Starcraft 2

[Final_metroid]

its really funny, comparing this to the SSBB board

[JoeFu]

So no one has any thoughts on the new units they showed?

I'm happy that revers are still in the game though. I love those guys.

Also, nice to see firebats are still in the game too.

[Scufo]

It seems they're just renaming a lot of the old units. Is the Tempest going to be any different than the Carrier? Is the Twilight Archon any different than the Archon? I hope so.

Also, I agree that the colors are too bright. It's not just that, though. Everything looks much more cartoon-ey than the original. Compare the new Terran unit portraits to the old ones and you'll see what I mean.

Take a look at the lava and stuff here:

Ew. Way to make Warcraft in space, guys.

[bouncerboy15]

Seeing how this game is still in the alpha stage, Blizzard has plenty of time to change the looks of the game.

[JoeFu]

A bunch of people think that Twilight Archon is High+Dark which makes a lot of sense.

And I think the game looks fine. I don't get the freaking nit picking. It's lava... omfg warcraft in space.

[HershDawg]

Apparently with the Tempest, they made it so it can't target other flyers. That means unlike carriers they can be raped pretty badly. The protoss units look good but they are going to need a massive amount of counters from the other 2 races. I can make a balance judgment until I see the other races changes and improvements.

[i heart robots]

For the people bitching about the colors:

Please shut off the computer now, and go outside. Oh wait sorry forgot outside is way too bright too. Fuck, better go hide in your dark corner and type stupid shit about Starcraft. STAY AWAY FROM THE LIGHT

[L.T.W.]

I really don't mind the new colors at all, I actually didn't pay to much attention to them until someone placed the modified pict with the old SC pallete, but I don't think this brighter coloration makes it more cartoony.

[linkspast]

Update!

&

Bump

[The Pezman]

Starcraft has a very different mood than Warcraft

I'd take issue with this.

Both games start as you take control of the heroic, almighty human forces and do battle against the evil, ugly villains of the game. One of your main heroes is corrupted by said enemies, and it's an easy segway to retain a character as you move on to play as the creepy enemies. You fight against pretty much every hero who was on your side previously (and end up killing a few them, especially in WC3). But the good guys soldier on, while the omniscient yet neutral third party has no choice but to get involved, and eventually they all band together in a multiracial, large-scale fight to take down the evil force and bring a satisfactory, though knowingly open-ended, end to the game. All races have the moods which label them in their appropriate category.

Where are the significant differences?

[Dark_T_Zeratul]

I'd take issue with this.

Both games start as you take control of the heroic, almighty human forces and do battle against the evil, ugly villains of the game. One of your main heroes is corrupted by said enemies, and it's an easy segway to retain a character as you move on to play as the creepy enemies. You fight against pretty much every hero who was on your side previously (and end up killing a few them, especially in WC3). But the good guys soldier on, while the omniscient yet neutral third party has no choice but to get involved, and eventually they all band together in a multiracial, large-scale fight to take down the evil force and bring a satisfactory, though knowingly open-ended, end to the game. All races have the moods which label them in their appropriate category.

Where are the significant differences?

Mood =/= Barebones plot.

[Triad Orion]

I'd take issue with this.

Both games start as you take control of the heroic, almighty human forces and do battle against the evil, ugly villains of the game. One of your main heroes is corrupted by said enemies, and it's an easy segway to retain a character as you move on to play as the creepy enemies. You fight against pretty much every hero who was on your side previously (and end up killing a few them, especially in WC3). But the good guys soldier on, while the omniscient yet neutral third party has no choice but to get involved, and eventually they all band together in a multiracial, large-scale fight to take down the evil force and bring a satisfactory, though knowingly open-ended, end to the game. All races have the moods which label them in their appropriate category.

Where are the significant differences?

I take issue with your summary of the plot as well. First of all, the Terrans in the original StarCraft were *never* meant to be seen as "almighty" and "heroic." They were a bunch of backwater people from the dregs of common society fighting for their very survival. You were meant to despise Terran leadership and a lot of what they did. The only characters meant to be sympathetic were Raynor and Kerrigan. Duke, Mengsk, the Sons of Korhal and the Confederate leadership were all meant to be viewed as groups that were filled with corrupt individuals who are entirely self interested. Sounds pretty close to realistic and cynical rather than heroic.

