Lurker art was finally changed!

The current Lurker model can resemble that. The Ultralisk model is beautiful to me.
When they first released the siege tank do you honestly think they were even thinking of putting that model as a final, no way of course not as it has changed. They did not change its model completly to please us.
When designing something, you don't go full on to the final piece, you start with a foundation then work on it. Because everyone wanted to see Zerg so much, we simply viewed this foundation model.
And I repeat again, if the model was worthy they'd use it, but its obviously not worthy if the x amount of designers think so enough to change it as it was gonna be changed anyway.

And on your quote, where he says spider-like he is refering to the Sc1 Lurker which was quite spider-like, probably.

 

The lurker new look at least will not bore me. And when I say I will get bore playing the lurker with the same model in sc1 but in 3d is because almost all of the zerg attacking unit are back, only the corruptor, roach and queen are the new ones. One or 2 of these core returning units IMO needs to look and feel new at least and the preferable choice would be the lurker since its not really that iconic like the zergling, mutualisk and hydralisk.

I also didn’t expected that the ultralisk will make a comeback. I really though the zerg will get a new ultralisk replacement. Anyway im ok with the new ultralisk in sc2.

Yes the roach is new… but that’s about it.

Viking-Immortal-roach(ok)
Marauder-Stalker-queen(ok)
Reaper-Phase prism-banelings(ok, meh they are still zerglings)
Thor-Colossus-corruptor(very good)
Viking-Mothership-infestor(defiler)
Banshee-Warp ray-overseer(overlord upgrade)
Jackal/cobra-Nullifier-nydus worm(transport)
Predator-Phoenix
nomad (yes i know its the science vessel)

still the terran and toss has lots of new units compared to the zerg. the zerg got far less new attacking unit.

If you look closely the zerg new units are not really impressive and they are lacking. The overseer, nydus, banelings, and infestor(defiler) are not really that of a unit like the terran and toss got. Check out the terran and toss they have a lot new core ATTACK units and support unit like the toss nullifier, the zerg only got 3 to 4.

Obviously the reason behind it is that most core attacking zerg unit in sc1 are coming back.

Hydra
Zerling
Mutualisk
Ultralisk
Lurker
“swarm” guardian (yes it still the guardian unless it will look really really really nasty NEW which is the necessary upgrade look im looking for making it feel like a new unit =less sc1 and less boring and more exciting).

the hydra would be the dragoon for the toss which are gone now.

what im saying almost all the basic attack units of the zerg are back, while the terran axe their goliath, wraith, firebat, etc in replace of newer ones. also toss cut the reaver, dragoon, scout, corsair in replace of better ones like the colossus etc.. how about the zerg? what did they replace with their basic attack units? only the devourer, the new zerg have the corruptor. there.

Ok I can’t blame it anyine, all these old zerg units are important and i know it since they are the tier 1 evolution except the ultralisk, lurker, and guardian. and this is the problem. well for me its a problem since i want sc2 zerg to be a little newer just like the toss and terrans.

It will feel the same and boring playing these core attack zerg units from sc1 in sc2 again since there isn’t any other new units to use except for the roach and corruptor and some new upgrades of these old units like the banelings.

The terran and toss with all their new attack units are more exciting and fun to play compared to the zerg in sc2.

Ok its not like I want to get rid of the old starcraft 1 zerg core attack units. This is what im saying the zerg somehow lacks something new, they lack more new monstrosity and yes thats because of too much returning core attacking units. It will also be unlikely for these units to get axe, so I really don’t know exactly how to solve this… so my case was to at least change the look or maybe the name as well of old units such as the lurker. Or add another NEW unit, while maybe scrapping the overseer since the overall unit type count is limited.

Another example if blizzard change the roach as the new tier 1 units and axing the iconic zergling, ill be open with it and see what happens at least the zerg still has the hydra(most iconic) and mutua.

I KNOW the zerg works in swarm and hordes of small medium units like you said. they are all about swarming and less of powerful few units. Well we can still have NEW small and medium swarming units as well for sc2.

