Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
123 Pages « < 10 11 12 13 14 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Starcraft 2 V2, Releasing on 27th of July 2010 :D

views
     
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 03:39 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



I'm lazy to re-upload these images on another host. Many images ahead so be prepared for long loading time.

Note the number of Broodlings swarming to Terran forces. I wonder if these Broodlings deal any damage on impact? Also present is the new Infestor model, though it looks pretty similar to Protoss's old Reaver & weird enough, on the ground instead of under.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Note the different type of Battlecruisers.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Good ol' Psi-storm remodeled.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Phoenixes anti-grav-ing Siege Tanks.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Spine Crawlers sodomising Protoss land units. I wonder what makes these Spine Crawlers from hitting air units since they can protrude their tentacles so long away.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Discuss.

This post has been edited by talexeh: Jun 29 2009, 03:49 PM
bobohead1988
post Jun 29 2009, 03:46 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
852 posts

Joined: Jun 2007
From: Sungai-Takda-Ara


You're missing one more type of battlecruiser
The shielded one
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 03:49 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



QUOTE(bobohead1988 @ Jun 29 2009, 03:46 PM)
You're missing one more type of battlecruiser
The shielded one
*
Right, here you go. Battlecruiser with Defensive Matrix on:
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Defensive Matrix Battlecruiser:
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Missile Pods Battlecruiser:
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Yamato Cannon Battlecruiser:
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


This post has been edited by talexeh: Jun 29 2009, 03:52 PM
TSCheesenium
post Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM

Vigilo Confido
*******
Senior Member
4,852 posts

Joined: Aug 2006
Wow,the graphics is just freaking awesome.

It still lack of the gritty look,IMO,but im fine with it.


Added on June 29, 2009, 3:54 pmPosting the SC2 player's impression here.

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «



Added on June 29, 2009, 4:12 pmShacksnews Interview with Dustin Browder

Comes with more screenshots.

This post has been edited by Cheesenium: Jun 29 2009, 04:12 PM
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 04:26 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



A few issues that left me either amazed or scratching my head.

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... In the early game Roaches are great units with blink/fast healing...
*
Roaches can blink?

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... When attaching, the Thor's body transforms, pulling its arms and legs inside, becoming a more cube-like shape, and attaching to the bottom of the Dropship...
*
Sounds nice but I wonder if it'll involve any delay while transforming?

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... When the Raven unleashes its Hunter Seeker Missile, a large missile slowly flies toward its target, with a red laser constantly pointed at the target...
*
Why call it missile if it flies slowly?

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... After a certain amount of time without hitting its target, the Hunter Seeker Missile will harmlessly explode wherever it is when it runs out fuel...
*
Runs out of fuel? Fuel? What?

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... a player may be tempted to move their Raven very close to the intended target, however, the Hunter Seeker Missile will inflict damage on friendly units as well, including the Raven, so a hasty close-ranged launch of the Hunter Seeker Missile may spell certain doom for the Raven...
*
Terran has too many units which hit friendly units!

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... The Infested Terran start out as sacs that grow on the Infestor's back before falling to the ground and hatching. The Infested Terrans attack using their gauss rifles...
*
Before we know it, Zerg has found a way to mass produce gauss rifles & conquer all Terrans by supplying them cheap.

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... As we all hoped and expected, there is now a rewind button...
*
Woo-hoo!

QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 03:50 PM)
... The Mothership has been sent back to its early skill-set, with the Planet Cracker and Black Hole...
*
Big counter towards Muta-stacking strategy & I thought Planet Cracker was canceled due to the graphic obstruction it caused with all the zappings?

This post has been edited by talexeh: Jun 29 2009, 04:27 PM
TSCheesenium
post Jun 29 2009, 04:49 PM

Vigilo Confido
*******
Senior Member
4,852 posts

Joined: Aug 2006
The rewind button is awesome.

I like the current hunter seeker now.

Not too bad,IMO.
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 06:05 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



QUOTE(Zero @ Jun 28 2009, 10:53 PM)
The first battle was a Protoss versus Protoss match, on the 2-player map: Blistering Sands.  Both players had an amazing start, calling forth scores of Zealots and Stalkers to battle each other.  This was the first time that I had really seen the Obelisk, formerly the Dark Pylon, being used so much.  At their main bases, both players stationed an Obelisk, and would continually cast Proton Charge over their Probes, in order to allow them to carry additional resources for a short time.  As the battle pressed on, Matt Cooper gained the advantage, and kept David Kim from establishing a stable expansion.  After destroying the Nexus of the expansion, Cooper pressed forward with Immortals and Dark Templar in addition to his Zealots and Stalkers.  Kim sent forth a Colossus in defense, but Cooper's forces stormed up the ramp into his base and overwhelmed the Colossus.  Kim declared "GG" and the first match was over.
user posted image
NOO~ David Kim actually lost. He is human after all. cry.gif
TSCheesenium
post Jun 29 2009, 06:09 PM

Vigilo Confido
*******
Senior Member
4,852 posts

Joined: Aug 2006
Im looking to see that Battle Report then.