As for the changing alliances for the heroes, that can happen in wartime situations. Sometimes former friends become enemies in a hurry, especially if you consider the circumstances of which Kerrigan and Arthas both fell from grace in their respective games. The methods of how they fell were different as well. Arthas fell to his own madness and lust for revenge; Kerrigan was unwittingly forced into her change because she was captured by the Zerg and infested. Arthas practically begged for his own fall, while Kerrigan did not.

And I wouldn't call the Protoss the all-knowing third party to the matter that were hesitant to get involved. They were very clearly involved from the beginning. Does Char Sara and Mara Sara ring bells? The planets they destroyed at the beginning of StarCraft? They changed their tactics only because Tassadar believed the Terrans had a right to live as well, not because they arrived to the party too late. They are very much unlike the Night Elves, who couldn't get involved until the end because of simply where they were in the world.

What you're really going after is the way that Blizzard throws the gameplay at you... and you're not considering in Brood War or Frozen Throne, either. While Blizzard has trends in how they do things, how they *execute* them is entirely different.

[The Pezman]

I take issue with your summary of the plot as well. First of all, the Terrans in the original StarCraft were *never* meant to be seen as "almighty" and "heroic." They were a bunch of backwater people from the dregs of common society fighting for their very survival. You were meant to despise Terran leadership and a lot of what they did. The only characters meant to be sympathetic were Raynor and Kerrigan. Duke, Mengsk, the Sons of Korhal and the Confederate leadership were all meant to be viewed as groups that were filled with corrupt individuals who are entirely self interested. Sounds pretty close to realistic and cynical rather than heroic.

What you say is true, but nevertheless, you are playing under Raynor's command the entire time (while you're under Mengsk, he has yet to really show his true colors). For the first third of the game, you are playing as the Good Guys who have every reason to believe the people they're working under are Good Guys as well. When it becomes apparent that they're not, the Good Guys do the Good Thing and break away. So I'd still say that you remain in control of the Good Guys the entire time you play as the Terrans.

As for the changing alliances for the heroes, that can happen in wartime situations. Sometimes former friends become enemies in a hurry, especially if you consider the circumstances of which Kerrigan and Arthas both fell from grace in their respective games. The methods of how they fell were different as well. Arthas fell to his own madness and lust for revenge; Kerrigan was unwittingly forced into her change because she was captured by the Zerg and infested. Arthas practically begged for his own fall, while Kerrigan did not.

That's true, and I never denied it. However, that distinction only makes WC3 darker, which is the point I was trying to make in the first place.

And I wouldn't call the Protoss the all-knowing third party to the matter that were hesitant to get involved. They were very clearly involved from the beginning. Does Char Sara and Mara Sara ring bells? The planets they destroyed at the beginning of StarCraft? They changed their tactics only because Tassadar believed the Terrans had a right to live as well, not because they arrived to the party too late. They are very much unlike the Night Elves, who couldn't get involved until the end because of simply where they were in the world.

You're right. I'll give you that. The Protoss are involved from the beginning, while the Orcs and Night Elves are not.

What you're really going after is the way that Blizzard throws the gameplay at you... and you're not considering in Brood War or Frozen Throne, either.

That would largely be because I haven't beaten the former or even played the latter. I was on mission 6 or 7 of the Zerg campaign in BW before something (I can't remember what) happened to my computer, and my game files were lost. I never got around to rebeating it. Same with playing FT.

While Blizzard has trends in how they do things, how they *execute* them is entirely different.

You're absolutely correct, and it's those differences that made WC3's plot enjoyable.

We can argue plot distinctions all day, but the big thing I'm addressing is the mood, which I still don't see as significantly different. I merely provided the basic plot summary to show that things more or less go the same way in terms of victories, which affects the overall mood.

However, apart from all this, I must say I am incredibly happy that Blizzard didn't opt for a World of Starcraft like PA's Tycho predicted they would.