 

I'm tired of people saying the Zerg can only Swarm and can only have small and medium units. Please explain the Devouer, Guardian, Overlord, Overseer, Ultralisk, Queen?
Also please note Hydralisks are very big, they stand taller than a Zealot which is over 12ft, including the tail it would be more. A Zergling is the size of a large dog.
The Zerg are not that small.
of course they are better when swarming but please just behave.

 

zeratul11, you really need to stop saying that every single unit needs to be revamped/renamed. Blizzard called the game "Starcraft II" for a reason: it's a sequal to Starcraft, not a whole new game. Certain units, on top of being incredibly useful, are iconic to their race, so why change their look? Would you be happy if they renamed the Zealot the "Crusader" and replaced it's psi blades with a giant psi sword? I wouldn't; the Zealot is the first unit that comes to mind whe I think of Protoss. I don't want to see some rip-off unit replace it just because it's "new and "exciting"

I don't see why you're complaining about so many Zerg units returning. You listed six - zergling, hydralisk, mutalisk, lurker, guardian, and ultralisk. Well, guess what? Both Terran and Protoss have close to if not that many units returning too! Look at the Protoss - Zealot, High/Dark Templar, Archon, Carrier, and Observer. Terran - Marine, Ghost, Battlecruiser, Dropship, and the Seige Tank. Why haven't I seen you complaining about those units?

 

exactly. the zerg are big and vicious too.

some zerg nasty stuffs that i was expecting in sc2... a giant walking hive creature, a giant centepede like creature that could be a lurker or ultralisk replacement, a giant bug that shoots acidic plasma thing starship troopers style, a giant turtle like crab like zerg unit that could be an ultralisk evolution, a giant overlord that bombs multiple acidic bombs just like the guardian, another hydralisk evolution aside from the lurker making it tremors like creature, etc......................these are some units concept that is lacking for the zerg imo... well something similar to these but not very much silly. ^^

 

i have no problem with the zealot. i just explain WHY and HOW the lurker could get some new look and maybe a name change...and how it can relate on zerg lacking new units and more old core attacking units coming back making sc2 zerg somewhat boring and unexciting compared to the terran and toss etc. dont talk about rip off and giant psi sword(but i love to see that. xp)...and toss. please read what my ZERG post was all about.

bcoz they still have the viking thor marauder jackal banshee warpray nullifier colossus immortals stalker reapers mothrship phoenix etc........and so on. and what did the zerg gets? a new queen, roach and upgraded zerglings. xp

read my entire post please.

I bet blizzard still has tons of unrevealed zerg "preferably attacking" units concepts. if they have.... i WIN.

but i still dont know how they can fit in because of the zergling, hydra, muta, guardian, lurker, and ultra. oh well.

 

The zerg obviously won't get many new units as they are basically animals, and they evolve which is why they have many similar units. Its that simple.
Zerg can't just recruit monsters from Starship Troopers and have them in the swarm. The Zerg are a social order who follow the will of Kerrigan.

 

i know. they can have but gameplay wise the unit type is limited. lorewise they can have... well they can evolve differently.

 

@ Psionicz. I don't get it. You think that the community has no input into the development of StarCraft? You think if they bring in a unit that absolutely everyone hates they're still going to leave it in? If they've got to all the effort of designing a model, they're not going to just scrap it and completely remodel it because someone thought the original model didn't look so finished? As I said before, the original StarCraft2 Lurker just needed a couple of tweaks, some finishing touches, like the positioning of the legs and the eyes. That is how you come up with a finished design. You don't just scrap it if it isn't working and start again.

I don't know why you're bringing up the 'spider-like' part of the quote. I wasn't even talking about that, so why'd you bring it up? I was referring to their blatant lack of understanding of what the original StarCraft2 Lurker looked like. Either that or a complete lack of understanding of what a Triceratops looks like, but that's fairly unlikely.

