December Discussion Topic: Artistic Direction of StarCraft II

thor definitely has the terran feel. without the thor (a high class mech) terran is a mediocre race (ground), particularly if they only get a low class mech like the goliath. dont worry the thor is nothing like gundam and super robots, these are uver high class mech and i think only UED can afford it. hahah.

wow. thanks YCH9 for my marine link. ;D you forgot the ghost. lol

http://larcenciel-11.deviantart.com/art/starcraft-2-ghost-70305736


**How does the Terran faction look visually?

ok just tone down the team color. but dont make the buildings and units dirty. xp

the baracks looks great. the baracks in sc1 like all other terran buildings in sc1 looks like they are going to fall apart and not functional really. i like the new improvement on the terran buildings in sc2. Again, starcraft should look like starcraft 2 in the first place. why are there no one complaning about the marines new cool powersuit and guns..? they look diferent from the medieval armor looking amrines in sc1. the marines in sc1 do not look powerful enough. luckily we got a new great UPDATED HIGH TECH (what it should be like in the first place) looking marines now in sc2. so i think its justifiable that we get a more improve stronger richer powerful looking barracks and other terran buildings just like what we got with the marine make over...

iits like this the sc2 marine did not have a sudden change of armor from sc1 lorewise(maybe). i think the marine in sc2 is what the marine in sc1 is in the first place maybe not exactly the same but has the same mech like armor and not like we use to see in images of marines in sc1 game. 10 years ago blizzard was lacking in artistic concept and designs (sci fi.. they only have few inspirations like only alien(dark), but now we have seen tons of sci fi stuffs since then in movie *starwars123, war of the worlds, games *supreme commander etc) We were all novice 10 years ago and us we grow we learn from our minor and major mistakes and improve evrything to make it look better stronger UPDATED etc.

cinematics- i dont think we will get to see any of this in sc2.

the buggy with sarge road killing a zergling. looks too nostalgic with the jeep. year 2400+?

"the ambush" - that tank? looks like they were in WWII. badass then NOT now.

battle of amerigo - gay ghost. it was funny but it just made marines looks sissy. thats what happen when you base your game only on few sci fi movies like alien (dark setting) and starship troopers.

back then it was badass and perfect but now its obviously is not.

look how the cinematic we get now with tychus (matrix like etc.). The short clip of marines aiming with their guns in sc2 trailer intro pwns all cinemtic in sc 1. Not only because it looks visually stunning but because the marine looks BETTER (suit and armor).


Just imagine the starcraft original setting with the new sc2 marines on it as well as sc2 buildings). the barracks in sc1 was great then but NOT now. so enough with the starcraft 1 feel. this is the future people. 8)

merc haven = a joke. remove it! change it to a high tech prison camp.
refinery - i really don't like the look of it, doesn't fit with all other terran buildings.
nomad - looks primitive. make it look more high tech. Cut the cranes.

about the first screenshot. well its a bad screenshot. blizzard should pick the best screenshot possible.

and we should not base the visuals on screenshots but rather on the HQ videos we downloaded. ^^

 

I added these questions:

* Do you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?
* How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?
* How should the switch to 3d affect this universe's art?
* Do you like SCII's art style?
* What overall theme do you think fits the SC universe best (ie realistic, huge disproportionalities, etc)?

 

* Do you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?
Art is more like Star Craft 2, coming from the orrigional and taking little elements from WCIII, im quite satisfied with the art feel, it is something that i feel like it left out in the origional game. I really would like to get a collection eddition of ST2 that would contain all of the art for the game. that would be a treat.
* How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?
Very little, just because its esyer to work with does not mean you should take that road, specialy when its blizzard. There are games out there who have great graphics, realistic, but the story sucks! Now we have a detailed world that has good background story very uniqe cherachters, and still has a lot of unansweared questions which gives room for future games and expansions. Basicly you have a great story so why ruin the game with already familiar cartoonishness? That is not taking a game to a new level. Might as well play project revolution. So try going more realistic or more raw textures and materials then shiny plastic.
* How should the switch to 3d affect this universe's art?
The effect is that the game now turned into Warcraft in space in 3D.
* Do you like SCII's art style?
The concept art is great as always, really sets the mood for the game, but that mood is ruined when you actualy see the cartoonish game. They should really take the concept artist and let them work with the game developers so they can actualy do the units. Just look at Lord of the Rings, Their Gollum is amazing work, and that because they had the make-up artists actually painting the digital model.
* What overall theme do you think fits the SC universe best (ie realistic, huge disproportionalities, etc)?
Deffinetly the huge disproportionatelies, and the unrealistic in reality. Just look at Alien vs Preditor movie, its dark and creepy, definetly not for kids and yet you get to see Prottos-like kicking Zerg-like ass. Thats unrealistic in realistic involvement, it works great cause the interaction of unrealistic characters with the real environment is great. The realistic environment is what makes the crazy out of the mind creatures work.

