Starcraft 2

[Tulac]

Comments, anyone?
http://pc.ign.com/articles/788/788627p1.html

[TheChosen]

Sweet mother of pearl! :blink:

[Scatty]

I knew it would be Starcraft II and not Diablo III. Rumors and small heats-up from Blizzard were circulating around for quite some time already, but no ever ever could say for sure what project the're working on. Now we know ^_^

[Tulac]

Let's hope it will stay true to the original, knowing Blizzard they won't mess up. :D

[Scatty]

I hope so, though to be honest, if it will have the similar cartoonish graphics of World of Warcraft, or Warcraft III, I won't throw any further glance on it anymore. That two could have been looking better, I think.

[_r.u.s.s.]

i have a very intelligent comment, contaning just exactly one, gramatically totaly correct, word.

cooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool :D

edit: btw, offtopic: http://youtube.com/watch?v=CYY-g6ionzM

[Dave]

This is...this is...this is...damn...it's a figata! (I can't translate it ^_^ )
But what can you tell me about starcaft ghost???Is it a dead project? :unsure:
With WOW Blizzard is making lot and lot of money, I'm not surprised to see this release! :brain:

[Subach]

i cant wait to put my hands on it i played starcraft and brood war to death

ghost is canceled i believe sorry david

[Dave]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Subach @ May 19 2007, 02:30 PM) 290842</div>

ghost is canceled i believe sorry david
[/b]

What a shame :(
I'll take consolation with Starcraft 2! ^_^

[Blood-Pigggy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Scatty @ May 19 2007, 06:00 AM) 290812</div>
I hope so, though to be honest, if it will have the similar cartoonish graphics of World of Warcraft, or Warcraft III, I won't throw any further glance on it anymore. That two could have been looking better, I think.
[/b]

Haha, you might as well stop following it now, because according to the cinematic trailer and the gameplay footage that's been shown, along with all the screenshots, it still has the slightly cartoony look of the original Starcraft.

The only non-cartoony game Blizzard ever made was Diablo and Diablo II, why would they stop all of a sudden, it's their style.

[Scatty]

Starcraft was looking different than Warcraft III, though.

[Tulac]

Check out the gameplay trailer here (http://www.starcraft2.com). To me it seems crappy warcraft3 type micromanagement = out, massive battles = in. :D

[gufu1992]

Will be rated M... damn it....

[sev7en]

I loved the first Startcraft and sometimes I am still playing it via LAN with my friends... I loved its expansion and I can say with no doubts... I will love Starcraft 2 too ^_^


Here (http://polyphobia.de/nonpublic/muddles/blizz/) has been hosted some unpublished screens.

[_r.u.s.s.]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sev7en @ May 23 2007, 09:08 AM) 290963</div>
Here (http://polyphobia.de/nonpublic/muddles/blizz/) has been hosted some unpublished screens.
[/b]
:drool:

btw i sent this one on AR while AB was down so for those who havnt been to AR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klvO6wEtcoA

[bobson]

hmm, I need a new computer ...

But there is a hope - first Starcraft worked on some 486 :D Maybe this one will also have low rewquirements

[Sathanas]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bob-satan @ May 23 2007, 08:02 PM) 291047</div>
hmm, I need a new computer ...

But there is a hope - first Starcraft worked on some 486 :D Maybe this one will also have low rewquirements
[/b]

Well, the engine looks like it requires slightly more than WC3 requires to run. Shouldn't be a problem, though.

[The Fifth Horseman]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bob-satan @ May 23 2007, 10:02 PM) 291047</div>
But there is a hope - first Starcraft worked on some 486 :D
[/b]
DX4/100, anyone? :D

[Scatty]

Had one, before it transformed into Pentium 100. That one was sufficient to even run Quake smoothly. Still got it, standing in some corner :P

[The Fifth Horseman]

Mine ran Quake nicely too. Ah, the memories. :D

[Subach]

Minimum System Requirements for Starcraft 2
Processor: 1.4 Ghz Processor
Memory: 512 MB RAM
Graphics card: 128 MB RAM video card capable of Hardware TnL. DX10 is not required, but will be supported by SC2 and Blizzard are considering adding DX10 specific effects.

Harddisk:
Soundcard: A DirectX-compatible 16-bit sound card.
OS: Windows Wista, Windows XP or Mac OS
Connection: Access to Blizzard Entertainment's online gaming service, Battle.net, requires a low-latency, active Internet connection rated at 28.8 Kbps or faster.
Multiplayer games played over a LAN require an active connection to a TCP/IP network.

Other: Mouse and Keyboard

[The Fifth Horseman]

My PC is just within those parameters. :D

[Blood-Pigggy]

Does anyone realize that the game is probably in pre-alpha? I doubt its gone farther beyond that, what we've been shown is probably really early work, you can easily assume that the graphics will become more advanced and detailed as time goes on, the game has just been announced, don't be too sure of the system requirements yet.

