Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Details For StarCraft 2's Zerg

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the expect-more-at-blizzcon dept.

Real Time Strategy (Games) 163

Blizzard had a playable demo of StarCraft 2 running at Leipzig, and Kotaku's Michael McWhertor had a chance to sit down and spend some time playing the Zerg. The Zerg weren't available in previous demos; the Protoss and Terran campaigns were showcased earlier. GameSpy took the opportunity to interview two Blizzard employees about what people can expect from the game. Gameplay footage is also available which shows a Terran vs. Zerg battle. Blizzard PR rep Bob Colayco had this to say: "One thing that's new, as you go through the campaign... you know, normally in RTS games how they start you off with a couple of units and then it's like, 'Okay, two missions later we're going to give you tanks...' One of the things we're looking at doing with StarCraft II's campaign is putting the choice more in the players' hands. So maybe you like dealing more with infantry? You can purchase those upgrades and make your marines and other infantry stronger. Or else you'll save up the credits you get from the missions to get tanks sooner than you normally could."

cancel ×

163 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I will never forgive the Zerg (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745463)

For what they did to Kerrigan.

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745475)

I will never forgive Zerg... ...for what he did to my Buzz Lightyear action figure.

SLASHDOT SUX0RZ! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745985)

http://goatse.cz/ [goatse.cz]
You nerds love it!

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (4, Funny)

PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745559)

Me neither. I mean, what were they thinking, making her so freakin' awesome and all. Now, I can't stop thinking about her, and all other female video game protagonists have lost their appeal.

Those damn zerg. *dreamy siiiiiigh*

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (2, Funny)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747047)

Me neither. I mean, what were they thinking, making her so freakin' awesome and all. Now, I can't stop thinking about her, and all other female video game protagonists have lost their appeal.

Those damn zerg. *dreamy siiiiiigh*

Don't forget about the rogue [wikipedia.org] chick in Diablo. Something about her voice makes her blow Kerrigan away. There is no way that Kerrigan could ever compete with that voice.

(There's a joke in there somewhere)

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (5, Informative)

Bedouin X (254404) | more than 5 years ago | (#24749623)

(There's a joke in there somewhere)

Perhaps the fact that the same person voiced both characters?

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751653)

(There's a joke in there somewhere)

Perhaps the fact that the same person voiced both characters?

We have a winner.

I would have also accepted, "The voice-over actress's maiden name is 'Talken'!"

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (1)

Jonah Hex (651948) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751741)

World of Warcraft Burning Crusade - Sylvanas

No wonder, I just love the range Sylvanas has and look forward to hearing the rest of her quest voice recordings.

Jonah HEX

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24748215)

Yeah I've always been thinking of making Kerrigan my bitch, probably add one more zergling for some 3P action.

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (1)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745593)

That was Tonya Harding.

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (4, Interesting)

Travis Mansbridge (830557) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748075)

Interestingly, the character was given the name "Kerrigan," because the badass chick from competing RTS Red Alert [wikipedia.org] was named "Tanya"

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24748603)

I'm a little slow... please explain this further, what does the name "Kerrigan" have to do with "Tanya"??

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24749353)

I'm a little slow... please explain this further, what does the name "Kerrigan" have to do with "Tanya"??

Something to do with figure skating [slashdot.org] .

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745605)

For what they did to Kerrigan.

Elevated her from being Mensk's pawn to the Queen of Blades? She already 'thanked' him for that.

Nor will figure skating fans forgive Jeff Gillooly (4, Funny)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745661)

For what he did to Kerrigan [wikipedia.org] .

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745997)

Zergs are the niggers of Starcraft: Wicked stupid but massive strength in their primitive attacks.

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (4, Funny)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746931)

But, can you forgive the Klingons for what they did to your boy?

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (2, Interesting)

Bemopolis (698691) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747849)

Screw Kerrigan — consider what she did to Jennings [youtube.com] .

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#24749653)

For what they did to Kerrigan.

Ice skating's a tough world, bitch.