Lastly, Zerg may be physically big, but in comparison to the Terran and Protoss, they're small. A Hydralisk might be taller than a Zealot, and a Zergling might be as big as a large dog, but when compared to Colossi, Thors, Motherships and Battlecruisers, there's no competition. Ultralisks hardly even compare, and they're the largest of the Zerg Swarm, and on top of that they've had a size buff when coming into StarCraft2. No-one ever said that Zerg are really tiny creatures, but they're dwarfed by the Terran and Protoss.

@ zeratul11. We haven't seen all of Zerg yet so don't go saying that they haven't gotten any new units. Yes, other teams have gotten replacements, but you're just ignoring the Zerg replacements. The Roach and Corruptor are two great examples of incredibly helpful but original fighting units. So are Banelings but you always try to pass them off as something else. At first you said they're basically Spider Mines and now you're saying that they're practically Zerglings. Neither of these are correct. The correct answer is that they're Banelings! They're good against infantry and they're fantastic against buildings. Not Spider Mines, not Zerglings, Banelings.

If you were so bored with StarCraft1 gameplay, why are you even a fan? Now I'm not saying that StarCraft2 should remain like StarCraft1 because it was a great game that everybody liked, yada yada yada, I'm saying that just because some core fighting units have returned for the Zerg, it's not necessarily a bad thing. The Zerg have been completely redone so I doubt you'll have any problems being bored with their old style of play. Yes, some core units have returned, but no, we haven't seen all the Zerg yet, and no, it's not necessarily a bad thing. The Zerg will have no trouble being a new and unique team with a differing style of play to what they had in StarCraft1.

Lastly, I'll just remind you that just because these were core units in StarCraft1, that means absolutely nothing for StarCraft2. They'll have different counters and be counters for different things. None of them will be used in the exact same way as they were in StarCraft1 because there are so many new things to consider, like the other teams new units, the new damage system, etc. Also, these new units that you seem to think nothing of will also be core fighting units. Taking on air will be extremely difficult for you without the use of Corruptors, taking out buildings as quickly as possible will be difficult without Banelings, combating Protoss Zealots as efficiently as possible will be extremely difficult without Roaches.

Seriously lastly, I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see the Hybrid joining the mass of the Swarm. It's obviously something they'd keep secret for as long as possible, and it wouldn't be the first time they'd used things from the campaigns as new units. The Dark Templar were originally just a thing from the campaigns, not thought of as the Protoss but as a different race or, thing, similarly to how we think of the Hybrid now.

EDIT: zeratul11. No offense, but none of those suggestions fit the Zerg at all. They aren't just a stereotypical, biological race that can have any alien they want as a unit in their army, they're the Zerg. Just because some suggestions would be very alienesque, like your ones earlier, it doesn't mean that they suit the Zerg.

Kaaraa obviously did read your post. You're comparing the new units of both the Terran and Protoss to the Zerg. Not only have the Protoss and Terran been out a lot longer so they've had more units added, removed and tweaked, but you're combining both their new units against the Zerg. Not only is that two against one, it's like two adolescents against a toddler.

Lastly, again, you don't win. Most people here have voiced an opinion against you and just saying 'i WIN' does not help your case at all. It just goes to show that you're either not reading or completely ignorant to the things that people have been saying.

Just a quick word of warning, stop double posting and posting irrelevant replies. You're already done both in this thread alone.

 

Itza don't jump to conclusions. I said nothing of us having no influence to change, which is what we have, influence but not command.
Also you act as if whatever you say is correct, just because you think the Lurker would be perfect with your tweaks does not mean so. Its simply preference and opinion nothing more nothing less.
I dislike the current Lurker model, you like it. Simple.
Also the fact they changed it is a

Also the size comparisons was directed mainly at Zeratul.

 

You said they don't change models to please us. That's just wrong. They're making the game for their fans. If the fans aren't pleased with it, it's not going to be as popular and they won't make as much money or gain as much support as they otherwise would have. It is in Blizzards interests to please its fans. They wouldn't just make and remake models to have unfinalised and finalised designs. If they design a model that they think is a good one, they'll implement it into the game. If they design a model that they do not like, we'll never see it. If the design a model that they like but the fans hate, we'll see it but it would probably get changed. They obviously thought that the Lurker had a good design. It is the fans and most of their inability to understand what the Lurker should look like and as a result have complained which have spoilt it for the Lurker. Instead of seeing what was wrong with it and saying that they think it should be changed, they've just complained about the whole thing using completely bogus reasons, like famehunter did in the original post.

