Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
RTS Starcraft 2, New Units with Video and Explanation.
|
fujkenasai
|
 May 28 2007, 05:54 PM
|
|
QUOTE(H@H@ @ May 28 2007, 12:45 PM) I don't think they're even trying to beat those games in terms of graphics. Blizzard likes focusing on the graphics in terms of style rather than making it the game with the biggest bling on the planet. Plus, they also cater to lower end systems. As for the physics effect, DoW doesn't actually use a proper physics engine. When units are flung, its quite often predictable (Technically, ALL games have some form of physics calculation, but its usually very limited). Only a few games actually incorporate a fully realistic physics engine into the game. Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander had full implementation (All projectiles are affected by real world physics and not some cockamamie percentage style) and Age of Empires 3 sorta tried to (Cannonballs would bludgeon anything in their path and its trajectory was affected by terrain) I don't expect Starcraft 2 to do this since anything uncertain about something would obviously cause the numbers-obsessed Koreans to go stark raving mad. Come to think of it, maybe that's why they don't really like Warcraft 3 (Since this one used number ranges for damage handling instead of the fixed numbers in Starcraft) Speaking of the koreans I still think SC wins over WC3 in Korea is the competitiveness and the skill level in SC. You cant have 5 expansions and 5 battles at once for WC3 yes you can seperate your 3 heros but thats bout it, the hero system causes the tide of the battle whereas in SC every battle and every unit is crucial. If you loose one battle or even a few units in SC it could cost the player his game. |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 29 2007, 12:48 PM
|
|
|
Same here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 11:07 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(jones007 @ May 29 2007, 06:05 PM) as long as the graphic is good + good game play is good enough. why bother the physics thingy and bla bla. QUOTE(sniperz @ May 30 2007, 10:36 AM) starcraft 2's graphic is assumingly great. cant wait to see the demos The graphics are not that cutting edge as mentioned earlier in the forum, and there seem to be no physice in the game there isnt really a 3-d effect like sup com where missiles planes carriers fly at different altitude. QUOTE(radkliler @ May 30 2007, 09:19 AM) So far the only game which uses physics as a part of the game is SupCom...the rest are most probably eye candy. Do you play that game. |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 12:00 PM
|
|
|
Definately, I wanna see what tyhe koreans come up with. But I hope they dun copy everything from Sup Com and CnC3, they've coppied enuf for the Demo already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 01:49 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(slickz @ May 30 2007, 12:54 PM) didnt see the part where the debris slide down the ramps, did you? Starcraft 2 will have Havok physics implemented. Yup. The same kind implemented in far cry, half life 2 etc. I did see that happening but that I believe is just an eye-candy and if you have a unit there where the debries slide down I doubt there will be any effect on them. Thats why I say the physics in the game is just for eye candy unlike Sup Com. I thought half-life 2 is jim randall physics and not havoc physics? |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 02:11 PM
|
|
|
I hope that the gameplay is not as bad as RoL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 02:33 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Aoshi_88 @ May 30 2007, 02:11 PM) If it was like CoH... Imagine a flaming Battlecruiser crashing into a Protoss Warp Gate killing any newly spawned units and damaging the Warp Gate itself... 1337!!! That is possible for Sup Com. This post has been edited by fujkenasai: May 30 2007, 02:51 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 02:52 PM
|
|
|
Are you really a gal?
If you are then you need to ask your female friends to join too, RTS really need female players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
May 30 2007, 06:36 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(slickz @ May 30 2007, 05:11 PM) er? jim randall physics? google didnt even bring up anything lol. half life 2 is havok ler SauceOk so Im wrong but why sauce? QUOTE(t3chn0m4nc3r @ May 30 2007, 05:30 PM) haha... unfortunately gals find RTS 2 complicated...  only nerdy gals love RTS...  Thats why I love nerdy gals, they are hard to find. |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 1 2007, 09:31 AM
|
|
|
I wish that it will support WinXp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 14 2007, 02:44 PM
|
|
|
Whee Carriers are back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 15 2007, 10:02 AM
|
|
|
Yeah we know that its stated =_=
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 16 2007, 12:06 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 16 2007, 11:12 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 16 2007, 11:27 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 16 2007, 07:26 PM) Or,at least,no overpower game changing heroes. Id say the mothership is a hero like unit. QUOTE(Aoshi_88 @ Jun 16 2007, 08:05 PM) SUPER STORM OF BLIZZARD + AREA OF EFFECT +200 SQUARES!!!! Whats that? |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 18 2007, 03:48 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(azxel @ Jun 18 2007, 08:57 AM) the graphics does look a bit like DoW, eh? I hope they've done something stellar with the gameplay, rather than just the old starcraft zerg or tank rush but with updated graphics. Where's my World of Starcraft?!?! Ohh Blizzard no WoS pls, its gonna be my nightmare. I wonder if the dotards would want a World Of Dotards. |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 20 2007, 01:23 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Jun 18 2007, 05:51 PM) Nah,i dont think so.DoW graphics look more "mature" than SC 2.SC 2 still have that old SC1 look and feel. Hell no.Enough MMORPGs. SC2 does have some changes towards the gameplay, even carriers have changed in their defences etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 21 2007, 07:26 PM
|
|
|
Generals graphics sux even for its time.
This post has been edited by fujkenasai: Jun 21 2007, 07:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 22 2007, 09:00 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Frosty-Snowman @ Jun 22 2007, 05:17 PM) Go and get PC Gamer US : August Edition 2007. Got whole loads of stuffs about Protoss unit and few of the rests.. Localised edition have arr? |
|
|
|
|
|
fujkenasai
|
Jun 23 2007, 12:29 AM
|
|
|
DAmn that means pay much more.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0511sec
0.43
7 queries
GZIP Disabled