David Kim lost. rclxm9.gif
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 07:51 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



There has been a rumour flying around that Blizzard will exclude the LAN feature in StarCraft 2. It's not confirmed but it was reported that it was due to a certain planned technology to be incorporated into the new Battle.net. hmm.gif

An anti-piracy strategy? Does this mean that every single system that wish to join a LAN game would be required to log into Battle.net first? Then those with no Internet access = no player against player experience?
TSCheesenium
post Jun 29 2009, 08:00 PM

Vigilo Confido
*******
Senior Member
4,852 posts

Joined: Aug 2006
QUOTE(talexeh @ Jun 29 2009, 07:51 PM)
There has been a rumour flying around that Blizzard will exclude the LAN feature in StarCraft 2. It's not confirmed but it was reported that it was due to a certain planned technology to be incorporated into the new Battle.net. hmm.gif

An anti-piracy strategy? Does this mean that every single system that wish to join a LAN game would be required to log into Battle.net first? Then those with no Internet access = no player against player experience?
*
I saw that rumour too,but i think it will fail.Look at flying spaghetti monster or you know what server.They manage to crack it till they have a functional Battlenet but no one is playing on the real Battlenet with pirated copy.

I say they might as well make something like Steam and offer SC2 frequent DLC content.Steam is a much harder to crack system and it have been quite successful so far.

Frequent DLC helps too,as it put you off from pirating a game.I wont want to pirate Sins of Solar Empire or DoW2 now.The retail v1.0 is so inferior compare to the latest version.New AI,new maps,new textures,bug fixes and the list goes on.Post release free DLC tempt pirated users to get the original game,like in DoW2,retail v1.0 have only 6 maps,while the upcoming version will have 17 maps.DoW2 have no map making tools yet.If you pirate,you are stuck with 6 maps with a retard AI.

EDIT: LOL,wtf with flying spaghetti monster.

This post has been edited by Cheesenium: Jun 29 2009, 08:03 PM
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 08:13 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 08:00 PM)
I saw that rumour too,but i think it will fail.Look at flying spaghetti monster or flying spaghetti monster.They manage to crack it till they have a functional Battlenet but no one is playing on the real Battlenet with pirated copy.

I say they might as well make something like Steam and offer SC2 frequent DLC content.Steam is a much harder to crack system and it have been quite successful so far.

Frequent DLC helps too,as it put you off from pirating a game.I wont want to pirate Sins of Solar Empire or DoW2 now.The retail v1.0 is so inferior compare to the latest version.New AI,new maps,new textures,bug fixes and the list goes on.Post release free DLC tempt pirated users to get the original game,like in DoW2,retail v1.0 have only 6 maps,while the upcoming version will have 17 maps.DoW2 have no map making tools yet.If you pirate,you are stuck with 6 maps with a retard AI.
*
I don't like the idea of frequent DLC. As you know, Blizzard has always pride themselves in making their games as perfect as possible with minimal update / patch for balancing purposes. They have even planned 2 expansions, hence they have ample of opportunities to apply whatever changes they deemed fit into StarCraft 2. With all these delays plus 2 expansions that fans need to fork out money for, the idea of frequent DLC with the excuse of combating piracy will not be welcomed with open hands by majority (or minority) of fans. sad.gif

As quoted below, I guess they're trying to revolutionize the Battle.net system & I do really hope that it'll turn out to be something that will make people go WOW (not World of Warcraft doh.gif).

Last but not least, about the FSMs that you mentioned there, I truly believe that DotA's popularity is part to be blamed for the existence of all these FSMs. Don't take me wrong though, I'm not saying that DotA is the root cause of piracy as I do have colleagues purchasing original copy of WarCraft 3 just to play that map in Battle.net.

Pray hard.
QUOTE(Gunnar Petzall @ Jun 29 2009, 05:46 AM)
StarCraft II will not have a local area networking (LAN) game mode.

Rob Pardo, senior VP of game design at Blizzard Entertainment confirmed in an interview with IncGamers that the StarCraft II development team "don't have any plans to support LAN," and clarified saying "we will not support it." The only multiplayer available will be on Battle.net.

IncGamers also got a clarification from Blizzard, shortly after the interview, saying the choice of excluding a LAN feature "is because of the planned technology to be incorporated into Battle.net," a topic they will reveal more about at a later date.

The original StarCraft gained popularity largely because of the easy LAN mode, used on massive LANs like Dreamhack or small personal networks between friends, so this is a surprising move by Blizzard.

Besides the full interview, make sure to check out our massive StarCraft II preview, videos, screenshots/art and other StarCraft II news from the event or visit our StarCraft channel StarcraftWire.net for further details.
user posted image
TSCheesenium
post Jun 29 2009, 08:25 PM

Vigilo Confido
*******
Senior Member
4,852 posts

Joined: Aug 2006
QUOTE(talexeh @ Jun 29 2009, 08:13 PM)
I don't like the idea of frequent DLC. As you know, Blizzard has always pride themselves in making their games as perfect as possible with minimal update / patch for balancing purposes. They have even planned 2 expansions, hence they have ample of opportunities to apply whatever changes they deemed fit into StarCraft 2. With all these delays plus 2 expansions that fans need to fork out money for, the idea of frequent DLC with the excuse of combating piracy will not be welcomed with open hands by majority (or minority) of fans. sad.gif

*
I would prefer a method that rewards original owners than punish them like forcing them to login to their accounts,have unreturnable installation limits or removing features like LAN.