Re:I will never forgive the Zerg (1)

Trails (629752) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751335)

Never mind Kerrigan, I still can't get over what the Zerg did to Aeris.

lol (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745489)

in b4 tyranids > zerg

Re:lol (1)

Silicon Jedi (878120) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745619)

Tyranids Zerg.

All well and good.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745589)

But when will SC2 be released? will it be another SC: Nova?

Re:All well and good.. (1)

Spring182 (1338645) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745679)

The difference between Starcraft II and Starcraft: Ghost is that Starcraft Ghost was a spinoff, Starcraft II however is the sequel to one of the best selling video games of all time, they likely won't let Starcraft II hit Development Hell

Re:All well and good.. (1)

Tridus (79566) | more than 5 years ago | (#24749095)

SC: Ghost was also being developed by another studio, and SC 2 is in house.

Hopefully it'll be fast-paced (1)

BeardedClone (1351227) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745621)

I love South Korean Starcraft competitions. They really know their stuff. Hopefully Starcraft 2 will be accepted by them. Hopefully it'll be as fast-paced as the first.

Re:Hopefully it'll be fast-paced (1)

Daengbo (523424) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747769)

Believe me. They're all drooling at the thought of getting their hands on it over here. You needn't worry.

Woah, all of a sudden the Zerg are out?!? (5, Funny)

CaptainPatent (1087643) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745685)

What's the rush??!?!

Re:Woah, all of a sudden the Zerg are out?!? (2, Funny)

doyoulikeworms (1094003) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746157)

I know! Can't a guy sit down and enjoy a NR 20 Year game once in a while?

Re:Woah, all of a sudden the Zerg are out?!? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24746163)

Zerg?

Rush?

KEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKE ^__________^

text added so I can add the correct amount of capital K's and E's.

Re:Woah, all of a sudden the Zerg are out?!? (2, Informative)

Daengbo (523424) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747795)

For the humor impaired, Ke ke ke is the romanization of the Korean text laugh. I'd type the real thing, but Slash won't accept it.

Re:Woah, all of a sudden the Zerg are out?!? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24748251)

I once paid a hooker $500 to let me zerg rush her face.

What's the rush? (2, Funny)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748493)

6pool

Linked video... (4, Insightful)

MooseMuffin (799896) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745745)

...is in lower resolution than the actual original game, and then made worse by crappy encoding. You'd get a better idea for the game by firing up starcraft 1 than trying to watch this.

Re:Linked video... (0)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 5 years ago | (#24745831)

All the screenshots I've seen have been lo-res as well. I guess no one told blizzard 800x600 is no longer the standard screen resolution. hah.

Has there been any word on the resolution supported by SC2? I find playing SC painful now.

Re:Linked video... (3, Interesting)

drik00 (526104) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746339)

IANAGP, but to my understanding, until the game engine (specifically in 3d games) is finalized and tuned and tweaked, the frames per second sucks ass, so its not a surprise the showing the game off in lower res so that it runs smoother. Judging only from WoW, they have a firm understanding on large resolutions, and wide-screen, God bless 'em.

J

Re:Linked video... (4, Interesting)

PrimalChrome (186162) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746867)

You're missing something. Blizzard intentionally limited the original Diablo, Starcraft and Diablo II to small (even for the period) resolutions. Why? Not for optimization. To force a 'level playing field'.

I've never understood the obsession with competitive Starcraft. It was a clickfest game with very little overall strategy. Age of Empires II and Myth: the Fallen Lords were more along the lines of games that put the Strategy in RTS.

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24747383)

Sprite-based games were obviously limited to that resolution, because with the technology sprites could not be scaled for arbitrary resolutions.
WarCraft 3, World of WarCraft are 3-d and the field of view is exactly the same regardless of the resolution, though aligned differently for widescreen.

Re:Linked video... (2, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748555)

Sprite-based games were obviously limited to that resolution, because with the technology sprites could not be scaled for arbitrary resolutions.

They didn't have to scale it, they could have simply let you see more onscreen at once. They didn't to keep a level playing field.

