Page 67 of 191

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:02 am
by Mucky
Maglok wrote: Your forgetting high templars.
Mucky wrote:spellcasters that lack any damage output
What am I forgetting about HTs?

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:10 am
by Maglok
Sigh, read a bit before posting something like that.

Since Mucky posted before me I was referring to him and the fact he mentioned defilers and arbiters are usefull casters, I added High templars to the list.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:20 am
by Mucky
I said spellcasters that lack damage output are seldom used and listed arbiters and defilers as the two exceptions to that statement. High templars have psionic storm and therefore do not lack damage output. At any rate, they are not subject to being underused or being perceived as not useful.

You're the one that needs to read.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:41 am
by Maglok
Well apologies but it seems your statement is a bit ambigious. When you say attacks I thought you meant direct attacks worth a damn, not a special ability that does damage.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:01 am
by Mucky
Maglok wrote: Well apologies but it seems your statement is a bit ambigious. When you say attacks I thought you meant direct attacks worth a damn, not a special ability that does damage.
Didn't think that would cause a misunderstanding, although I did imply that defilers lack damage output despite the fact that they have plague. My bad.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:44 pm
by Taeradun
CRIPPLE FIGHT

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:48 pm
by Taeradun
Mr. Meta wrote:From a campaign maker's point of view, don't the Mothership and the Thor just scream "use us in a boss battle"?  ;D
lol especially one of your campaigns where you usually only control a few infantry units at any given time :P

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:48 pm
by Meta
Taeradun wrote:
Mr. Meta wrote:From a campaign maker's point of view, don't the Mothership and the Thor just scream "use us in a boss battle"?  ;D
lol especially one of your campaigns where you usually only control a few infantry units at any given time :P
And the maps are all perfectly completable after you've died a few times

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:27 am
by Lavarinth
Quote from Karune at Blizzard Forums:
I think you can expect changes. How much and how huge those changes are will be a matter of opinion.

The team has heard some feedback from the community that is concerned that the look of SC2 is too "colorful" and that more "realistic" color choices would be more in keeping with the original StarCraft. We saw a lot of these types of posts early on after we made the announcement.

I just spoke to Sam Didier (our Art Director) about this issue and he tells me that in order to make the units read well we have added A LOT of team color which really blows the units out and makes them look super-colored especially with the brighter colors (red, blue). The art team plans to take one or more passes over all the units in the game to try to balance out team color so it still works for game play but looks less bright and more in keeping with the original StarCraft. Changes to the over-all look to the game are always an option and the team is always tuning and trying to balance out the look of the game.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:16 am
by IskatuMesk
It has nothing to do with team colors at all. They've said this exact same thing before. They were wrong then, they're wrong now. They continue to fail to listen.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:04 am
by Meta
Yeah, talk about missing the point: they said the exact same thing some time ago. Team color is one issue, and a real concern if you want to understand what's going on without having to follow the action through unit wireframes(like in WC3), but units looking too bright is an entirely different matter. Terran buildings will look cartoony even with no team color at all. -_-

Also there's an ongoing debate on several forums, including the official SC2 forums, about the artwork. It's mostly about a cartoony color scheme vs a gritty color pattern. The majority of people favor a more realistic artwork, but I wonder if Blizzard will get the point anyway. IMHO their graphics department needs to un-Warcraft themselves.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:06 am
by IskatuMesk
Keep in mind most of their art people from sc/diablo are gone. There's Metzen, but I don't think he really does anything with starcraft anymore let alone art. And he's really lost any talent he once had anyway.

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:07 am
by Lavarinth
If I had my SC CD key, I'd post this on Blizzard forums..

"This is not WarCraft in space. It's much more sophisticated."

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:27 am
by Taeradun
lol lav ur funnee

Re: StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:07 am
by Mucky
FUCKING BRIGHT COLORS I HATE THEM AAAARRGH