DLCs fit perfectly into this but i do know it is against Blizzard's philosophy.They could do it by releasing fun World Editor DLC.

Still,Steam isnt perfect,IMO,but i think to date,it's the best way to prevent piracy.At least zero day piracy.

This post has been edited by Cheesenium: Jun 29 2009, 08:28 PM
frags
post Jun 29 2009, 08:30 PM

The Wizard
Group Icon
VIP
1,640 posts

Joined: Oct 2006


QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 08:25 PM)
I would prefer a method that rewards original owners than punish them like forcing them to login to their accounts,have unreturnable installation limits or removing features like LAN.

DLCs fit perfectly into this but i do know it is against Blizzard's philosophy.

Still,Steam isnt perfect,IMO,but i think to date,it's the best day to prevent piracy.
*
I actually have no doubt that StarCraft 2 will be akin to what Half Life 2 is with Valve. The whole speculation about Blizzard building their own platform was even before SC2's announcement. WIll people be pissed off? Sure they will. But people will eventually get it because it is the product that makes the difference.

BTW DLC not necessarily means paid stuff.
TSCheesenium
post Jun 29 2009, 08:36 PM

Vigilo Confido
*******
Senior Member
4,852 posts

Joined: Aug 2006
QUOTE(frags @ Jun 29 2009, 08:30 PM)
I actually have no doubt that StarCraft 2 will be akin to what Half Life 2 is with Valve. The whole speculation about Blizzard building their own platform was even before SC2's announcement. WIll people be pissed off? Sure they will. But people will eventually get it because it is the product that makes the difference.

BTW DLC not necessarily means paid stuff.
*
Yes,DLC does not mean paid stuff.

Im just thinking that Blizzard should use something more in the lines of what developers of TF2,DoW2 or Sins done to their games.

Maybe Blizzard is getting their own Steam. hmm.gif
JuzJoe
post Jun 29 2009, 09:42 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
101 posts

Joined: Oct 2008


QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 29 2009, 08:36 PM)
Yes,DLC does not mean paid stuff.

Im just thinking that Blizzard should use something more in the lines of what developers of TF2,DoW2 or Sins done to their games.

Maybe Blizzard is getting their own Steam. hmm.gif
*
plz dont, if blizzard has their own version of Steam, I will go crazy opening up so many clients at 1 time.
hizperion
post Jun 29 2009, 09:47 PM

Average Bitch
*****
Senior Member
913 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: The Dupes Heaven; Expire: Oct 2077



if no LAN then can't play multiplayer without internets LOL ¯\(°_o)/¯
SpikeTwo
post Jun 29 2009, 10:02 PM

無敵 PC Elitist
*******
Senior Member
5,464 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Über Special Forces Gaming Room
graphics are good! this is the graphic we will have to play with for another 10 years. LOL...

btw, no worry bout the no LAN mode. if the game is hot, "some" intelligent ppl will figure a way. brows.gif


This post has been edited by SpikeTwo: Jun 29 2009, 10:04 PM
talexeh
post Jun 29 2009, 11:48 PM

One man's meat is another man's poison.
*******
Senior Member
3,094 posts

Joined: Dec 2007



QUOTE(SpikeTwo @ Jun 29 2009, 10:02 PM)
graphics are good! this is the graphic we will have to play with for another 10 years. LOL...

btw, no worry bout the no LAN mode. if the game is hot, "some" intelligent ppl will figure a way.  brows.gif
*
And this is the kind of response / attitude / mindset that cause them to come up with all kinds of security features that will only make the games less enjoyable at the end of the day. doh.gif
hizperion
post Jun 30 2009, 12:55 AM

Average Bitch
*****
Senior Member
913 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: The Dupes Heaven; Expire: Oct 2077



stopping the unstoppable whistling.gif
H@H@
post Jun 30 2009, 02:15 AM

I'M THE TEAMKILLING F***TARD!!!
Group Icon
VIP
6,727 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: 6 feet under at Bloodgulch Outpost Alpha Number 1



I don't know if this has been mentioned amidst the flurry of Battle Reports being posted and dissected by everyone here.

Or even if its old news (RPS being time warped and shit)

But, apparently LAN play is tied to Battle.net which means you need to be online just to play LAN.

Source: RPS

That just put a HUGE dent for all cybercafe owners here. Unless of course they do something like Steam where the CD-key is tied to your Battle.net account (Which is what they did with the whole relaunch of the service earlier this year) whereby it'll be a GIGANTONOURMOUS crater for cybercafe owners.

123 Pages « < 10 11 12 13 14 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0187sec    0.45    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 4th December 2025 - 08:52 PM