I act like what I say is correct because, believe it or not, adding the finishing touches will make it look like a finished model. That is what finishing touches are. If you can't understand that finishing touches will make it look finished, then the value of your opinion on all things model-wise has just plummeted. Never would someone design something and have it come out perfectly for their first version. They'd get the basic idea and then add or subtract certain areas and features, emphasising some parts and downplaying other parts. That's how you obtain a finalised model. You don't try something that doesn't quite work, then scrap it and start over again.

I find it odd that you're saying 'it's simply preference and opinion nothing more nothing less' when on the previous page you told me my views were crazy. I also find it odd that you're already saying it's a good thing that they've changed it despite the fact that you have no clue whatsoever about what it looks like now. As I've said before, if it all turns out for the best, then I'll be all for it. Seeing as though now they're remodelling it they'd want to get it absolutely right before showing us which means that they'd put a lot more effort into it, so chances are that it will in fact improve, but the fact is that it could still turn out much worse and there are so many other graphics based issues with the Zerg at the moment so they shouldn't be worrying about the Lurker right now. You seem to think that I'm against making the Lurker look better, but I'm not. This change might not actually turn out for the best and there are other things for them to focus on.

So what if the size comparison was mainly directed against zeratul11? That doesn't suddenly mean you're right. The Zerg are a small swarming army. That doesn't mean that they all have to be as big as a rat, that just mean in comparison the the Terran and Protoss, they have smaller units, and much more of them at that.

 

When I say some of your views may be crazy, it simply means I disagree with them.
Um how can you misinterprate this:

Into this:

Yes of course they are going to change something the fans are not pleased with. But I pointed out that the first siege tank model was obviously not a final. They release something unfinished so they can see what we like and what we don't like so it aids them in development. It stops them from continuously releasing model changes and we say ''nope don't like, new plz''.

You talk about the fans inability to understand what a Lurker should look like?
The Lurker should look like whatever Blizzard wanted it to look like, in Sc1 it was that broad spider-like Hydralisk with more spines.
Heres the in-game model of a Lurker in Sc1:

Note it looked like it was flat simply because it could not be as they wanted it to look djue to limited tools. Same with the Ultralisk, as in Sc1 it looked quite low to the ground, and you wouldn't suspect it to be a large creature which has an upright posture.
Heres what a Sc: Ghost Lurker looks like:

You can clearly see its pretty much a Hydralisk with legs and more spines.
And heres the original concept art:

And here is a funnel web spider:

See the similarities?

An animal which burrowes should be sleek, compact and durable.
From what I understand is, that you are pleased with the Lurker model as it has a broad shovel like head to burrow into the ground, and a slim body.
Note that those are only characteristics of an animal which moves around underground.
A Lurker is not going to dive head first into metal is it?
No. Because it uses it's claws and strength, so why does the current Lurker have a big round head?
They use their sharp claws and raw strength to smash into the ground as Ultralisks use their claws to smash into the ground.

Like I said before, the Lurker stays still underground, meaning it doesn't need a distinguishable head that it may burrow with as you can't headbutt a solid steel floor and go through as if it was sand.
(Did you not say in another thread that the current Lurker now looks as if it was built to burrow now due to its broad head and compact build?)

Relate it to a funnel web spider, they are not sleek at all. They don't have heads. Yet they can dig large tunnels, Why?
Because they are strong and use their legs to burrow into the ground.
Their build is very similar to the Sc1 Lurker and they operate in a similar fashion, being that they wait for their prey to come into reach then attack.

A final note on the burrowing, most animals which burrow through possibly tough ground use their claws. Examples are:
Meerkats, tranchulas, moles, ardvarks, honey badgers, mongoose (yes these include meerkats).
The only animals which use their heads, are certain reptiles and they burrow through sand. And obviously in Sc2, to dig through metal you have to be robust not small, broad head to dig, with little legs.