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24750179)

Oh YES, that would have made it MUCH more fair.

Re:Linked video... (1)

MistrBlank (1183469) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750553)

Hmmm... I wonder if there's any research on vector based sprites.

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24749633)

Myth:TFL (and its sequel) were beautiful, but they weren't strategic. This was intentional--they stripped out the strategy (logistics, research, unit production) almost entirely to concentrate on small unit tactics. I think the only thing that can really be called strategy is veteran management.

bullcrap (5, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750003)

excuse me but age of empires and similar games dont have nothing to do with rts. they are basically "Whomever builds the baddest, fastest unit the most and sends them over, wins". there are small variation in tactics you can do, because every unit has an anti unit, but its nothing like starcraft. also the races, faction units are almost all the same, with only 2-3 different in 15 unit selections. they are basically the same.

in starcraft you have 3 different races with TOTALLY different units all having totally different abilities.

no unit has a clear anti unit. there are many different units that can stand against and be an anti unit of a particular unit because of their different abilities.

and this makes the game an infinite variation of strategy. there are countless ways to win a matchup. you can go mass production, but if your opponent has good micro (management, meaning using units very effectively individually) and uses very little number of units and their abilities perfectly, you are totally screwed.

no sir, either you dont know zit about strategy, or havent really played starcraft by giving its due.

Re:bullcrap (2, Insightful)

kv9 (697238) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750125)

no sir, either you dont know zit about strategy, or havent really played starcraft by giving its due.

I know I'll probably get the modstick for this, but if I wanted to play a strategy game I'd go play Total Annihilation, not kekeke zerg rush ^_____^

Re:bullcrap (3, Informative)

AioKits (1235070) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751353)

If you liked Total Annihilation, you'll probably like Supreme Commander. Good stuff. Reminds me of TA a lot.

Re:bullcrap (3, Interesting)

Sobrique (543255) | more than 5 years ago | (#24752219)

Supreme Commander is good, the sequel - Forged Alliance - is better.
Big shift in the gameplay dynamics away from 'simcity, rush nuke' to something a little more reliant on going out and controlling territory. And make experimentals and nukes a bit more 'usable, but not instant victory' which as someone who likes a 'proper' lategame, rather than a 'he who nukes first wins' suits me well.

Re:bullcrap (5, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750897)

Any game where players' effectiveness is rated by how many actions per second they can perform is a crappy strategy game. Period. Strategy is about thinking, not how fast you can jump the screen around and send your units in 50 different directions.

Re:bullcrap (2, Insightful)

MooseMuffin (799896) | more than 5 years ago | (#24752291)

Sounds like you're looking for turn based strategy games. You can easily take 50 actions in a game of civilization within a single turn, and a turn is simply a unit of gametime. RTS games have multiple turns per second, so if you expect to execute the same complexity of strategy, then yes, you'll have to be able to perform numerous actions per second.

Re:bullcrap (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 5 years ago | (#24752353)

Sorry, but "real time" strategy is going to have both elements of critical thinking and the ability to act and react quickly. If you can't handle it, go play turn based. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't strategy.

Re:bullcrap (2, Interesting)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751297)

Strangely every good Starcraft player I've met seems to have restricted himself (it's always a him, strange huh?) to a handful of proven tactics and apart from that spent most of his time practicing to become really really fast at clicking and ordering his units around, basically what you complained about other games encouraging.

Myself? I'm still looking for a game that's essentially Command & Conquer but that emphasizes long drawn out battles that last for hours and where you actually have to do things like fortify and hold key points in the game world (like towns and bridges that help you control resources). AFAIK 99% of RTS games, including Starcraft, focus way too much on having good hand-eye coordination and not nearly enough on thinking. And no, I don't want turn-based games as a substitute, it's a different genre (and while I find it interesting I prefer real-time combat, but it has to be the kind of real-time where ten minutes isn't enough time to build a shitload of units and rush them from one side of the "world" to the other to crush your enemy's base while hoping your enemy didn't manage to do the same in eight minutes).

