Doesnt lot of the graphics look... Toony?

punwisp · May 23, 2008

When looking at the graphics of SCII it doesn't look realistic... It seems more cartoonish kind of graphics, not saying it as in it sucks I'm just saying how they designed it seems more cartoony 3D graphics, not realistic graphics, what do you guys think?

some of the Zerg units in particular look cartoony the most, like the mutalisk
and the buildings
http://www.starcraft2.com/screenshot.xml?s=80

Just_Spectating · May 23, 2008

games arent supposed to look real.

punwisp · May 23, 2008

What a wonderful opinion

Shadow_Fox · May 23, 2008

I've never seen a game by blizzard with actual good as you put it..realistic graphics, and i doubt i ever will; it just isn't their style. Who cares honestly.

By the way...He was stating that as a fact, which is entirely incorrect, if they aren't supposed to look real, why do we continue to perfect graphic technologies in games? Obviously to make them more lifelike (though it is kind of hard to make say, halo look realistic, but i mean games like crysis, call of duty 4, etc.

centurywarlord · May 23, 2008

I don't think SCII is developed to look realistic. They probably want to retain Blizzard's trend of developing games that have cartoon-like textures. Look at WCIII, and WoW. They both look like cartoons.

Videosurfer101 · May 23, 2008

It's quite simple, this game needs to get a Teen rating, thus can't look like Gears of War. If it did though that would be awesome. Also is Blizzards always making them like that, I don't think they will ever go for the hardcore gory shooter games.

centurywarlord · May 23, 2008

tbh i don't really care much about graphics as long as the gameplay experience is good enough to make me go w00t.

Videosurfer101 · May 23, 2008

Exactly, I think the graphics are great, it has alot of things that make it unique, like when air units die they fall to the ground, and slide down slopes even. The explosions look pretty amazing. And any game with cool explosions is good in my opinion.

PatruX · May 23, 2008

The Koreans etc were concerned it might not be as good/nostalgic as SC1, so I guess they didn't want to break the trend of having cartoonish graphics just yet.

Callahan · May 23, 2008

Yes it looks toony like almost all Blizzard's games.
It's their trademark.
Like a Picaso painting looks cubic, a Blizzard game looks toony.

redmarine · May 23, 2008

All of Blizzard games have at least a small amount of cartoonish feel and look. I like that.

Dumblor · May 24, 2008

redmarine said:
All of Blizzard games have at least a small amount of cartoonish feel and look. I like that.

Me too. Video Games were made to run away from real life , not to simulate it , and realistic graphics would ruin it. I know that even if the graphics were realistic starcraft would still be fantasy game , but it's better with the toonish look.

centurywarlord · May 24, 2008

I agree. If you wish a realistic looking RTS, go play C&C3, or wait for Red Alert 3.

Starcraft is good as it is now. Makes it look unique among the other RTS.

redmarine · May 24, 2008

centurywarlord said:
I agree. If you wish a realistic looking RTS, go play C&C3, or wait for Red Alert 3.

Starcraft is good as it is now. Makes it look unique among the other RTS.

You can't say Red Alert 3 will have a realistic feel. It is so much like StarCraft 2's graphic if you look at the trailer. Anyways the newest screenshot has a more grittier feel on the buildings.

ModFreak · May 25, 2008

If the graphics are made realistic, I bet it would kill a lot of older machines trying to run the game. I hope the system requirements won't be too high for my two-year old rig... :sad:

redmarine · May 25, 2008

Heh... My computer from 1995 is barely able to handle GTA 2.
Anyways I'm going to buy a computer which shall pwn all system requirements!

Super-Sheep · May 25, 2008

Lol can you play Warcraft III with that 1995 computer?

By the way, cartoonish > real. I wouldn't play Warcraft III, if humans look like real humans. D:

punwisp · May 26, 2008

C&C 3 didn't have very good gameplay, they focused on graphics then anything. Red Alert 3 though seems like it will have the same graphics feel as SCII, also in my opinion, games that are newer and dont have realistic graphics, means theres good gameplay, and that they didnt focus on graphics, which alot of companies do including EA(EA kinda sucks at RTS)

ModFreak · May 26, 2008

punwisp said:
C&C 3 didn't have very good gameplay, they focused on graphics then anything. Red Alert 3 though seems like it will have the same graphics feel as SCII, also in my opinion, games that are newer and dont have realistic graphics, means theres good gameplay, and that they didnt focus on graphics, which alot of companies do including EA(EA kinda sucks at RTS)

EA concentrates on milking the game of all the money it could produce. Unlike Blizzard, who concentrates on quality rather than the money it can make. (but of course they need to earn money to keep them going) One of the main reasons why we see Warcraft 3 and Starcraft on the competitive scene rather than CNC 3 or Red Alert 2.

Mechanical Man · May 26, 2008

For those who say the realistic graphics sux: I do not strive to see uber realistic graphics, but playing with toy soldiers does not really catch a sci-fi style. Something like sc1 textures would be fine.

centurywarlord said:
I agree. If you wish a realistic looking RTS, go play C&C3, or wait for Red Alert 3.