Remember, you said you like the current model. I am arguing against that as the current model does not cut it in my opinion. I am trying to tell you that the current model is not a good one.

I'd also like to point out the fact you said this in the Lurker thread:

And why didn't you argue this then when I said:

Oh and speaking of the fans, it would seem the general view of the Lurker is that they dislike it. You amoung a few are the only ones who like it.
Care to tell me why the current model is better than the old models?
Lurker thread.
http://www.starcraft2forum.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3944

 

You only say that the original StarCraft2 Siege Tank was not a finished because you didn't like it. The fact is that nobody liked it, and that's why it was changed. If we all did like it, they wouldn't have changed it, and it would have been a finished model. The point is that they don't release unfinished models just to gauge our reactions. If they think a model is worthy, then they implement it into the game. If they don't think it's worthy, and don't think it's finalised, they won't implement it into the game. Even if they did implement incomplete models, that doesn't stop us saying stuff like 'nope don't like, new plz'.

Blizzard obviously wanted the Lurker to look like the original StarCraft2 model. If they didn't want it to, do you think they'd have selected that specific concept art, created a 3D rendering on it and implemented it into the game? The Lurker didn't actually look like a Hydralisk in StarCraft1. The only thing they had in common was that each had a crest, but they were both different crests at that, and that damned Lurker concept art which made it look as though they gave the Lurker a head transplant and replaced its actual head with a Hydralisks. Evolutions of Zerg creatures do not and should not look like original form. No other Zerg evolution does, so why inflict that upon the Lurker?

Lurkers or any other Zerg units do not have to have a sleek, streamlined design in order to burrow. The Lurker is compact, it is durable, but it isn't sleek, nor does it have to be. Don't just be stupid and pointlessly say things like 'a Lurker is not going to dive head first into metal is it?' and 'as you can't headbutt a solid steel floor and go through as if it was sand'. Anyone with a brain stem would be able to see that Lurkers do not dive head first into the ground. They dig down with their claws and legs, and the head is the last thing to enter the ground. In StarCraft2 we can see that the head actually rests on the top, closest to the surface, and does not attempt to use it to Burrow.

By the 'thunnel web spiders' I assume you mean funnel web spiders. They may not have heads, although they do have extremely large mandibles, but this has nothing to do with the way that they burrow. If they did have large heads, they would not try to headbutt their way through the soil. They would still use their strong legs to tunnel, just like the Lurker. You keep on listing other animals that do not use their head to Burrow, but why is it that you assume that the Lurker Burrows in this way? It's not as though you're just applying it to the Zerg either because you mentioned the Ultralisk that has an equally proportionately large head but uses, its claws and legs to Burrow. Why is it that you believe that the Lurker has to headbutt its way through when everything else is capable of actually digging?

 

You seriously don't intake any of the infromation I give in my posts do you?
I never at one point said the Lurker uses its head to burrow.
And I will not repeat my self. If you can't digest what I've written too bad. I'm sorry its just frustrating to write something and someone to argue things in which I've never said or meant. And you're the only one who does this.
I will edit and break my post up so its much easier for you to read then maybe you'll see what I'm saying.

 

You kept on bringing up other Zerg units that Burrow with their limbs, not their head, as well as all these other types of animals that also dig with their limbs and not their heads, and kept on saying stiff like 'a Lurker is not going to dive head first into metal is it?', 'as you can;t headbutt a solid steel floor and go through as if it was sand' and 'most animals which burrow through possibly tough ground use their claws' so what are you trying to get at? Are you trying to say that the Lurker shouldn't dig with its head? Because it doesn't, and shouldn't so there's no point in you even mentioning them.

The Lurker digs with its limbs, OK? It doesn't try to dive into the ground head first. It digs with its limbs. The head has nothing to do with how it Burrows. As you said, the Ultralisk, which also has a big head, still uses its limbs to Burrow. Why can't you comprehend that the Lurker would do the same thing?