/Mikael

Re:bullcrap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24751523)

Sins of a Solar Empire. That is all.

Re:bullcrap (2, Informative)

Salamande (461392) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751581)

Sounds like you might want to check out Sins of a Solar Empire. [sinsofasolarempire.com]

Re:bullcrap (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 5 years ago | (#24752119)

Rome total war kind of had this for me.

With the turn based unit building and setting up your units it had that kind of feel.

It was lacking resource management in the fighting though, and except for city defense there were not too many choke points.

It was by far my favorite strategy game ever though (perhaps because I didn't over-play it before going full time Linux).

Re:bullcrap (1)

whistlingtony (691548) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751755)

Ok, I'm being kind of a bastard here, but I think you're confusing strategy and tactics. There is really only one strategy in RTS games... Get bigger faster than the other guy.

-T

Re:Linked video... (2, Insightful)

DuckDodgers (541817) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751251)

If the game had little strategy, building a massive force of your best unit was a sure path to victory. But Blizzard designed each unit in the game with at least one effective counter-strategy available.

You need to manage your economy, scout your enemy base locations, scout which units he was building so you could build the appropriate counter units, and then control your army closely for tactical combat, by taking injured units to the back for repairs, drawing enemy forces into geographic bottlenecks so you can focus your firepower, and making effective use of unit special abilities.

It's an extremely deep strategy game, far more than a simple "clickfest". If you don't like how fast it is, set the game speed to the slowest possible. Then you can enjoy the depth of strategy without having to click and hotkey at lightning speed.

Re:Linked video... (1)

Psiven (302490) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747623)

Actually WoW handles widescreen improperly by actually chopping off the top and bottom of the screen to deliver the aspect ratio of your monitor. So hopefully Blizzard fixes this for all the widescreen players out there.

Re:Linked video... (1)

n dot l (1099033) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747731)

What? I've got a standard monitor and a widescreen next to each other and it works perfectly on either of them. The HUD doesn't fall off the edges of the screen and I can see just as much vertically at a given zoom factor...

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24748395)

What? I've got a standard monitor and a widescreen next to each other and it works perfectly on either of them. The HUD doesn't fall off the edges of the screen and I can see just as much vertically at a given zoom factor...

So you've got some kind of magic computer, then?

World of Warcraft handles widescreen resolutions by reducing the vertical FOV. This is simply fact. It's documented with comparison shots here [widescreen...gforum.com] . This approach is very common in multiplayer games, as a wider horizontal FOV might give players with widescreen displays an unfair advantage, but a reduced vertical FOV is barely noticeable in most circumstances.

Re:Linked video... (1)

n dot l (1099033) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748569)

Yeah, OK. I'm a retard. I had my camera pointed a tad differently in one of the screenshots I was comparing (which were admitadely made to brag about my new monitor and not to actually do any other sort of serious comparison between the two :D ) and it was clipping against something which made the effective camera range different (I've got my max camera range tweaked higher than what the WoW interface normally allows so this happens a lot). I still don't consider it something that needs to be fixed like the other poster does, it's just the way it is. I thought he meant the HUD was clipping off the screen or the text was nonuniformly stretched and unreadable or something, two problems I recently had to fix in a game I work on and which definitely fit the definition of broken.

Re:Linked video... (1)

10Neon (932006) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750379)

Try the StarCraft II website, http://www.starcraft2.com/ [starcraft2.com] ...Their screenshots are in the neighborhood of 1600x1200.

Re:Linked video... (0)

ockegheim (808089) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746113)

I could make things out just well enough to see the Zerg get comprehensively pwned by siege tanks. My advice:

SPAWN MORE ZERGLINGS!

Re:Linked video... (4, Funny)

Trent05 (70375) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746265)

It always drove me up the wall playing with ppl who INSISTED on being Protoss and INSISTED on playing on a map with pretty much unlimited resources.

Gee whiz, fighting Protoss yet again on a map that completely negates their weakness ($$). How fun.

Hopefully they'll put in a few different balancing stats/players into this one.