God i love my teddy bear.

 

* Do you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?

Very interesting question.... I have thought a lot about it myself... I actually think SC2 art is SC2 art....

The only ting i can point out is that the Stalkers look a bit and move a bit like narubians for WC3.

Also the little we have seen of the mutalisk loks like gargoyle animation....

* How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?

I deslike the cartooniness in SC... i totaly agree with the poster above: Less shiney plastic and more raw textures and materials (that goes for Terran, Toss looks great...)

* How should the switch to 3d affect this universe's art?

well... I feel like the old SC was some cind of semi-3D (at least more 3D than Warcraft 2) so now they only need "to go all the way with this Alexei"

* Do you like SCII's art style?

Hell yea! But some units must be changed....

 

Qo you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?
A:I don't think so, i like these SC2 artwork and they do have similar style such as Samwise's artwork of SC and SC2 except improved, the artwork of SC from Samwise is a lot like WC style drawing and i didn't mind as long its final look in-game has the SC vibe into it so as a result its more like both, if i'm allowed to say both

Q:How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?
A:As long it does not look like WCIII and too cartoonish its fine

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7k3ZM6bQx4&NR=1

This video was made by some of the SC community about this...

 

That video in my opinion deserves its own response because the makers obviously have an agenda and are suing a good hunk of bias in their arguments. First off, and I think this needs to be truly understood by everyone, BLIZZARD IS NOT MAKING SC2 FOR PRO GAMERS IN FIRST, they are making it first for the fans of SC which most of are not pro gamers and never will be, so anyone who argues the game needs to be designed to be completely proportional skill needs to take their head out of their ass and look around because a lot of players they would call "noobs" disagree, and guess what the noobs have the numbers and the money to say their vote comes first. (It should be noted though that assistance with balance from pro gamers is a good thing, but as far as unit/ability ideas go, their vote should be the same as everyone else and guess what there is a ton of people in that everyone else category)

Now as for one of the first things the video brings up, ideas from other sources. Ideas from places other than the minds of the development team are going to happen, nothing is original anymore. The source should not effect anything as long as the idea is turned into a starcraft idea (this is for the morons that think just because the stalker looks like a wc3 unit it should be scrapped. Guess what, THATS BAD REASONING. If you want to attack the unit don't attack the units source go after the abilities/mechanics of the unit. Which they did, but guess what, NOTHING CAN BE OVERPOWERED UNLESS THERE ARE NUMBERS THERE TO SUPPORT IT, and numbers are adjusted all of the time that's what a beta is for.) Next, if you want to attack the ability to see units in a crowd that's fine, but if your using video from a shitty camera as your source, you are grabbin for straws.

On to graphics, graphics in general vary greatly with the viewer, I for example like the new siege tank graphics were this video's creator obviously doesn't, not much I can do about that. The same goes for any unit animation including the zealot's. As for buildings being blocky that's another matter of opinion but again don't base your opinion on the video from a shitty camera.

OK, so whats left? The Immortal and the Thor. First, while the Immortal may be great counter against the siege tank that doesn't mean that's the only thing it can do, as for it being weak against weak units the last time I checked Marines cant kill a unit with 100 shields and 240 hp in a 1v1 battle same goes for reapers and zlings. Every unit in sc1 had some sort of counter that if it went up against a number of its counter units that equals the value you spent on your units, your units lost, the same is true for the Immortal. Blizzard is already trying new things with the Thor so I think what was presented in the video has already been addressed.

Finally, we have the Mothership. I have already participated way to much in this debate, so here is just a raw fact about the opinion expressed so far on this forum:

Question: What do you think should have been done with the Mothership?

The Mothership should stay the way it was in the original gameplay video. 46 (21.1%)
It should stay a superunit you can only have one of but with minor balancing changes. 126 (57.8%)
The Mothership should stay the way it was shown at blizzcon. 22 (10.1%)
The Mothership should be completely scrapped and a new unit built to take its place. 24 (11%)

Total Voters: 216

I think that says all that needs to be said about the Mothership and the "communities" opinion of it.



P.S. I apologize for any grammatical mistakes I missed. (Im sure I didnt catch em all) <--- Heee hee gotta catch 'em all


Bonus 300 minerals for a great post

 

Also, I don't see what is wrong with the colossus. It looks like the perfect thing for an advanced civilization to use. The protoss are all about shiny, standout units, and that is exactly what the colossus is, something to deal damage and get people's attention. The protoss are pulling out all the stops to defeat the zerg so they would use any robotic units they can get thier hands on.

 

Great post Kerwyn.

