How does StarCraft 2's graphics compare to other RTS games? (image heavy)

paragon, the screenshots of these games look more like 3d shooters and not RTS games, they really seem confusing, and unit control seems rather poor, although i havent played them, thats just what i feel on first glance.

Also, the screenshots are mostly a close up, with only 20-30 units, where as star craft is not played as in close as those games seem to be, and is much cleaner in general,which makes it easy on the eye, and easy to distinguish one unit from the other.

Also i believe that in one year's time or more, the grafics will improve, i think even the models of the units will improve, we've seen at least 3 different models of the protoss nexus, it is, in fact very early in the game.

Also, in those games i really cant tell the difference between the different factions, starcraft is again very easy to tell whos who.

Also, those games have tanks,humans,rifles, all things that we have in the real world and rather easy to replicate very close to the real deal, which makes the game look good. Making aliens and futuristic units is not as easy.

Although i woulnd mind a darker sharper look for starcraft it looks pretty cool so far, and i would prefer to play it for the graphics and the cleaner environment than those other games.

 

[img width=670 height=502]http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/807/807327/worldshift-20070723000308857.jpg[/img]

peronally i love this one, especially those massive trees, it has a rpg feel to it

 

The unit control on those games is great. Couldn't be better.

Both games are usually played farther away (in WiC's case, much farther away) so as to see as much of the battlefield as possible.

Everyone seems to be forgetting that with starcraft 2 they worked on it for 3 years before telling anyone about it. This is something they have not done for any other game. All signs point to it being released between Summer and Winter 2008. That's 1 more year. They are mostly done with the game. We will not see any drastic changes in art.

In the game it is extremely easy to tell who is on which side.

Making up whatever you want is just as easy because you can have it look however you want. If you make something from the real world and you don't make it exactly right, someone will b**ch about it

It's way too oversaturated and bright and flashy. Starcraft was darker and grittier

 

so far 'no' but later on 'yes' but i think SC2's graphics are a lot better than World in Conflict, SC2 has so many polygons and better shading and the effect will look better and yes world shift does look really amazing and looks better but SC2 is still working on the game since that Blizzard are working on other games: WoW: Wrath of Lich King and Diablo 3 plus there is possibly a WC movie coming out

 

um... world in conflict units have a lot more polygons that starcraft 2 units. world in conflict has a lot more effects than starcraft 2. starcraft 2 uses brighter flashier effects but the explosion in world in conflict are a hell of a lot better. world in conflict has terrain deformation for f**ks sake.
And if you play world in conflict with DX10, holy ****. WiC DX10 I can PROMISE you that SC2 will not have these features. Why? because the engine is not as good.

And here's CoH DX10

 

...If you look closely you'll see the difference between the polygons please trust me but i do agree that the explosion effect and the brightness effect is 'hell a lot better' but of course SC2 is still under construction and it is currently in a pre-alpha/ pre-beta state

 

Why would I trust you on which game has more polygons per units? You have no credentials known to me. I MAKE models. I know all about polycounts and how you can make them look higher than they really are with textures and normal maps (all three of these games use normal maps by the way).

 

Because while he may not have had much modeling experience, I was recently informed that he is a Jedi. The force is strong with this one.

 

Explosions and stuff - in game, WiC
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/22824.html

Another cool in game WiC video
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/20406.html

 

To think about it i think World Shift is right now probably adding more texture to it and adding stuff but RIGHT NOW SC2 is working on quite a lot of things: polygons, graphics, texture, more doodads/ abilities etc and yes they are using normal maps but like i said 'SC2 is still under construction and it is currently pre-alpha/ pre-beta state'

 

It's not going to change THAT much in 1 year when it's been in production for 3 years.
Just watch the videos in my earlier posts and take blizzard's **** out of your mouth

you can like a game even if it doesn't have cutting edge graphics. starcraft 2 does not have cutting edge graphics. i still like it.

 

Yes WiC does have cut-off edge graphics but sorry to say this but i don't any polygons better than (i'm not gonna say 'the word') 'the game', the texture is nice NOW but honestly the texture looks better if you look at the video of 'the game', the graphic effect looks amazing when the camera zooms into the Thor in the Terran faction video but yes the sound effect isn't AS GREAT as WiC and if you're thinking that why can't blizzard put these parachute things and these ultra bombings with some COOL bombing effects well the reason why blizzards is not doing these kind of cool things is that Blizzard is trying to make the game balanced and trying the make 'the game' THE ultimate competitive RTS game

PS: i did not realised your links of WiC i'm sorry about that because i was writing my post and then i saw '2 replys has occur before your post' so i have to post it again and i have watched the videos of WiC and it is amazing and i wouldn't mind playing the game

 

ironically, the goal of WiC is to be the ultimate competitive RTS. And with its merger of FPS aspects such as the wasd/mouse controlled camera as well as online games that you can join and leave at any time, it is doing a good job at catering to a larger group of people than the usual RTS players. Also, it will have an edge considering it is being released a year earlier than starcraft 2.

 

... how exactly is that ironic?? ;D (quote from 'StrangerHood')

 

you're saying that a difference between the two games is that SC2 is trying to be the ultimate competitive RTS when they are actually both trying to do this. That the difference you pointed out is actually a similarity is ironic because it is incongruous

 

O.O.. i was joking about 'How exactly is that ironic' ha ha ^_^
but i see what you mean but here's the question: IS Sc2 will be the ultimate competitive RTS game, and here's another question for you paragon: which one of these game has better in-game close up view graphics?? a) Sc2
b) WiC
i am only testing if you ACTUALLY have good eyes
furthermore to be honest the texture in Sc2 is a lot better than WiC

PS: oh yea how did your power level went down 5-4??

 

Wow... after seeing those other screens, I love SCII's graphics even more! It's actually not ugly!

 

YES!!! now there is someone at my side eat that paragon.... um... sorry that i said that..

 

if you had seen recent interviews paragon then youd know that sc2 is only 40-50% done, so graphics will change dramatically....

 

WiC is much better close up. To prove it to you, here are some links. All in-game
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4763027.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4694261.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4619969.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4694268.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457322.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457324.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457904.html

And here are some models partially showing wirefram to show off polycount which is, despite all your whining otherwise, higher than that of SC2
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4750270.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4750263.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4750262.html

And here are some renderings of in-game models
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457890.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457900.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457898.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457909.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_4457905.html

And here is a shot of the game a little over a year before its release
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/821/821566/img_3857612.html

Now heres some closeish shots of starcraft 2. I'm not on my desktop now so I don't have every screenshot, render, concept art, or magazine article for starcraft 2 saved to the hard drive like I do with that computer so I can't provide you with anything real close but I'm sure you can provide something
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/850/850126/img_4764239.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/850/850126/img_4764238.html

LJYLJ power downed me because I power downed him because he called me a c*** (writing the whole word without any stars clearly violated rule 1)
Then GrahamTastic power downed me because he's DontHate's knight in shining armor.

You seem to forget that a game is more than just its graphics. There is also coding, deciding what units will actually be in the game, the story, implementing the story (which this go-around is giving players more free reign over what they do in the middle which will take even longer), the zerg, various new mechanics, deciding if those mechanics will be implemented, any additional thoughts on user interface, anything else gameplay related, and of course the balancing. That's at least 40% of the work left right there. Terrans and Protoss will not change drastically. You are kidding yourself if you think otherwise.