Unit Portrait (Making it look more realistic)

what would be a solution though would be to make these new portraits downloadable, so you can choose if you want them or not, though i still doubt blizzard would do it, because of the high costs of doing something like this

 

You'll definitely be able to upload your own portraits in the editor, but I very highly doubt they'll be customisable for multiplayer and the campaigns, provided your multiplayer map isn't a UMS one, where people will suspect you for rigging it anyway so there's hardly any point in playing it.

 

Personally I like the SCV as it is.. I think they did a great job with it and the quality is actually more realistic than you're making it out to be. The main difference is that the portraits you made are completely clean, shaven, unharmed, models of perfection; good cheesy action movie/boy band material. Terran arn't supposed to look like that, majority of them are criminals or rugged individuals anyway. Starcraft II portraits ARE very detailed, the style they took just matches the Starcraft world alot better.

 

I think, if they chose to use pre-rendered animations for the portraits as they did in SC1, they could make them high-quality. The tradeoff would be more stuff loaded to RAM, less tax on the video card, less flexibility when it comes to switching between animations. By the looks of things, they're rendering them in real time, so any quality boosts could potentially slow the game down. I am sure they're considering this stuff, and I am sure these portraits are not yet final.

 

yeh thats the only problem. but if they can make it with not really stressing the system that much, then why not? as good as blizzard is im sure they can make it still look realistic good as well as still compatible with the slowest pc possible.

yes actually i thought of that too, you covering up both side. but they why are you saying that i did read the last part of your past where i actually also did covered up or countered both of your post.

actually cgi realistic human(superman) is more harder to make than cgi monster or creatures(king kong, dinosaurs, aliens, etc) etc. so realistic zerg and toss? much easy to make than the terran.

im just anticipating what sc3 will bring. good graphics etc... and much better realistic detailed unit portrait.

 

First off, for the gods' sake, only quote what you're responding to.

Secondly, it's not 'covering up' both sides, it's 'covering' both sides. Second of all, you responded directly to that part of my post and didn't offer any 'if not' scenario.

Thirdly, that's because Superman, etc, is doing superhuman things, like flying, etc, so there's nothing to reference. Ordinary human CGI is much easier, as much of it can be done by actual people, which is in fact how King Kong was done, and was acted by the same actor who acted as Gollum/Smeagol. That's not to mention that Superman was done a longer time ago than the others.

StarCraft3's unit portrait is irrelevant to the quality of the StarCraft2 portrait. Saying you want StarCraft3-quality unit portraits for StarCraft2 is like saying you want StarCraft2-quality unit portraits for StarCraft1.

 

i Prefer the current one because even though there are arguements concerning its quality , at least it matches the graphics and feel in game. Realistic looking portraits do not match the graphics in SC2, i disargree with your arguement saying SC1 portraits didn't fit SC1 they still had the same slight tacky feel about them. The only difference between SC1 and SC2 is that units now look bulkier and obviously colouring and zooming in adds alot of detail. I dislike games which try to blend really realistic looking graphics with cartoony graphics. Keep high quality CGI sequences in the cinematics and they'll be even more stunning when you see them

Better graphics do not nessicairily equal a better game and blizzard trys to make you focus on the game and not the unit portraits (Toning down explosions is along the same lines). As i've stated in other posts, blizzard games are fun because they don't throw in every fancy trick in the book into their games. Keep it basic, keep it smooth so it stays fun !

 

so do you expect the next sc games(sc3) will have the same unit portrait quality as now in sc2 because blizzard is all simple and doesn't throw fancy trick in the book? i dont think so. and why not just retain the quality of unit portrait in sc1 for sc2 if thats the case?

imo the current unit portrait is good enough right now since they can't really make it much better plus also the fact that most computers today are not high end. and so i accept its(my suggestion) not possible in sc2.

sc1 portrait is clearly way different from the overall look of the sc1 2d cartoons like graphics. but still both combined made it look great.

@ itza

yeah yeah.

First of all, most of your post is not really necessary since you already know its just an example. also the top part of your post is completely wrong, why say it doesn't look like an scv etc... i think your already smart enough to know that i was just showing a more realistic unit portrait and i only use the scv interface coz what else can i use, its not like i going to completely edit the whole interface. clearly you said those thing just for the sake of debating and arguing and just adding to the fact that you don't like the idea of a more realistic unit portrait in sc2.

you could directly say just that the realistic unit portrait doesn't look good with the overall look of the game. why still go in details like the marine is too handsome and clean. for gods sakes that is just an example!

flying or not making an uver realistic human with cgi is really hard to make and cost tons of money. Realistic alien and monster is a bit easier to do than realistic humans in cgi. The bugget production for such film that includes realistic human cgi is usually more expensive than films with cgi monster. Its hard to make cgi realistic human since the realistic details are very important, unlike aliens and mosnter because we can just invent their look etc.