[vega12]

As someone who doesn't play the single player campaigns much, I'd have to agree with the statement that Starcraft and Warcraft have different moods. I'm not sure if the original statement was even that much directed at story, or rather the gameplay. This difference in mood is present even at the shallow level of "swords, shields, and magic" versus "space, guns, and technology". But arguing over whether the moods are different is primarily a subjective argument with no right answer anyway. Some people might find the games similar at some fundamental level which they feel makes the moods similar, while others might not see the same similarities as limiting factors.

[Zutnunzor]

They bettah not have gotten rid of goliaths for the viking unit. Oh HELL no.

[shikigami]

less mmo more starcraft/diablo.

[friendlyHunter]

What the- I could swear I posted something in this thread yesterday, now it's gone! I must have used the "preview" button instead by accident =p

Here it is again:

less mmo more starcraft/diablo.

What do you mean by this? Starcraft and Diablo are (arguably massive) multiplayer online games... with large single player modes as well, of course. I'm just curious, that's all =p

They bettah not have gotten rid of goliaths for the viking unit. Oh HELL no.

I think they did... though, it's possible some old SC1 units are still available in the map editor (such as the Reaver, which appeared in an old SC2 video, but they've removed it from the Protoss tech tree last time I checked). But I doubt the Goliath will be one of those =/

[shikigami]

hat do you mean by this? Starcraft and Diablo are (arguably massive) multiplayer online games... with large single player modes as well, of course. I'm just curious, that's all =p

depends on your definition of mmo. while its arguable, they both lack a persistent world, which is supposedly a hard requirement.

[DarkOmenDKA]

Keep in mind that this is an early build. Blizzard also is famous for teasing it's fans and not revelealing all the information or even saying the opposite. That being said, there was an article online, I forgot where, that stated there is a 4th race. I doubt Blizzard would not include a 4th race into the mix. I don't think it would deter the game and instead improve it as it did with the warcraft series.

My biggest worry is that this will turn into SC with prettier graphics. Also, with the release of Dawn of War, I think Blizzard has a pretty high bar to pass. If you include the 2 expansions, that gives you 7 races to play as, a full sci-fi univerese that was established long before SC, and the potential for extreme growth.

I don't doubt Blizzard in any way. I believe this is the only company that has released nothing but great titles, I just hope that it continues this trend.

[HoboKa]

Keep in mind that this is an early build. Blizzard also is famous for teasing it's fans and not revelealing all the information or even saying the opposite. That being said, there was an article online, I forgot where, that stated there is a 4th race. I doubt Blizzard would not include a 4th race into the mix. I don't think it would deter the game and instead improve it as it did with the warcraft series.

My biggest worry is that this will turn into SC with prettier graphics. Also, with the release of Dawn of War, I think Blizzard has a pretty high bar to pass. If you include the 2 expansions, that gives you 7 races to play as, a full sci-fi univerese that was established long before SC, and the potential for extreme growth.

I don't doubt Blizzard in any way. I believe this is the only company that has released nothing but great titles, I just hope that it continues this trend.

Yeah I hope so too, but they may have gotten rusty from whoring off World of Warcraft for so long...ah well at least the concept drawings are still kick ass ^^. And the storyline had better be as epic as the original...with good voice acting that's as solid as the original game.

[herograw]

i tRUST bLIZZARD iN eVERY dECISION

[Arek the Absolute]

lol no caps 4 u

[shikigami]

i tRUST bLIZZARD iN eVERY dECISION

amazing post.

[HoboKa]

lol no caps 4 u

cap nazi!! No cap for you!

(Soup Nazi from Seinfeld reference)

[Stealthshark]

That being said, there was an article online, I forgot where, that stated there is a 4th race. I doubt Blizzard would not include a 4th race into the mix. I don't think it would deter the game and instead improve it as it did with the warcraft series.

Just thought I'd chime in here and post a link to an interview 1UP did with a couple of the developers for SC2 that I found interesting.

At about 9:35 the question about a 4th race is brought up and the response is that it was something they decided against fairly early in the development cycle.