those 3D zerglings were much better than the SC 1 Zerglings.....
how does basically a blob of (add team color here) equel better looking than fairly well designed and animated 3D zerglings, they even hop with little movements on their legs....
- Registered User
Member for 10 years, 9 months, and 23 days
Last active Sat, Dec, 1 2007 14:04:28
- 0 Followers
- 51 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
Nov 17, 2007i think angels and the like are none excistent, or at least their excistence is no more real than characters depicted in games nor are they any more real than Santa claus, the boogie man (altho Santa could be Saint Nik and he excisted)Posted in: General Discussion
overall though i am open minded but i voted no because i dont belive in religion and angelic figuires altho if they excist and they look like the one on the first page hell yeah!!
Nov 14, 2007Posted in: Starcraft & SC2Quote from "Equinox" »Low-polygon 3D is not good graphics by my standards. I think low-polygon 3D is some of the worst graphics possible. Ex: WC3, which is rather old now, my computer can surely run that.
I must say, UT III looks a lot better on my computer than WarCraft 3. Also, AoE 1/2 also look better than WC3. SC would look better than WC3 if it had a bigger resolution... D1 looks better than WC3... all those came out before WC3, they have bigger maps, greater detail, they hardly require any power.
I don't mind 3D as a concept, what I do mind, is 3D replacing 2D where it can't even compare to the quality of 2D. Where it decreases map size (see AoE III, map size has became ridiculous, also see Heroes V, same shit), where it decreases unit quantity (again, AoE III), and, to cap it all, lowers performance.
It's not my fault 3D in RTS is low-polygon and makes games look like crap. I don't care how old 2D is. 2D looks better, costs less, period.
This comparison is idiotic. 2D is a perfectly working concept, it has plenty advantages over 3D.
I repeat. Games of mass unit number are DISADVANTAGED by 3D. They look worse, they are simplified to pay for the 3D, they take longer to make, again, they require users to buy new computers. 3D has no advantage over 2D. Except one. Hype. People like you, who don't know what art is and just chase after latest technology, like some chase after the latest shaders and crap like that. The look of the game is not defined by technology used in it, it is defined by its design. Except 3D makes it very, very, limited.
Stop making idiotic comparisons please. We are not in kindergarden. Well, I'm not, at least.
Old music > new music. Old movies > new movies. Old games > new games. Hmm?
low-poly 3D is bad. low-poly 3D is not a technological breakthrough, it's a source of hype for new RTS/RPG games, nothing more. 3D is disadvantageous. If you can't see it, you are just chasing after new technology for the sake of new technology.
2D and 3D are two different fundamental ways of programming. Color, blackandwhite, 16bit, whatever, have nothing to do with this. before you make such comparisons maybe you should read some material first.
1. you say i make bad comparisons, your comparing SC2 graphics to WC3, thats a terrible comparison, the graphics are in no way similiar, 3D graphics have been done very well in so many 3D games, World in conflict, possibly Tiberian wars if you like that sort of thing, graphics have been done well in several games and WC3 is an insult to them, from what ive seen from SC2 so far i would not compare it to WC3 i mean weve seen the zerg already and all of these designs are fairly early, they could if they wished change the engine
2. it would wouldnt it, WC3 is so aged and using a graphics engine not comparable to the style of UT3, but UT 3 is a good example of well made 3D graphics, as well as Crysis is also but still, they are not RTS however.
3. thats an opinion, i feel your trying to dig this in as a fact, 2D lower quality than 3D, how can you possibly say this when we can see so many improvements in 3D, can you possibly say C&C tiberian Dawn is better graphically than Tiberium wars, hell how can you say SC is better than SC 2 graphically, ime not complaining with what ive seen so far...performence is not neccerily the fault of the game, newer games built for newer systems, the top rigs dont neccerily feel the performence drain ime sure, my computer certainly doesnt in AOE 3, but i agree those maps are useless in AOE 3, but i wouldnt say World in conflict maps are horrific, it depends on the developers as well, not just the performence on size of maps as well as the games mechanics, Age of empires 3 is more tactical than strategic for example so it would not have massive armies or maps.
looks better? no not period, another opinion....Tiberian dawn, world in conflict, Black and white 2 infact a lot of later 3D games>>>2D graphics not to menstion massive armies are not everything, its good i agree, who doesnt love a huge army at your finger tips but all sorts of graphical effects are more viable in 3D that 2D could never display.
the only advantages is that as you say, costs less for us gamers (doesnt matter to me, ive already got a gaming rig...the cost is irrelevent) and this ties in with performence. Thats about it...3D games are superior graphically if you take the examples ive given and not something like WC3, can show more effects, now you list more of your prefrences, you call hype and try and label me as someone who doesnt care about design now, simply because you dont want to spend some cash to upgrade your machine and seem to want to live in the past..thats your prefrence it doesnt mean however that you should try and label someone as a guy who doesnt care about design.
now you seem to think somehow someone in this entire forum and site could possibly be in kindergarden...right..
a source of hype? please name some new 3D games with a 2D game whos graphics beat it...please do, whos effects are greater than this new 3D game.