I did not say it like that. if its impossible to get that more realistic unit portrait in sc2, then fine. sc3 will have it for sure.

 

My comment was directed at the level of SC2 graphics in relation to its portraits. SC2 graphics are not top end in every sense so therefore neither should their portraits be. Obvisously by the time SC3 is released (if it ever is) the average level of graphics expected by the community would increase which would in turn increase the portrait graphics. But in my view both have developed at the rate they should.

 

good, i understand and agree.

but sc1 have pre-rendered like characters on the unit portrait which is not really at the same level or rate with the overall 2d graphics of sc1. so imo a bit of improvement on sc2 unit portrait will not hurt, if blizzard have some spare time and if it will not really affect system requirement that much.

 

@ zeratul11. Actually I'd say that you're making these false accusations for the sake of arguing, or at least for the sake of wearing me or my points down. I did not say what I said for the sake of arguing, I said it because you had not clearly stated that it was purely for the sake of example. There was still a lot of doubt, so I responded either way. If you can't accept that, or just want to blindly believe that I was truly arguing for the sake of arguing, why do you continue to argue with me? I've already said I did it just to cover both sides, and you continue to argue with me, while other people are still making the same mistake, obviously due to the lack of clarity, which is the reason why I covered both sides in the first place.

I'm aware it's an example now, but, as I've already said, that was due to the lack of clarity until then. There was nothing to show that it was purely just an example and a fair bit which could suggest that it wasn't. That is why I covered both sides, just in case. If it was just an example, why didn't you just state that it was and then respond to the relevant part instead of acting as though I completely missed the entire point, which I didn't because I responded to it either way.

About CGI, budget's hardly a decisive factor. There are some animations for humans that have a really low budget, and others that have a really high budget and the same goes for aliens. The point of the matter is that, although there may be more things to get right for humans, they're right here with us. We can get the movement easily by using one of those special suits. You can get all the details because they're right hear around us and we have an amazing knowledge base of both appearance and anatomical structure, which we do not have for other things. Everything has to be planned and made to look like a plausible creature for aliens, while people can just be copied. Just look at the Blizzard cinematics if you want an example. The Terran look realistic. It's low quality, but they look realistic. The Protoss and Zerg on the other hand, do not work well overall. Budget is irrelevant, as they share the same budget, and the same goes for technology.

 

Just looks like you are trying to make the SCV operator look more appealing. He is supposed to be a mere worker. Some of the portraits will look cool and fancy and...girlish. But the SCV has always been the nose-pickin' cigar smokin' type if you ask me. I wouldn't mind if they made the current one more realistic though.

 

^ thats just an example of a more realistic unit portrait. not my suggestion for an scv portrait or anything.

 

the weather forcast today seems bad...

i just want to say that the unit portrait for the SCV is kind old, from the units sounds of sc1 these guys seems to be gonna sound more matured, did some of those former SCVs survive the brood wars? If so maybe they should promote/increase their salary lol.... anyway thats better compared to the youthful gayish unit sounds for the former SCV, with the other unit portraits im glad they werent able to make the cut, but its not so bad randomizing unit portraits of scvs at all, and maybe perhaps we can have our own gif portraits overlap units in the editor. The first potrait is more likely the winner among those candidates

 

why are we talking about the scv now


we are talking about cooler portraits IN GENERAL, not just for the scv, so would you all pleasse shush about that.

 

They look fine the way they are. And really why bother making the unit pics that high quality/realistic when your hardly ever gonna be looking at them? Not to mention the likely imcrease in system requirements for something so minor.

 

you Dont get the Mans point do you?
you are all wrong here Sorry!

he doesnt say to put THOSE unit portraits or styles-cloths colors etc in starcafts2 portrate,
he Just Says Blizzard to make Some Sort CINEMATIC QUALITY porttrais and put in the game!
that will Actually BE LESS VGA consuming than the current ones!

PreRendere Cinematic Portrais its Just A VIDEO, it doesnt and it take Very few resources from your 3D Card to be displayed!!!!!!! as 2d video not even hd quality! like C&C and the ingame cinematics!

on the other hand the current 3d portatrats are 3D Models are NOT PRerender and that means that your VGA will not anly has to do all the dirty work for your Battlefield, But your VGA will spend Enough resources and FPS to render those Portatrs realtime too!

So i Totally AGREE with Zeratul11's Opinion!