[Scatty]

If they say "Minimum System Requirements: 1.4 Ghz Processor" you always better assume it's 2.2 Ghz instead, to be on the safe side. Running the game at the told minimum requirements usually makes the game impossible to play due to almost fixed images instead of any frames per second at all.

[Tulac]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ May 24 2007, 08:24 PM) 291246</div>
Does anyone realize that the game is probably in pre-alpha? I doubt its gone farther beyond that, what we've been shown is probably really early work, you can easily assume that the graphics will become more advanced and detailed as time goes on, the game has just been announced, don't be too sure of the system requirements yet.
[/b]
That might be true, but there are always the lowest details that can stay the same through the making process because you choose which effects you will add. Poly count and the basic engine capabilities won't change. Still my PC is too slow even for that.

[bobson]

They said it won't be released this year ...

Blood-Piggy you must be right about pre-alpha

btw. I bought a new computer ... and for what ???

[Eagle of Fire]

Minimum System Requirements for Starcraft 2
Processor: 1.4 Ghz Processor
Memory: 512 MB RAM
Graphics card: 128 MB RAM video card capable of Hardware TnL. DX10 is not required, but will be supported by SC2 and Blizzard are considering adding DX10 specific effects.

Harddisk:
Soundcard: A DirectX-compatible 16-bit sound card.
OS: Windows Wista, Windows XP or Mac OS
Connection: Access to Blizzard Entertainment's online gaming service, Battle.net, requires a low-latency, active Internet connection rated at 28.8 Kbps or faster.
Multiplayer games played over a LAN require an active connection to a TCP/IP network.

Other: Mouse and Keyboard[/b]
Hey, that's a little more than half as powerfull as my computer is right now, and it's already 4 years old... I think it's not that high a requirement. :)

[The Fifth Horseman]

I've got 1,69 Ghz and 1 GB RAM... should do the trick.

[guesst]

I'm actually kind of disapointed. I mean, if you're going to make a sequel you should fundimentally alter what the game is about. Just tacking on new units and a new story, isn't that just an expansion? And don't give me "it's in 3d now." Oh, okay, so they made a 3D update to the old game. Cool if you're Prince of Persia and you've had 5 sequels come out recently, but StarCraft we haven't seen in a decade. Don't just re-tread the old game!

I'd state what I wanted to see, but that's a sure-fire way to make sure it doesn't happen. Telling the world what you want to see means they can't use it without paying you royalties. In that note maybe I should have said, "You know what I'd love to see? A re-tread of the original. No new races, no cool story line advancement. Just give me the old game, but in 3D!"

[Blood-Pigggy]

Take guesst's comment, multiply it by 20, and you get the Starcraft II GameFAQs forum. Too many people are complaining about that, but how can they even tell, there's been barely any information released, it's Blizzard, they ARE going to do something differently.

[Tulac]

Well people have magic crystal balls and see the future.

[guesst]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Jun 1 2007, 05:43 PM) 292582</div>
Take guesst's comment, multiply it by 20, and you get the Starcraft II GameFAQs forum. Too many people are complaining about that, but how can they even tell, there's been barely any information released, it's Blizzard, they ARE going to do something differently.
[/b]
I've never been to the gameFAQ forums (but Penny-arcade just mentioned them too, so that's kind of funny). I'm just going off what they're showing us so far and nothing I've seen has made me go "What is that?!" Even the trailers for WCIII had the burning rock guy. Nope, all I see are grunts, zerglings, protos, the usual line-up. If they had something new you think they'd tease us a bit with it.

[silz]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(guesst @ Jun 1 2007, 02:11 PM) 292552</div>
I'm actually kind of disapointed. I mean, if you're going to make a sequel you should fundimentally alter what the game is about. Just tacking on new units and a new story, isn't that just an expansion? And don't give me "it's in 3d now." Oh, okay, so they made a 3D update to the old game. Cool if you're Prince of Persia and you've had 5 sequels come out recently, but StarCraft we haven't seen in a decade. Don't just re-tread the old game!

I'd state what I wanted to see, but that's a sure-fire way to make sure it doesn't happen. Telling the world what you want to see means they can't use it without paying you royalties. In that note maybe I should have said, "You know what I'd love to see? A re-tread of the original. No new races, no cool story line advancement. Just give me the old game, but in 3D!"
[/b]

Man, its so damn early in development and you are complaining already? I mean did you happen to see the beta version of the game where the rest of us didn't have the chance. Wow, I hate to say but you are being too judgmental other than making a complete fool of yourself. Rest assured the Blizzard team knows better than you will ever do.

