken everything I've thrown at it in Wc3. Can get a bit laggy with 6000 - 7000 units in Rome: Total War at max settings..I think I should lower the anti aliasing.

If Blizzard can design an efficient engine that can handle large amounts of data going on at once I will be more than satisified. Build that on a nice flexible 3D engine. Then ontop of the efficient flexible engine build an amazing game. With amazing single player, amazing multiplayer, and an amazing set of tools.

I think i'm much more than satisified.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-23 at 17:26:37

QUOTE(Cole @ Nov 23 2006, 05:45 PM)

TRY LOWERING THE UNIT SIZES!!! 7000 units is a lot, I never reach over 3k :\ It gets hard to command a lot of units like that too, IMO

Especially cavalry, it's so much eaiser to control cavalry when there isn't like 130 cavlary per unit

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-24 at 07:07:45

RTS games have limited graphics to control alot of units at once.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by green_meklar on 2006-11-24 at 11:09:26

Yes, that's one of the main issues. And what Blizzard did with WarCraft III was to completely ignore that and try to make the graphics as good as they possibly could. The result: Welcome to lag universe.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-11-24 at 11:13:37

QUOTE(green_meklar @ Nov 23 2006, 10:41 AM)

Oh, they suck all right. 2D? 256 colors? Limit of 600X480? StarCraft having good graphics is a physical impossiblity. WarCraft III's graphics are far, far better than StarCraft's. Poor StarCraft is just totally obsolete and can't compare to WarCraft III's advanced 3D engine.

Blizzard, if you're out there, start thinking. Hard.
[right][snapback]593661[/snapback][/right]

What do you have against the graphics. I think they are fine, what would you want better. What do you wan to see more detail in each unit or something. Its from a distance, For this style of game. The graphics are perfect.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by green_meklar on 2006-11-24 at 11:32:37

...aside from being butt-ugly, you mean? No, seriously, they are way, way too cartoony. Like, compare this:
WarCraft III peon
to this:
WarCraft II faces
to this:
StarCraft marine
The order of cartooniness is pretty damn obvious.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-24 at 12:14:48

I can't see the bottom two pictures.

Personally, I like Warcraft 3's graphics, I don't think that the cartoonish look makes them look so bad =\

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-11-24 at 13:29:25

Ya, that would be a better statement if those links worked. Unless that really is the Warcraft faces then they really suck. It brought me to Mario really pixelated.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-24 at 13:46:16

what green did was to make a complete fool out of himself. proven, he doesn't know how to upload images from links.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by KrAzY on 2006-11-24 at 14:21:36

Not only that, but if he tried to upload the Marine's portrait, that is superb for a 1998 game because it got it's shape and animation. If so, he even made a fool of himself even more.

By the way Lithium, did you even read my long post clearly or not, I don't like to waste time when all you said "StarCraft is ORIGINALLY released in 1996" which is such a wrong answer. Why don't you answer my entire post?

Report, edit, etc...Posted by green_meklar on 2006-11-24 at 20:25:36

QUOTE

Ya, that would be a better statement if those links worked.

o.O They all work for me.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-24 at 20:33:28

yes i did. and i stand corrected.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cole on 2006-11-24 at 21:40:58

QUOTE

TRY LOWERING THE UNIT SIZES!!! 7000 units is a lot, I never reach over 3k :\ It gets hard to command a lot of units like that too, IMO Especially cavalry, it's so much eaiser to control cavalry when there isn't like 130 cavlary per unit

or not.
It's incredibly fun and I find it rather easy to control, flank, and set up.

Wanna hear something great? So I stormed Rome with carthage with about 5,000 troops and slaughtered the place.
Idk how many times the roman empires tried attacking me. I think after the 7th time of defending I got bored and send all my troops(it was like 1000 vs 2000..they had more) outside the walls. I STILL WON. It was getting so annoying.

QUOTE

Wc3 was never ment for a high amount of units. If Wc3 main-game lags you...uhh.. please go mow some lawns and get $300.

QUOTE

Artistic style is an opinion.
I like WC3's style. You don't. End it there.

btw not all your links work.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mr.Chicken on 2006-11-24 at 22:24:28

If theres a new generation of map making then HELLZ YAY

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-11-25 at 04:10:58

WC3 map making is exponentially more advanced than bw map making. people havent even discovered all its techniques yet.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by JordanN_3335 on 2006-11-25 at 07:57:52

The only main reason why or if they make another starcraft is because you know that in warcraft 3 you have the abilities to scroll the player field like when you use the mouse wheel and wheel it down it goes to ground level. How cool would that be with starcraft maps. And it would still be good if people who complain that it wont run SC and BW maps if it had backwards compatibility and can bring those maps to life.

But so far a man can dream.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Chronophobia on 2006-11-25 at 09:09:01

QUOTE(Lithium @ Nov 25 2006, 03:10 AM)

WC3 map making is exponentially more advanced than bw map making. people havent even discovered all its techniques yet.
[right][snapback]594528[/snapback][/right]

Apparently we haven't either, there have been several new discoveries for not so long ago, as an example the EUD triggers. But Blizzard apparently do not want us to use that tecnique either.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-11-25 at 09:29:22

How long ago were these EUD triggers created. If Blizzard has already made a patch on them I think that they hav been out for a while. Yes I think that we hae basically thought of everything that you could do with triggers. Now we just have to figure out new ways to put them together to make an original map!

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-25 at 09:46:25

They have been out for a while.

Also, Lithium, I don't know for sure, but I don't think that there are many techniques, if any, that aren't figured out in WC3. The fact that the editor will let you do anything is why, every technique is already available, given to them.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by green_meklar on 2006-11-25 at 10:44:58

QUOTE

Wc3 was never ment for a high amount of units.

But it was still drawn for fewer units than it had, because it lagged like hell.

QUOTE

Artistic style is an opinion.
I like WC3's style. You don't. End it there.

Artistic style may be a matter of opinion...but cartooniness is outright fact.

QUOTE

btw not all your links work.

Like I said, they all work for me.

QUOTE

Also, Lithium, I don't know for sure, but I don't think that there are many techniques, if any, that aren't figured out in WC3. The fact that the editor will let you do anything is why, every technique is already available, given to them.

I think he means things you do with the editor, rather than things you do to the editor.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cole on 2006-11-25 at 15:14:06

QUOTE

Artistic style may be a matter of opinion...but cartooniness is outright fact.

It is Cartoony....whats your point? I never argued against it.

QUOTE

But it was still drawn for fewer units than it had, because it lagged like hell.

I'm sorry I don't know what you mean "drawn for the fewer units it had". Wc3 doesn't lag like hell as long as you meet the requirments on the box and you have the latest drivers for your graphics card and hell if you just meet them lower the quality down.

QUOTE

Apparently we haven't either, there have been several new discoveries for not so long ago, as an example the EUD triggers. But Blizzard apparently do not want us to use that tecnique either.

Problems can be caused with EUD's because you can edit the memory directly. THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING.(Virus, trasmitted, by map?)

The Wc3 editor is just.....it's far more advanced.

Next Page (3)