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24746409)

True. Protoss+unlimited resources own in the early game as you can build faster.
Zergs + unlimited resources own in cramped infinite resource maps (More unit production per area) Just build and keep sending them out.
Unless you know the more advanced terran defensive tactics, which would let you hold back most players.

Re:Linked video... (3, Insightful)

nasch (598556) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747041)

If you're playing Zerg with huge resources, can't you build huge numbers of hydralisks and/or mutalisks and/or guardians, instead of huge numbers of zerglings? I mean, six or eight hatcheries pumping out, say, hydralisks and guardians gets pretty nasty pretty fast. Or heck, Ultralisk rush. It seems to me that it's not so much that Protoss has to spend more money, but that they make fewer, more powerful, more expensive units. But then I'm no champion.

Re:Linked video... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24747179)

Cannot Create More Units

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24747983)

No. Unlimited resources usually means that the mineral patches and gas geysers have max capacity, meaning you can mine them roughly forever.

You'll still be mining gas out of one geyser. That's not even enough to maintain mutalisk production out of a single hatchery, much less 6-8 hatcheries pumping guardians.

Re:Linked video... (1)

Spinalcold (955025) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748039)

I always laughed when on maps of unlimited res people would go carrier rush. 1 or 2 defiler and hydro's up the ass will demolish them, then their base is free for the picking.

Re:Linked video... (1)

nasch (598556) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750949)

If there's useful terrain around, the carrier rush could still be effective since plague doesn't affect shields. Attack with the carriers from beyond hydro range and use a ridge, water, etc to keep the ground units away. OTOH, plague + mutalisks... ouch. I always found though that High Templar are the biggest threat to carriers. Two or three of them can take out pretty much any number of carriers if they're all together.

Re:Linked video... (2, Informative)

SpazmodeusG (1334705) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748163)

Protoss can build an unlimited number of buildings at the same time using 1 probe and that probe can go back to harvesting whilst the buildings are being built.
On maps with lots of resources you might be building several things at once early on. That's several less peons terran and zerg have harvesting.

Re:Linked video... (1)

nasch (598556) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750891)

Yeah that's true, that gets them going earlier.

Re:Linked video... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24750561)

  That is true what you said about Zerg. Zerg require lots of recourses, but with lots of resources you can create lots of spawning. This means even MORE micro managment. The problem is that in the end, humans (terrans) have a slight advantage in the end game.

  Case and point. A month ago, a finals game in Korea, Savior (one of the top Zerg progamers) played a Terran. Savior made lots of bases, held terran to one base, and dominated the whole map, except for one expension base. He ends up destroying the primary base, but terran was able to set up expension, and turtled in. He put missile lunchers everywhere, tanks on high ground, and started to build battleships. No matter how many times Zerg would build up an army, do a drop, or attack in, he was eliminated, as the guy slowly build up his battleships.
  Then, when he had about 10 battleship, he would slowly move around and destroy all the zerg bases.
There was not much Savior could do, resulting in him losing the game. So I hope in SCII there will be slightly more balance (which it seems that way) and no single UBER units (which there seems there are - Zerg Queen, and PRotoss time stopping ship.)

  www.youtube.com/jon747 has a large collection of top star craft games. Check it out.

   

Re:Linked video... (1)

EMeta (860558) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750947)

Infinite resources maps give the psi limit of 200 more weight, and as protoss con arguably do more within that limit if they have enough resources, the advantages leans to them. Also, they don't actually need to stay within that limit (via mind control of drones or SCVs).

Re:Linked video... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24746493)

Re:Linked video... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24746669)

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/39089.html

Hi-Def video link

HD Video Link ^^^ (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747061)

Mod Parent up!!!

Re:Linked video... (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746735)

The ones on the Starcraft 2 webpage use to be of acceptable quality, if it's not there yet it will get there I guess. (Not the reviewers of course, maybe he should had made it private and used Vimeo? =P)

Pussy Nazi Sez (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24745929)

No pussy for YOU!