[Blood-Pigggy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(guesst @ Jun 2 2007, 10:08 AM) 292680</div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Jun 1 2007, 05:43 PM) 292582
Take guesst's comment, multiply it by 20, and you get the Starcraft II GameFAQs forum. Too many people are complaining about that, but how can they even tell, there's been barely any information released, it's Blizzard, they ARE going to do something differently.
[/b]
I've never been to the gameFAQ forums (but Penny-arcade just mentioned them too, so that's kind of funny). I'm just going off what they're showing us so far and nothing I've seen has made me go "What is that?!" Even the trailers for WCIII had the burning rock guy. Nope, all I see are grunts, zerglings, protos, the usual line-up. If they had something new you think they'd tease us a bit with it.
[/b][/quote]

???

But that just means there's already been new information revealed for you. The burning rock dude (the Infernal) was only part of the plot.

There's already been a lot like that revealed about Starcraft, new characters, and the confirmation that the Xel'Naga will have more of a role.

[The Fifth Horseman]

Here's to hoping that the origins of Samir Duran will finally be revealed.

[Dave]

I remeber there's was a bonus mission after the end of the game...and Duran said something about Xel-Naga...Protoss+Zerg = Xel-Naga?

[The Fifth Horseman]

Zerg: Purity of Form
Protoss: Purity of Essence
So what he was trying to achieve was a being that combines best traits of both = ultimate objective of Xel'Naga experiments.

[Blood-Pigggy]

Actually, I think the Xel'Naga pretty much thought their work was complete with the Zerg, they had already found what they believed to be the perfect race.

"Purity of Form" - Their adaptability and assimilation of other races.
"Purity of Essence" - The whole of the race is controlled by one upper being (the Overmind, now Kerrigan) with several lower tiers. Meaning that there is no inner conflict, they have only the intention of what is best for the species.


Of course, they were incredibly violent and the Overmind was hellbent on killing everything or assimilating it in the Zerg horde.

That's what it says in the manual.


I too hope that Duran's identity will be revealed, although I do sincerely hope that they don't show the Xel'Naga themselves, I like the feeling of "mysterious elder race" more than "well here it is, I hope the whole feeling of curiosity is gone".

[The Fifth Horseman]

From what I understood of the story in the manual, the "Purity of essence" refers to the Protoss' extensive psionic abilities.

[Blood-Pigggy]

But that was lost when they began warring independently, according to what it says about the "Khala" Protoss now have to effectively put effort into communication psionicly, whereas previously it was a compulsory action. That's why the Xel'Naga left them. I think they've lost the ability to totally manipulate their psionic powers.

Also, I agree that Purity of Essence was linked to the Protoss's psionic powers. But I think the manual mentioned as well that they believed the Zerg achieved it in a different manner. Did the Zerg not heavily rely on psionic energy? I think that's why the psi disrupter proved so useful against (and for) them, because they feed of that energy.

[Dave]

so.....how much time I have to wait???? :whops:
I want to play it now!!

[bobson]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(David86 @ Jun 16 2007, 01:32 AM) 294642</div>
so.....how much time I have to wait???? :whops:
I want to play it now!!
[/b]

You need to wait until next year or even more ... Blizzard some time ago announced, that they will surely NOT release this game this year. They never said it will be released next year - we all need to wait :wallbash:

They do it - it's theirs right ....

[Tiberius]

I remember getting Starcraft and Broodwar together for Christmas and playing non-stop for months. I'm kind of glad it's aways off, plenty of time to finish upgrading my computer. :max:

[Rhiyo]

Man I loved Starcraft. It would have to be one of my favourite games. Zealots were heaps cool!

[Tiberius]

I can't wait to see the new Nydus Worms, being as how I'm both a Starcraft and Dune fan. :bleh: The new Protoss Mothership sounds really cool, too.

[bobson]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tiberius @ Jun 20 2007, 07:41 PM) 295355</div>
I can't wait to see the new Nydus Worms, being as how I'm both a Starcraft and Dune fan. :bleh: The new Protoss Mothership sounds really cool, too.
[/b]

Starcraft will be inspired by Dune ?? (actually I know only a little about Dune universe ...)

[Dave]

the only thing I know is that Starcraft was inspired by X-Com.
Dune inspired Star Wars and many others

[The Fifth Horseman]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(David86 @ Jun 22 2007, 03:08 PM) 295766</div>
the only thing I know is that Starcraft was inspired by X-Com.
[/b]
And Warhammer. Don't forget Warhammer.

[Tiberius]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bob-satan @ Jun 20 2007, 10:29 PM) 295424</div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tiberius @ Jun 20 2007, 07:41 PM) 295355
I can't wait to see the new Nydus Worms, being as how I'm both a Starcraft and Dune fan. :bleh: The new Protoss Mothership sounds really cool, too.
[/b]

Starcraft will be inspired by Dune ?? (actually I know only a little about Dune universe ...)
[/b][/quote]

No, the article explains that the Nydus Worms are the source of the Nydus Canals seen in Starcraft, Brood War, and presumably Starcraft 2. They always "existed", but were not present in the first two games.