However, I agree with a very limited number of things in the video, such as the look of some Terran buildings, etc. But for the most part I agree with what you've stated.

My opinions are well known on this forum as far as the various issues (Reaper should have flamethrower or lurker-like splash, MS should be a superunit, etc...) and I still feel that action needs to be taken, but it's through sites like this that the change is going to occur, not through horribly produced videos on YouTube.

I also think we're taking way too many whacks at Blizzard prior to the Beta. In my mind Blizzard does a great job pre-game and in development even if they take too long. The part I'm truly worried about is post-release and after they've gotten their money. Their customer service and support for the original game has been notoriously shitty, as you can tell from the current battle.net servers.

EDIT: And I agree with Eon, I don't see the problem with taking inspiration from other games so long as it is in moderation. What's wrong with getting inspiration from Orson Wells in one of the greatest sci-fi classics of all time? I do get a little antsy when any unit resembles something from WC3, but I think that's a separate issue that I covered in my WC3 Developers Take Over thread.

 

Personally i love the terrain and ground looks, i think that the Terran should loose a little color and the BC plasma torpedo's look a little weird when firring (they fire at a 45 degree angle but the cannons(?) point forewards also the viking ground attack looks a little strange. I really have no problems with the protoss in terms of looks aside from the stalkers bounciness.

as an after thought supply depos look a little small and cartoony, i liked the old model better.

 

I wasn't saying I agreed with everything in that movie... *dodges incoming stabs at self*

I just wanted to throw the movie out there for YOU guys to see and comment on. Again, please don't attack me since I DIDN'T make it. Sorry if the video makes you mad but other people's opinions are worth being herd too, yes?

 

I never said it was by you, and yes I do agree that others opinions are worth hearing.

I'm not mad about it, but a video posted in youtube isn't going to attract much attention to the problems with the game. To do that, he/she needs to join a forum to discuss the issues, like we are doing now.

The problem with the video is that some of its points are outdated. The Thor has changed and some of the graphics have been redone. The Thor now has AA capabilities and has the kill twice effect, getting rid of some of its overlap with the siege tank. The mothership is another good example. The video is talking about the "super unit MS" which no longer exists, sad to say. Even if it still existed, I don't see how "luck" really factored much into it. It was all about skill to use them effectively. The only luck I see that really changes anything was if you had enough energy to use your abilities, which isn't really luck, but more like unit management.

Also, some of its points are inadequately defended. The example about the colossus for example. Just because a book was made a hundred years ago, it does not mean it is not allowed to be inside a video game. War of the Worlds took place in the future, not as far as starcraft2, but still was about advanced alien life forms. Another is the blink ability for the stalker. That point is completely wrong, a noob can't use blink to his best advantage, it takes strategy and microing to even be able to use it effectively to the point of actually change any major battle.

Lastly, a few points are just incorrect. Most noticeable was the agreement that rock-paper-scissors gameplay wasn't in sc1. It was everywhere in sc1, like LK said. Air beat melee units, melee units beat turrets, AA air units beat air units with only ground attacks, etc.

Overall, the video is good and brings up some key points, but it has been outdated and some flaws do exist in its logic. Even so, it's a good find.

 

Q Do you like the new look of the landscapes?
A: yes new landscapes look great.

Q: How does the Terran faction look visually?
A: the units seem bulky and brightly colored, seem like toys.

Q How does the Protoss faction look visually?
A again too bulky and brightly colored.

i think the camera being so far zoomed in on the action shots contributes to the problem though, hopefully we will be able to play with the camera zoomed out to show at least twice as much of the battlefield, not just enough room to show six units at a time when we used to be able to fit fifty plus.

Q Do you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?
A it is much more like warcraft 3, which has its ups and downs.

Q: How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?
A: not very much, i know everyone of course loves the private in the first terran video ("i love you sarge"). but being dark and bloody is much more important in starcraft. what would starcraft be without the marine guts splattered in the installation missions or medics exploding in a pool of blood? i dont want senseless fantasy violence to disappear from the games i like.

Q: How should the switch to 3d affect this universe's art?
A: this thought is more of an effect on gameplay than art, but: having range be calculated in 3d, and thus having height of air units actually matter. but this would probably take a ton of development time, and i dont think anyone wants to see you start fresh.

Q Do you like SCII's art style?
A: i am concerned that the art will be less violent, and instead more cartoonish. then again my idea of good design is an ogre with a grenade launcher on one arm and a chainsaw on the other.

Q What overall theme do you think fits the SC universe best (ie realistic, huge disproportionalities, etc)?
A non realistic, because we want to explore new worlds and terrains. but the fighting should be quasi realistic and bloody, as close to the original as possible.

