A tad realistic?

I wonder if im being too realistic here but, wouldn't the Terran's air units be going at least MACH 1? I can't possibly see a mutalisk flapping its wings fast enough to go at least MACH 1.

 

Space magic.

 

Calculating an attack run at MACH 1 would be nearly impossible. It just doesn't happen.

 

lorewise the zerg would have a significant speed disadvantage. But thats what scourge are for. walls of flying explosives.

 

The day people learn to separate SP (lore), MP, and gameplay is the day I'ma happy poster.

 

MP usually needs to represent lore at least a bit, otherwise a game has two completely unrelated parts.

 

It's already unrelated. You're just in denial. In fact, the entire game is unrelated to the lore. It just represents loosely something that is supposed to happen in a fictional universe. If you want lore, read the books, comics, and whatnot, if you want gameplay, play the game.

Simple.

 

it still features the same races, and most units from the army, although in different compositions and with different relative strength.

Someone from the starcraft universe would recognize it as something about their universe.

 

In the lore, they are not polygons, there is not a magical UI floating the air, the Terran and Protoss "units" are not mind-controlled because they have minds of their own. There is not some magical camera floating around at 1000+ MPH that can pan across large areas and issue orders instantly. Last but not least, you cannot turn down the settings making them look different, you cannot turn off sound IRL, and there damn sure isn't music everywhere you go.

Gameplay will never be in anyway related to lore. Ever. Just because your suspension of disbelief is stronger in some areas means nothing. Accept this and be a happier gamer, in my opinion.

 

That's like saying shooters are unrelated to life because there aren't any HUDs and things.
The game is related to lore (wth am I saying, it's the primary source for it as the game was before the books) whether you like it or not.

 

You're missing the point by a mile again.

The game tells you about the lore. It does not accurately represent the lore. The game creates an image in your mind based on this loose representation that immerses you in the fictional universe because the parts that don't make sense are filled in with your imagination and suspension of disbelief. Basically, the game is a loose representation of the "reality of the fictional universe". What you're doing is expecting it to be an accurate portrayal which can never be possible. If you were to sit back and imagine being a Marine in the lore, do you picture UIs, HP points, all from a bird's eye view? If not, then you agree with me. Hopefully, you imagine it being closer to an FPS with no HUDs or anything. That's the image in your mind that the game wants to create for you. It doesn't want you to assume that all the beings in this universe are squatty polygons with weird proportions. They damn sure don't want you to think a Battlecruiser is small. Just look at the intro Brood War cinematic.

The gameplay is not the lore; it only represents the lore by giving you things that you associate with this world in your mind. The image in your mind is the real StarCraft lore and universe, the game is just the thing that is used to tell you about and form this universe in your mind.

When you watch a movie, do you think that it makes sense that there's something that sees everything even though there's no one else there and can change angles and position at any given second, or, do you think that cameras were set up so that you could get a loose representation of the events going on in this fictional universe (i.e. in the "actual movie's universe" there's actually nothing there watching). Same thing with game play.

Here's another example. When you're playing, say, classic Space Invaders, do you believe that, in the universe, this space ship is made up of blocks or do you imagine that these blocks represent an awesomely high tech machine made up of various metals and circuitry. When you play Mario, do you think, in the unvierse: this is a few blocks formed together to look like a human or do you think this is a human Italian plumber who can jump really high? Sprites simply represent an idea that is meant to conjure up a universe in your mind. Same with the polygons and units of StarCraft. What you're doing is making the loose representation the ACTUAL lore/universe and that's why you have so many problems and have become a constant complainer. It's a loose representation. It will never be accurate and to expect anything more is to doom yourself to eternal problems. It will never happen. Ever. If you were to have your way, the game would suck if it could somehow still be called a game without the UI and other such necessities.

We've been through this so many times but you still don't know what I'm saying to agree or disagree. What am I doing wrong? Help me help you. If you still disagree, please repeat back what you think it is I am saying an I can try to go from there.

 

thats like saying what you see is not what is in the real world, because it has to processed by your eyes first. Sure, you are right, but there is no point in discussing what you are saying.


Game needs to represent lore. SP needs to represent it more than MP.

 

In a perfect world that would be possible. In the real world, it is impossible. No reason to get worked up about it and ruin the MP over something so easily looked past.

 

I was not saying mach speeds should be implemented.

I just wasn't sure wether he meant

'should terrans get mach speeds in MP'

or

'How the hell do the zerg win wars against terrans in SP'

 

More like how the hell do Zerg win wars against terrans? hahah

 

@ijffdrie: I'm speaking in general. Compromises must be made for gameplay purposes. In order to not be upset by these things, you have to accept the fact that game play is only a loose representation.

 

Idk about you guys but I thought realism was suspended the moment the three races decided to engage in battle in pre-designated locations, sending the same amount of workers to opposite areas in a symmetrical map while also building similarly sized buildings.

Honestly guys, lighten up. If you want real speeds and real bullets against real enemies that react realistically... I hear the army is recruiting...

 

If only military service for 1 year was mandatory ....

 

@snowden: Taking me far too seriously.

 

I've always wondered why the Terran, Protoss, and Zerg fight such decisive battles using only troops/vehicles that they build/train in real time. I mean, shouldn't they have fleets and armies already trained before they engage in the battles?

But no, they fly into a hostile Zerg world with a couple marines and four scvs. Obviously the lore just isn't there.

By that same note, it isn't there in really any games.

Nearly every FPS I've played involved one key character basically winning the war single-handed. One character killing thousands of enemies. Often, it's an American character, so I can't help but wonder where the other 400,000 army guys are (and there would likely be more in the case of a serious war).

Another example that is pretty obvious is in Mass Effect. Shephard is performing incredible tasks in order to ensure the safety of the galaxy, and she (I picked a girl ) has the support of The Alliance/Cerberus/The Citadel Council, and yet.. she engages in battles with alien species far technologically superior with one or two others by her side. Where are the Human armies? Where are the Turian armies? What could be more important than saving the galaxy?

Even the most realistic, engrossing, thorough games are not even remotely realistic. Maybe 1 in 10 action/war movies has some realism.

But they're all intended to make you feel as you are part of the game/movie's Universe.

Some are better at that task than others, but if you think about it (which you should Not do), they all basically Suck.