[Dave]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(the_fifth_horseman @ Jun 22 2007, 03:28 PM) 295774</div>
And Warhammer. Don't forget Warhammer.
[/b]

You mean a pc game or Warhammer with miniatures?

[Burger Meister]

After starcraft 2, it will be diablo 3... unless they are daring enough to create a new series?

[The Fifth Horseman]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(David86 @ Jun 22 2007, 06:25 PM) 295811</div>
You mean a pc game or Warhammer with miniatures?
[/b]
The miniature game, and specifically the Warhammer 40 000 setting. Just compare Tyranids and Zerg... there is a bunch of other similarities too.

[Dave]

Terran - Battlecruiser (http://www.starcraft2.com/features/terran/battlecruiser.xml) :drool:

[Blood-Pigggy]

Terran - Stupidcruiser.

Lame. LAME.

[Dave]

Did you play the new game?? NO.
I dunno on Multyplayer, but on single it was great!
Maybe it's better now :)

[Blood-Pigggy]

THE STUPID CRUISER IS LAME.

NOT THE GAME.
DAMMIT DAVID.

do u know what i will dew to u? i wil destroy u. omg

But seriously, people need to put at least some of what a "strafe" effect, that incredibly jagged turn is making me cringe.

[Dave]

I'm talking about the cruiser, not the game.
Battlecruiser's support was really precious on hard missions IMO, instead of telling me "it's lame, lame and stupid" try to be more constructive and tell me why you think it's useless.

[gufu1992]

^they shoot quickly... god finaly!

[Blood-Pigggy]

No David you corkis, it's dumb because it still has that "jagged" turn thing where it instantly rotates on its axis in like one millisecond.

If I was a soldier and I saw that muck about me I'd be like "*meep* YOU".

[Dave]

I understand your point, but mine was different, I like it and it's a strong Terran ship.
What's wrong with it?
You don't like it only because it rotates in a millisecond? :huh:

[Blood-Pigggy]

Exactly, it's stupid.
They can rag about their fancy graphics but if I don't get probably rotating ships then they better stop being lazy.

[Dave]

Personally I think you should mail them, the game is still under developement and I'm sure they'll listen you :ok: (maybe LOL)
Btw it's still a great ship, Yamato gun is a great weapon and new Plasma Torpedoes are really interesting.

[gufu1992]

yamamoto guna always sucked...

[a1s]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(David86 @ Oct 2 2007, 10:48 PM) 314368</div>
Btw it's still a great ship, Yamato gun is a great weapon and new Plasma Torpedoes are really interesting.
[/b]
Torps look like they are some new sort of bombard/artillery thing, which was done to death. and then some.
as for the ship, once they will release Starcraft:the RPG, I will start enjoying BCs for their level design, and cutscene usefullness, but until then I'll stick to wrtaiths.

[Dave]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gufu1992 @ Oct 4 2007, 11:50 PM) 314657</div>
yamamoto guna always sucked...
[/b]
Thanks again for your intelligent and argued comment :bleh:

[_r.u.s.s.]

david, the figther for the battlecruiser rights and discrimination

[Dave]

YEAH...personally I don't mind if people aren't able to play Starcraft in the right way :bleh:
( :tomato: )

[Blood-Pigggy]

Ok, that was honestly really dumb, any smart player uses the yamato cannon to destroy defensive buildings and the like, who hasn't blown down a whole row of turrets with yamato cannons and flew in with a bunch of cloaked wraiths?

[Dave]

+2 respect for BP ^_^
Btw you're right about the "rotating ships problem", but I think we could consider it an engine's bug cause every unit moves in that way...for non-flying units is ok, but not for huge ships like a BCruiser or a protoss Carrier.
Another "bug" I don't like about BC is that has little dimension in front of other units (like marines).

[Blood-Pigggy]

It's not a bug, it's just something that bothers me, especially since the flying units in every RTS game in the past years have made airborne units move more realistically.

I'm all for preserving the spirit of the past title, but this is just being lazy, what I remembered from Starcraft was the pseudo cartoon/realistic art style and exploding death animations, not crappy air unit movement limited by technology at the time.
It just irks me that they would spend so much time on other facets of the graphics and not incorporate such a small detail.

[Dave]

About Protoss Carrier (http://www.starcraft2.com/features/protoss/carrier.xml), today they announced the new one :)
New cool design, but seems there's nothing new.

[gufu1992]

Hooray for return of most powerfull/weak unit in the history of SC!

[Dave]

OMG! Terran without Siege Tank is like Michael Jackson without Moonwalker!
Edit: okay, they have added it :)