Nov 14, 2007slightly i like Demonhunters idea, i tihnk MMORPG i disagree on (prob coz i have no friends to play online with mostly ) but seriously i think that going online its going to end up similiar to Hellgate london where you have a price put on getting better, where people that dont get that will not be as "leet" as everyone else who does. But the things i do agree is, a diffrent in side, Hell/Heaven which is where i agree partly with Demon and Genesis, that there should be heaven and hell to choose form and ofcourse Sanctuary but not so basic, there should be many branches to choose from and following those you can gain buffs, special abilities and aleigance specific bonuses.Posted in: Unannounced Class
For example i think the game should open out, you can customise (like hellgate although not neccericery) faces, height but only to a small degree, hair colours, skin etc etc but more neccery would be the side you pick, you could be a necromancer fighting for the side of light (World: Sanctuary, Allegiance:(could be diffrent Angel council members who give diffrent powers, Class: necromancer) or possibly you could choose a Demon specifically fighting for Baal with skills appropriot to him. It would give a wide range of classes to play as.
and ofcourse ime all for 3.D personally as long as they keep the Dark atmosphere
Nov 13, 2007all this anti-3D coming from you Equinox, do you have a high end PC, just wondering, can you play good 3D graphics.....Posted in: Starcraft & SC2
you seem to have this incredible nostalga and love for the old 2D, its just so....old...its like using black and white for Diablo 3, hell lets make it like pong, that was a classic game, you can bounce diablo around.....old games get outstripped eventually, especially by 3D, black and white<Color, 2D<3D
Nov 13, 2007Posted in: Lore & StorylineQuote from "Tale" »What I believe is that he transformed into what he feared the most. Even as the Lord Of Terror he has fear, and his would be truly the worst to imagine. If you can, think of the worst thing you fear and hate the absolute most, then imagine it being right where you are. All around you and inside you, I myself would find that quite disturbing.
I believe that is why he fled in such a way.
yes but one thing is my fear, and diablos is another all together, ime a mere human..Diablo should be quite aware of his powers and the way they work, as well as being the lord of terror anyway, but i think its a little silly.
Nov 13, 2007diabloofterror posted a message on Φ Graphics Discussion (New art style proposal to Blizzard)and to think i started this odd argumentPosted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Nov 12, 2007Posted in: Lore & StorylineQuote from "PhrozenDragon" »Right, that to me felt slightly ridiclulous. I do think Uldyssian, during taht very short period right after he beat Inarius could have killed all of the Prime Evils outright. But prior to that moment, hardly.
yeh it was a bit ridiculous but how? how can anyone other than perhaps the Anguis council defeat a prime evil and where was Uldyrssian pwoer coming from, the worldstone again, hmm, i dont tink he could "kill" them possibly defeat, i dont think anything can kill a prime evil since they seem to just end up going back to hell or another realm. Uldyssian was certainly powerful at that moment.
Nov 12, 2007hmm i thought as much but i was more referring to their power overall as in abilities, like stopping time.Posted in: Lore & Storyline
hmm i suppose that would make sense
Hmm well take into account that this is weakened diablo, the only diablo we see in the games is the weak one after his the three prime evils banishment and their bodies destroyed, its likely that after that they are incredibly weakened so it can still make sense but yes i belive there will be a masive retcon
hmm well mendeln brings lilith and Rathma who are stuck in said orbs out from the void, they were not actually present in Sanctuary so it must be more than a sensation
hmm your probably right, Blizzard didnt get far with the WoW one until they gave up
hmm well as players i dont know, wether the characters in diablo are connected to the worldstone or not ime not sure but it doesnt matter anymore does it lol, the things smashed. But i dont think any players in true canon could reach the power to beat on a prime evil when hes at full power, for example even Uldyssian doesnt exactley beat Diablo truly, although theres that odd part where Diablo is sent terrified by his own power, one would think he has control and understanding of his own powers especially considering his status and possible age.
Nov 12, 2007finshed the veiled prophet (may be a spoiler to follow)Posted in: Lore & Storyline
whats up with Diablo, how was he affected by his own powers so badly, i mean i would of thought the lord of terror from what hes seen and done to be a fearless being especially since he is the prime of terror afterall, one would tihnk he would certainly not be terrified so easily
Nov 12, 2007whats the power of the Council?Posted in: Lore & Storyline
didnt it say somewhere that if they judge it, beings can be completly deleted from excistence or something like that, if this is true why do they not just do it to the prime evils.
do the 3 prime evils=the council in power? since even one of them, lord mephisto did not seem afraid to approach the council so suddenly, he even seemed to sound to me like he wouldnt flee if a battle would commence, also whats the little orbs that shrink people and are then thrown into the void, what are they made out of, glass? frost? i mean if certain beings cant break them, what does it take to break them? a special force.
i wish Blizzard could make a Diablo encylopedia and add all the bits and bobs that they have not fully explained, not things that would ruin a future story but definations set in stone of what certain powers and abilities are and what their limtis are.
Can the Anguris council stop time? or did Uldyssian do it? when everyone froze i mean, i think Uldysian may have done it and it seemed to happen when he willed it, but the Council chose some of the Edyrem it seems to not be frozen when Rathma says about how they are chosen to listen, so perhaps teh council can do this.
Just makes me wonder if the Angels seem so powerful ime surprised they dont defeat the prime evils who have not shown so much power imo
Nov 11, 2007WOOT finished Sin war trilogy now at last, got the book read in 2 days hehe, should of tried to make it last really but now i am glad i know the storiesPosted in: Diablo III General Discussion
anyway (starts to spill all the secrets then thinks better of it)
Nov 9, 2007Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from name="Elfen Lied" »Diablo has one of the best lores/background story of a game series IMHO, but i am still amazed by the number of people who never ever bothered to learn even a small part of it, then ask a question to which the answer is found in the lore. kind of annoying, most of the lore is actually found in the manuals, tomes, and by talking to the NPCs in the games. But i suppose thats just their nature (or mine), i prefer story and atmosphere over flashy graphics.
I take my time going through the game, reading any and all tomes i find, and talking to NPCs, esp. old wizardy, elder dudes i meet along the way, as he who doesnt understand history is doomed to repeat it, history teaches us so much, we should take its valuable lessons to heart.
how do you remember every piece of lore? i havnt played Diablo or read the manuels in ages, ive read them all but i dont remember every little piece....how do you do so? or have you played it so many times over your memory somehow rememebrs everything
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.