i just re-looked the screenshots and now i've seen: TO MUCH COLORS
so many explosions, dead units and alive units.... you cant see what is waht and was shooted by which unit and so on....
so much colors are the reasons why I don't like and play wc3
do you agree??
should the orginal scbw-makers make starcraft 2????

1) Blizzard is now "Activision Blizzard".
2) culurz r pretty
3) More colours = future. All games these days use HUGE colour pallets to decorate the environment, and not some crappy 8bit Mario thing.
4) The original creators are long gone (not dead... but other stuff)
5) NO, I LEIK TEH CULURZ.

Old screenshots are too colorful, new screenshots aren't colorful enough in some cases. They just need to tone down the brightness a bit.

Actually. I just noticed, you are right. But thats because the Zerg turned into giant purple fruitballs.

There is color variety, then there's oversaturation and eye-squinting bloom. Apparently Blizzard is not a fan of chiaroscuro.

I wouldn't say it's too colorful. It is, however, too cartoony.

Quote from IskatuMesk

I wouldn't say it's too colorful. It is, however, too cartoony.

Yeah, everything is way to curvy and nice-looking. The spawning pool looks like it was made by elves.

Quote from [Vi3t-X]:]

3) More colours = future. All games these days use HUGE colour pallets to decorate the environment, and not some crappy 8bit Mario thing.

I doubt they are even using palettes. Most things went from 16 colors to 256 to 65536 right up to full 24- or 32-bit (both 24 and 32 being true color).

In sc2 you will be able to create darker units in the editor for your own custom maps...
And I don't think that it is to colorful. Maybe you should accept that the zerg units are still the first draft. They will fix the details after finding a good multiplayer balance between the 3 races.

Like we've said repeatedly, StarCraft II theoretically should support everything War3 had, and more.

Quote

i just re-looked the screenshots and now i've seen: TO MUCH COLORS
so many explosions, dead units and alive units.... you cant see what is waht and was shooted by which unit and so on....
so much colors are the reasons why I don't like and play wc3
do you agree??
should the orginal scbw-makers make starcraft 2????

You can adjust brightness, saturation for that game. And if you don't like colors, you don't like future games- so just stick to Starcraft.

Quote from Ahli

In sc2 you will be able to create darker units in the editor for your own custom maps...
And I don't think that it is to colorful. Maybe you should accept that the zerg units are still the first draft. They will fix the details after finding a good multiplayer balance between the 3 races.

hopefully....
what I hate is that the pylon's crystall is the color player right now -.- the lightblue version [normal SC] looks great
y... the zerg corruptor are really huge purpel balls with some tentacles
i did not see many zerg-bullet right now... the corrupter has 1pixel shots i guess..... I just saw very very small things flying around when corruptor attacks... humm....
corrupter should get at a flying unit [like a face-hugger in Alien vs Predaot] so that unit can't attack it and the corrupter can manipulate it..... is a great idea i think

Quote from BeDazed

Quote

i just re-looked the screenshots and now i've seen: TO MUCH COLORS
so many explosions, dead units and alive units.... you cant see what is waht and was shooted by which unit and so on....
so much colors are the reasons why I don't like and play wc3
do you agree??
should the orginal scbw-makers make starcraft 2????

You can adjust brightness, saturation for that game. And if you don't like colors, you don't like future games- so just stick to Starcraft.

I'd still like the Zerg to look like they do in the cinematics.

Personally, I think the graphics look fine other than zerg. Zerg need to be redesigned, imo they don't fit in.

...They fit in just fine. You have to remember that the Zergs they used on Cinematics looks just like the one you play on the game. Except you view it from far and above.
You know what? This annoys me more. People trying to find something to critisize when they're just fine. They're fine ok? You don't have to be picky about something thats just fine.

Lets get this strait right now:

SC1 cinematic Zerg LOOKS like SC1 Zerg.

SC2 cinematic Zerg LOOKS like SC2 Zerg.

SC2 Zerg LOOKS NOTHING LIKE SC1 Zerg.

If you don't like the custom colour thing, go to the editor and adjust the colour values.

For example

P1: Set all alpha channels to LIGHT BLUE (Crystal is an alpha channel since it adapts to player colours). YAY.

Quote

Lets get this strait right now:

SC1 cinematic Zerg LOOKS like SC1 Zerg.

SC2 cinematic Zerg LOOKS like SC2 Zerg.

SC2 Zerg LOOKS NOTHING LIKE SC1 Zerg.

I don't see the reason to stare at the Zerg for too long to notice the slightest difference.

Quote from chuiu

Lets get this strait right now:

SC1 cinematic Zerg LOOKS like SC1 Zerg.

SC2 cinematic Zerg LOOKS like SC2 Zerg.

SC2 Zerg LOOKS NOTHING LIKE SC1 Zerg.

But there is one (Or some) cinematic(s) where it had StarCraft II concepts in a critical StarCraft I event. Especially Jim Raynor's voice had changed by using the same words spoken by the original voice. And speaking of Zerg, StarCraft I Sarah Kerrigan killed some StarCraft II Hydralisks.

Quote from Mafia.KrayZee

And speaking of Zerg, StarCraft I Sarah Kerrigan killed some StarCraft II Hydralisks.

Where?

Also voice acting isn't a game design concept.