 

I think SCII's art is too much like Warcraft 3. The old starcraft had a certain grittyness and realism that the new starcraft lacks, and I think it's going to detract from the intensity of the gameplay. Intensity is what (in my eyes) made Starcraft so much better than other RTS games, and I don't want to lose that. Models neeed to be less bulky.

Starcraft doesn't really go for realism, but I don't like the cartoonishness of the new models.

Some specific things I'd like to address:
Firebats, tanks, vikings, stalkers, immortals, thors, and the nomad autoturrets are all too bulky and disproportionate and look like tabletop models.

Most of the flying units look good (except overlord, which doesn't look organic enough) as do infantry. Archons look good too. Everything could be made a little less blocky, but overall it's ok.

I'm not sure about collosus yet.

When buildings/units break apart their needs to be more fire/blood, because atm it looks like lego models breaking.

In general terran weapons need to be sized down. in SC1 weapons were proportionate and looked real.
Also all the colors on units are too saturated. things need to look a bit darker and grayer, less cartoonish. Don't overdo it though.

I don't like the color changes on the archons etc, I think it will look really bad for certain colors. It'll be fine for white, teal and blue, but not red or orange or green.

I have no complaints about terrain, I think it looks great.

 

* Do you like the new look of the landscapes?
Yes. The landscape is stunning. I wouldn't mind if the landscapes were ocasionally more dour.

* How does the Terran faction look visually?
Great. Some colour issues but those are my personal preference (the Nomad is very bright, construction vehicle-esque which may have been the goal but if it were toned down i would not complain.) I may sound sick and sedistic, but more realistic blood would be nice. Darker.

* How does the Protoss faction look visually?
Perfect. Advanced. Graceful. Deadly.

* Do you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?
Some of the units are dangerously close to WC3. Overall its going well though.

* How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?
ABSOLUTELY NONE. The fact that the original Starcraft was NOT cartoony made it intense and gritty. Warcraft 3 can still make me laugh even in the most intense moments. I love it, but its cartoony.
(also as a side note, though its not art related, some of the voices are a bit...silly.Viking and Banshee for instence.)

* How should the switch to 3d affect this universe's art?
It should make it more gripping

* Do you like SCII's art style?
So far, yes.

* What overall theme do you think fits the SC universe best (ie realistic, huge disproportionalities, etc)?
Realism fit. The starcraft universe is dark and real. Adding disproportionalities would be like taking a hatchet to intensity.

* Additional Feedback you would like to give
Keep it gritty, keep it dark, keep it intense. Thats how Starcraft left off, its only right that SCII should follow in its legendary footsteps.


EDIT: I have been reluctant to say this, becasue Samwise is one of my favorite artists, but his style is bulky and disproportionate...which may be one of the reasons WC3 looked like it did and Starcraft 2 is leaning that direction. It's not really a problems its just...a thing.
Samwise, wherever you are please don't be insulted. :-[

 

Do you like the new look of the landscapes?
I enjoy the overall look of the landscape. It has many a detail, and it is overall more interactive and undistractively pleasing to the eye than SC and SC:BW. Each landscape that I have seen so far fits the theme that i see so far, and gives each and every game it's own flair. Just like in real life, a skirmish in the jungle is going to be very different compared to a stakeout on an isolated platform in space.

How does the Terran faction look visually?
To me, the Terran faction seems a little too cartoony or childish for me. When I think of a marine, I see a battle-scarred convict with the personality of a bored tiger, ready to shoot at anything it's allowed to shoot, and ready to maim anything its allowed to maim. With the current marine design, I just can't get the feel of it... I see a disproportioned figure with colored plates all over it. Also, the terran units lack the aura of mechanical power that i loved so much in the original. I know these things are difficult to emphasize with such a limited pixel-scape (for lack of a better word), but I'm sure there are some things that can be done to improve this.

How does the Protoss faction look visually?
I am awed and frequently wet myself whenever I get even a small glimpse of a protoss unit in Starcraft 2. The almost religious seriousness and focus emenates from each and every unit on the screen, as if they were literally pouring psionic energy in to their weapons to give an extra boost to their slash. The abilities are so aesthetically appealing that I have been known to be blind for a couple hours after staring at a loop of the Stalker blink ability. As for the buildings, they are spectacular. I especially enjoy the new look of the stargate, which is even better than I imagined it in my head. Great work!

If anything, what would you change about these factions?
For the protoss, I would personally change the squid-like appearance of the Colossi... no particular reason, they just bug me. For the terran, I would probably try to make the siege tank seem even more powerful, as it lacks the aura I described above.

PS: Sorry, some of these were questions posted on another Starcraft 2 Forums site for this discussion, and so I kept them on there.

 

You're welcome to use any of the questions from any other fan sites. Feel free. It actually adds to the depth and structure of the argument and makes it easier to summarize the viewpoints expressed here.

Good comments, everyone. Keep 'em coming.