Starcraft II - Screenshot Update

A new screen shot has been recently added to the Starcraft2 website.

http://www.starcraft2.com/screenshot.xml?s=80



they weren't kidding when they said they were making the banelings bigger.

and i think the roach has also been updated, along with the mutalisk.

Enjoy,
-Seradin

 

Awesome! Now we know the size of the bigger Baneling. Its size feels just right, it's about as big as a Roach.

 

Hmm.. i dont think the roach has changed at all tbh.. perhaps i need to squint closer at my moniter but mrhm .
Shame though, i thought they had changed that damn hatchery model!

 

What I don't understand is, what's the point in downloading then uploading the screenshot when you can simply link to it?

Anyway. They do look nice, their size sort of emphasises their deadly explosions. But the Roach still looks like a melee unit.

 

Because some browsing dislike the Starcraft2.com script or whatever and it loads quicker through imageshack.

 

actually i was a little worried that blizzard didnt mean to put it on the website so they might have taken it off so i had to save it to my desktop.

 

The roach's coloring looks darker and more realistic to me.

As for the hatchery, I personally like the model. Sure it could look better, but it looks more realistic than the original.

That must be the spire at the left side of the pic. It looks very different from the original.

 

Well being in 3d could explain the realism you're getting from it now .. Im sure blizzard could do better, frankly it does not correlate well with the creep at all .. dark purple/grey... then boom a big pinky splat! Could be down to game development stage tho tbh... Anyway! sucks how we didnt get to see the new lurker karune hinted at .

 

umh, it was always in 3D.

 

wooo huge banelings!! yay xD

 

Doesn't look as though the Roach or the Mutalisk have been updated. They look the same as they did in the original Zerg screenshots and high definition renders. The Hatchery also looks good. It's not a bright pink splat in the middle of a sea of dark purple and grey Creep, because the Hatchery is not bright pink and the Creep is not dark purple or grey. The Hatchery is a purple and flesh colour, and the Creep is a very pale purple and grey. To think that Creep is dark you'd have to live on the Sun or something.

I like the new size of the Baneling. It's hard to imagine Zergling sized creatures exploding to deal mass damage to a large area. However what's happening with their animation? Some look like they're walking, some look like they're rolling and others look like they're bouncing. They've seriously got to fix that.

Lastly one of the thing I'm extremely happy with, and I don't think anyone's commented on it yet, is the design of the Larvae. They can be seen at the base of both Hatcheries. They look absolutely awesome. My only concern is that as you can see with two of the Larvae at the bottom Hatchery, they could easily get clustered up which would take subtract from their appearance. They look great and not only would having them all clustered make it harder to appreciate their design, but it also looks extremely unprofessional and incomplete.

 

The animation's okay. It only looks weird because they roll, and it's a still image, so it looks like they walk, roll, and bounce.

 

It doesn't only look weird because it's a still image. If they're rolling, they should never be on all fours, and a fair few are in the screen shot. Also if they're rolling they should never be off the ground, which, again, a few are in the screenshot.

 

I see what you're talking about. It still doesn't matter because the actual animation looks fine to me.

 

Mrhm, well that may be the case but the hatchery and the creep and even the majority of the zerg buildings do not correlate properly IMO with the creep at all.. Colouration/saturation choices really dont seem to tie in well together with the zerg buildings/creep atm. This could possibly be down to development stage ofc... but meh i would indeed like to hope that the creep is not in its final form, atm it seems to be a very simple ground texture change.

 

First off, do not quote such a long post and then just reply to one part of it. If you're replying to the part about the Hatcheries and Creep, delete the parts about the Roach, Mutalisk, Banling and Larvae.

Why do the Zerg buildings have to have a texture that matches or ties in with the Creep? Plants and trees don't match the soil, houses and buildings don't match the ground, so why do the Zerg buildings have to? The Creep is a great textures, especially when seen in a video.

 

You kidding? plants and trees do match the ground.. where they meet the colours blend nicely then the dead foilage of other plants etc melds in nicely to another colour. In this case there is no 'Blending' in between the colours of the creep and the buildings.. check wc3, even the buildings there had a ground texture that was applied to them when they were built, to help them blend with the grassy textures of the floor etc.

But yeah. as i stated BEFORE its ofc down to opinion. And the fact that sc2 does not appear to have this texture slightly annoys me.

Sorry i didnt realise posting a full quote was such a big deal.....

 

With trees and plants, the trunks come directly out of the grass or soil. There colour and texture of the trees' trunks does not match that of the grass and soil. You don't see the soil slowly fade out and the tree trunk slowly fade in, in other words, it doesn't blend. WarCraftIII had ways of getting around that 'blending'. They had different models for if it was in grass, snow, etc, and the model basically had a retaining wall circling it, which helped to get rid of the need for blending and also helped when placing the buildings on sloped surfaces. Lastly, they've already said that they'd like to do that and are seriously considering it.

Why did you say that you didn't realise that posting a full quote was such a big deal if you went ahead and quoted the whole thing anyway? I've already told you several times to; A) not quote the person directly above you, which you did, and; B) not to quote the entire thing, which you also did. Not only did I post directly above you but half my post went on about how you shouldn't quote the whole thing but you included that part anyway. Before you post any more, read the Forum Rules. As I said before I've already told you a number of times not to do it, but it doesn't seem to make a difference.

 

Kek.. seems i forgot xD. Didnt think it was such a big deal, hence the forgeting

Anyway.. here are some examples of how buildings should properly correlate with the ground textures and real life examples of trees which 'go' colour wise with the floor..

http://www.mass.gov/envir/forest/images/multiLayerForest.jpg If u check the floor you can clearly see that its a dark browny colouration - which in turn MATCHES the trees.

More examples?

http://www.rffi.org/image/RedwoodForest.jpg see how everything correlates with each other properly?

Now lets check some zerg creep/building pictures:
http://www.starcraft2.com/images/screenshots/ss80-hires.jpg

See the spawning pool? its colouration is a Bright Shiny colour which does not correlate with the creep at all. Its entirely the wrong shade.

See the building next to it? This is also a good example of the creep not linking properly there is no transition between the two and is overall also a completely different shade.

 

The hatchery looks better now and the buildings are around its right size, the Roach looks more darker and it better, similar to the grittiness update for the Terrans