Re:Pussy Nazi Sez (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24746337)

Previously I didn't think trolls could marry, but you appear to have experience in the matter.

I'm not sure this makes me feel any better.

Ooh ooh I know this one! (1)

blackicye (760472) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746497)

1) Send Overlords to scout for enemy bases.
2) Crank out Zerglings as fast as you can.
3) ???
4) Profit!

If I could change the resolution (4, Interesting)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746663)

If I could change the resolution on good old StarCraft, I'd be very happy.

I don't want a 3d look. It seems to make things harder to see and it's a waste of processor power. I just want to be able to see more of the map on the StarCraft I have.

Howabout making a StarCraft 1.9? Blizzard could do that for almost nothing, compared to this new release, and people like me would mail in the checks to get it.

Re:If I could change the resolution (3, Insightful)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#24746781)

WC III uses 3D as well but since only the almost-from-the-top-view is the only good one everyone use that and it look pretty flat. Sure you can look around some stuff, hide a unit behind a tree or building somewhat and it makes ground units very hard to click on when there are lots of air units on top but I'd say it works well.

It doesn't look as cool as on screenshots from a lower angle and more up close but it works very well for playing the game.

Also I guess it's easier to support more resolutions and aspect ratios and such when it's rendered vs uses animations.

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748601)

hide a unit behind a tree or building somewhat and it makes ground units very hard to click on when there are lots of air units on top but I'd say it works well.

You can hit insert or delete to temporarily turn your camera roughly 120 cw or ccw (in its horizontal plane). You can also hit page up and page down to raise or lower your camera. These camera adjustments makes it much harder to hide your units behind your opponent's UI limitations. I suspect Blizzard learned something from watching SC replays ;)

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751779)

Yeah, but turning around are pretty useless to click a hero under other units and it jumps back.

You can change ground angle with the scroll wheel as well but it takes time and time is important while fighing. Also if there are plenty of units and lights and shit like that it doesn't help much anyway, sometimes it's hard to actually SEE the unit.

I don't know how it was in Starcraft, my SC games may be countable on one hand.

But yes, true, I think you could hide things behind refineries in C&C maybe aswell? Maybe they want to have it that way to allow for taller buildings and in that case WC 3 / 3D is actually an improvement since at least you can do something about it.

Ah, whatever, just mass archers/bats/gargs/.. and kill all air, done ;)

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

SpazmodeusG (1334705) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748055)

I agree but not for the reasons of processor power. Starcraft 1 was standardised, no matter what computer or OS you played it on you knew the interface and the graphics viewpoint would be exactly the same. Even the keyboard shortcuts were fixed.

These factors could really be seen as a feature as they made it great for competitive play.

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

goose-incarnated (1145029) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748159)

What computer or OS options did you have? I only had windows as an option for playing starcraft (even if I emulate windows).

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

SpazmodeusG (1334705) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748343)

Starcraft 1 can be run on Mac or PC and in fact the Battle Chest editions have the 1 hybrid CD that has both PC and Mac versions on it.

It's great as a LAN game across many completely different systems as there are no advantages from one system to another.

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

Starayo (989319) | more than 5 years ago | (#24749297)

Well, my starcraft discs, original and expansion, both support windows and mac. They were bought individually.

Though, I did buy them fairly recently as those "classic games" sort of dealie. They look the same as my old ones though.

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

goose-incarnated (1145029) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748121)

I agree - SC is almost perfectly balanced as it is, all most fans want is better graphics and tcp support.

In fact, I wouldn't mind an SC/D2 port for a handheld with a touch screen, and because of the low requirements of SC it should run just fine on something like the gpx2/F200 [wikipedia.org] . I'd rather have the hours of fun on a handheld than by booting up a computer just to play sitting at a desk. I'd imagine that just those two games ported to the F200 would very quickly make it one of the top-selling handhelds :-)


Come to think of it, I'd love to port SC and D2 to the F200 - I wonder how much a licence will cost ....

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

Jezral (449476) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748401)

They don't want to do that. They're even constraining SC2 to have a limited field of vision where regardless of screen resolution you can't zoom out too much.