Those two games looks even more toyish as their predecessors.

W plastik fantastik

redmarine · May 26, 2008

Mechanical Man said:
For those who say the realistic graphics sux: I do not strive to see uber realistic graphics, but playing with toy soldiers does not really catch a sci-fi style. Something like sc1 textures would be fine.

Those two games looks even more toyish as their predecessors.

W plastik fantastik

We all got our own opinions and taste.

JetFangInferno · May 26, 2008

I find the cartoon-ish style rather appealing. You get to see marines getting blow up to smithereens in a rather comical way.

punwisp · May 28, 2008

red alert 2? I'm sorry but your really rather wrong. Westwood focused on quality while it was around, infact red alert 2 is a classic RTS, not as big as SC or WC, but many still play it. Back then, there weren't many games focusing on 3D.

Also red alert 3 has more of the SC2 graphics theme. C&C3 Actualy was very realistic, infact too much graphics were used on that game lol. Actualy in my opinion ive come to the conclusion that most realistic(HIGH graphics) gameplay useually sucks. C&C 3 they really used too much graphics, it hurt my eyes sometimes =O

redmarine · May 28, 2008

punwisp said:
red alert 2? I'm sorry but your really rather wrong. Westwood focused on quality while it was around, infact red alert 2 is a classic RTS, not as big as SC or WC, but many still play it. Back then, there weren't many games focusing on 3D.

Also red alert 3 has more of the SC2 graphics theme. C&C3 Actualy was very realistic, infact too much graphics were used on that game lol. Actualy in my opinion ive come to the conclusion that most realistic(HIGH graphics) gameplay useually sucks. C&C 3 they really used too much graphics, it hurt my eyes sometimes =O

What ruined C&C3 for me is the third race and the wierd units of NOD. Otherwise the game would be OK.

punwisp · May 29, 2008

At first EA ruined the story, and tried fixing it in the expansion but ruined other things. One thing they failed with the expansion was there was zip done to the gameplay. and it didnt really have the feel of playing a lot. if they focused more on gameplay then maybe. Actually a map editor like blizzards would be awsome, instead its a pain in the ass. Anyway sorry for going off topic

redmarine · May 29, 2008

It's hard not talking about the Scum Editor on a StarCraft II Category.

Ash · May 30, 2008

I don't think C&C3 was ruined really, and I think it's a massive overstatement when people say EA ruin every game they get their hands on. It seems like people say it to be 'cool', much like Linux operators complaining because they're in the minority when it comes to games and new software. (Yes, I am criticizing myself when I say that, too)

The NOD units were based around rushing (as is the same with the Zerg) whilst the GDI was late game, the Scrin however are just Batsh- --urm >.> -- ... Crazy.

Back on topic though, I think the 'cartoonish' graphics is just blizzards style. Look at WoW, SC and Diablo, they're all cartoonish. And we can't forget WC3, that was released with Cartoon graphics even when blizzard had the potential to push the graphics cutting edge.

It's something that Blizzard Fans recognize; the crapptastic graphics. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I've played WC3 since the start, I'm just simply saying it's how they have styled their games, and probably will continue doing so for the foreseeable future

punwisp · May 31, 2008

Actually, d1-2 and SC didn't have cartoonish graphics, that was the farthest at the time they could go graphics wise, they couldn't make call of duty 4 graphics then lol, so cinematic wise it wasnt cartoony, it was just primitive graphics, the games itself, everything was 2D, WoW and WC3 wasn't really toony either, they just used a 3D style where it would be able to be playable on most computers, if they make the graphics too high or too complex(very detailed) then only high specked machines could play them.

Ash · May 31, 2008

punwisp said:
Actually, d1-2 and SC didn't have cartoonish graphics, that was the farthest at the time they could go graphics wise, they couldn't make call of duty 4 graphics then lol, so cinematic wise it wasnt cartoony, it was just primitive graphics, the games itself, everything was 2D, WoW and WC3 wasn't really toony either, they just used a 3D style where it would be able to be playable on most computers, if they make the graphics too high or too complex(very detailed) then only high specked machines could play them.

Blizzards graphics have always been low spec. Denying that is like saying an Anorexic will eat herself to death. D:

HappyTauren · May 31, 2008

blizzard could do realistic graphics, even low poly... they simply did not do that.

LordDz · Jun 1, 2008

I'm just afraid that WoW will affect the movies and graphics too much. Just look like when they presented the Zerg, the movie looked like it was made out of WoW!

I want real thundering movies. JETZT!

punwisp · Jun 2, 2008

what? How does wow have anything to do with movies? They have made very good videos thats not wow graphics

redmarine · Jun 2, 2008

punwisp said:
what? How does wow have anything to do with movies? They have made very good videos thats not wow graphics

That movie isn't wow!

Try compare the wow movies with the zerg trailer.
It's their(Blizzard) style...

punwisp · Jun 3, 2008

you mean the gameplay videos then? Yea the zerg look a bit toony

Doesnt lot of the graphics look... Toony?

Similar threads