 

Read my edit. Oh and I havn't edited any of my statements, just added stuff and fixed some typos.

 

First off, the StarCraft1 Lurker did actually have a fairly broad head, it was just harder to see in such a small, low detailed image. The StarCraft:Ghost Lurker never existed, just like how the Terran never actually had a Cobra, they were just ideas and designs that never made it to the game. Also, the StarCraft:Ghost Lurker is not a good model, and all the art and designs for StarCraft:Ghost were generally very poor and weren't a good representation of the actual StarCraft units. The concept art is a cartoon. It's not proper concept art. Lastly, the funnel web spider has nothing to do with the Lurker's head. I don't understand what your obsession with it is anyway? Why do you keep on saying it needs a slim head? As you said, it burrows with its limbs, so why keep mentioning its head and all these other burrowing creatures that have small heads?

Also, why do you always leave the reference out of the quote? It makes it so much easier so everyone can view the quote you're referring to. I had to look through about ten pages to find the quote you were talking about. First, I was mainly applying it to the Hydralisk as that's the one that we've seen the official concept art of. Secondly, just because it's just a concept, it doesn't mean it has to be completely redone. Do you think when they were drawing the concept art for the Zergling and Hydralisk they got drew the basic framework and then just scrapped it if they weren't happy with the way it was looking or do you think that they'd rub parts out and tweak it a bit?

I didn't reply to you saying that the Lurker is obviously not finished, because I agree with you there. I've said several times that it just needs some adjustments or finishing touches and then it will be finished. If I'm drawing something, I don't just start over when I haven't finished it yet. No-one does. That's what they're doing with the Lurker. It hasn't been finished and they're remodelling it.

You say that it should be big, robust, dark and spiny, but it is big, it is robust, darkness is just another of the finishing touches and doesn't require it to be remodelled, and it's hard to be spiny while still being robust because spine imply that they're long and thin. Instead of having long thin spines, the Lurker has thick, sturdy thorns which help it look more robust.

 

Lol you know what. I need not saying nothing more on this subject. Either way the Lurker has changed. Simple as that.

 

You're not finished with this topic. You can't just start discussing a topic, bring up a whole lot of useless and irrelevant point and then leave without even explaining why you brought them up. The size of the Lurkers head has nothing to do with whether it can Burrow or not. It does not use its head to Burrow and it won't get in the way of Burrowing. It's just like the Ultralisk, except on a smaller scale. Both have massive heads, both use their limbs to Burrow, but for some reason you hate that the Lurker has a large head and like that the Ultralisk has one. There is no sense in that.

Also, you continue to act as though I don't want the Lurker model to be improved. If you've been reading my posts you'll see that I've said that I do want some changes, but that doesn't mean it should be completely redone. As you've said, it currently doesn't look like a finished model, so all they need to do is add some finishing touches and there you have it. You've got a finished model. Also when have I said that the new model will be worse that the current one? If the current one is better, then it's a good thing, but we cannot just assume that it will be. Regardless, there are other graphics based problems that should be a higher priority than the Lurker. The Infestor being one example.

You walking away from this discussion is just another example of the times where you're basically given up on your arguments, just like how you said you'd give up on your thread about Terran technology. You just throw some useless point out there and don't even explain the logic behind them. When someone challenges them, you just say you're not discussing it any more. What's the point of being a part of this forum if you don't want to discuss these sorts of things? Would you rather someone post the information about the Lurker's model getting updated and everyone just says 'yes, it is'? It's a discussion. If someone takes the opposite view, like me, you discuss it. Personally I don't feel that the Lurker needs to be remodelled and I've said why. You feel that it should be remodelled and you've said why, but you've started going on on a tangent about burrowing creatures with little heads. What has that got to do with anything?

 

Since you find it useless and irrelevant dont ****ing reply?
I'm not giving up I've just said all I wanted to say. You are oblivious to the truth. The Lurker model you like is changed, what more is there to say?
There is no argument until we see the newest model, since my argument is in favour as they''ve changed it. Please just open your eyes. Come on you're a smart guy, we don't need this.