Personally, I hate that and want to be able to see everything at once, but they feel that players should be limited in this fashion. I doubt you'd see the original SC updated to allow zoom out for the same reason.

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750209)

Go play Spring [clan-sy.com] then, it allows zooming out until you see the whole map if you want to (I usually play in a zoom level that's further out than other games allow but not THAT far out).

Re:If I could change the resolution (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748529)

and people like me would mail in the checks to get it.

Only problem is that you would mail those checks to a Swedish bay affected by global warming :p

Re:If I could change the resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24749421)

3d is easier to render on modern videocards than 2d is now. 2D is the waste of processing power.

Video is terrible quality (2, Funny)

agristin (750854) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747037)

I could see there was a Zerg base and the player was building some Zerg stuff (could barely see what it was). Then some grey blobs came in and pointed some yellow flashing triangles and then the player played poorly, made some Zerg that ate only some of the marines. Then something happend and some tanks came. I couldn't watch anymore because my eyesight was going from trying to focus on the blurry video.

Here it looked like this:

"OOO {iii"

And now you've seen the crummy movie.

Oh god find the red dot! (5, Funny)

TheTornOne (847602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24747421)

***Chirp*** "Nuclear Launch Detected"

Re:Oh god find the red dot! (1)

cfortin (23148) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750185)

I've set Thunderbird to use that half-second chirp as a you-got-mail
indicator. I still jump whenever it goes off ....

I never really got that (1)

patio11 (857072) | more than 5 years ago | (#24751577)

So you've got an entire corps of ghosts -- super-intelligent, psionic assassins with a mortality rate of probably 50% and 80% when they go out to do nuke spotting... and nobody ever realized that if you are firing nuclear weapons, you don't really *need* laser-precision accuracy? Because they're, you know, nuclear weapons? What's the worst thing that happens, you overshoot the ultralisk by 50 yards and only burn it to ash instead of annihilating it on a subatomic level?

"Smart" bombs, indeed.

I don't think Starcraft2 will have the same appeal (1)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 5 years ago | (#24748015)

The video looks great (the High Def one that AC linked for us). But I worry about what the content from TFS. The reason that Starcraft didn't give you tanks until a few levels in, was so you could learn just a few new things each level. The first 3 levels of every game as complicated as Starcraft should be learning. Even if you've played dozens of RTS before, including Starcraft, you're still going to have to learn the new units, upgrades, and controls.

It looks like Blizzard is going for the "RPG" element too, like Warcraft III and Battle for Wesnoth. I hope it isn't too bad. I really liked how I could beat a level of Starcraft, or Age of Empires, etc, and not worry about not being strong enough for the next level because I didn't beat the previous levels efficiently enough.

Re:I don't think Starcraft2 will have the same app (1)

ifrag (984323) | more than 5 years ago | (#24749579)

I really liked how I could beat a level of Starcraft, or Age of Empires, etc, and not worry about not being strong enough for the next level because I didn't beat the previous levels efficiently enough.

I doubt this is ever a real problem in Warcraft 3 / TFT. Not once did I ever feel the need to replay a level simply so my hero could get more powerful. Unless you intentionally avoid using them they get plenty powerful enough even through casual use. If you actually got stuck as a result of this then I would question what tactics (if any) you had outside of hero use.

I love Blizzard's fresh new content. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24750363)

It is great to have a demo with the tyranids, Sure the eldar and space marine demos were fine but everyone loves the tyranids.
I really love the new spacemarine character Lemon Roos leader of the Astral Coyotes division!
I wish all game companies could have the creativity and generate the original content that Blizzard does.

Hmmm... (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | more than 5 years ago | (#24750911)

"One of the things we're looking at doing with StarCraft II's campaign is putting the choice more in the players' hands. So maybe you like dealing more with infantry? You can purchase those upgrades and make your marines and other infantry stronger. Or else you'll save up the credits you get from the missions to get tanks sooner than you normally could."

What, like Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends? Woopie do.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>