Quote
|
Do you like the new look of the landscapes?
|
To an extent. Thus far, they seem faithful in conveying the same vibe that their predecessors did. However, there
are still problems. Most often cited is the issue with the cliffs; they're far too rounded. The edges need to be sharper and more defined, and, where applicable, erosion needs to be more naturally distributed (which is to say, unevenly).
Also, a notable issue that has come up on some of the maps is the matter of color interfering with unit recognition.
This Thread on the Battle.net forums sums up the issue nicely, and even goes as far as to say how the problem can be corrected.
Quote
|
How does the Terran faction look visually?
|
On the whole, the Terrans look much like their two-dimensional counterparts. However, there are a number of gripes for a great deal of the models that need to be addressed:
Buildings: Some of the buildings still look like they're made by PlaySchool or Mattel, which makes them somewhat out-of place compared to the more realistic ones. In
this screenshot, for example, the Barracks and the Shadow Ops look nice and well-made, but the Refinery and Command Center (and, to a lesser extent, the Factory and the add-ons) look too
new and undetailed. More grit, grime, and rust is needed to round these structures out. Wear and tear, as it were. And simply changing the color of the vertices won't cut it; you need to actually add some
detail.
Thor: Much like the buildings, it suffers from the lack of apparent use that the Terrans are famous for. Its far too shiny, and it looks more like a toy than a weapon of terror. It needs to look like it means business.
SCV: Two things: ditch the drill-bit, and make the jets red again.
The drill-bit just looks silly, especially when its repairing something. The fusion cutter, at least, was ambiguous enough that we could assume that it could function as both a cutting and a welding torch. And, despite being colored Protoss-blue, the graphic was different enough that it could be easily distinguished.
The jump jets on the back are both
way too glowy, and, oddly, very blue where everything else fire-related is quite orange-red. Terran stuff is supposed to be notoriously inefficient, giving off more heat than light (or lift, for that matter), so why make a complete reversal of a design philosophy on something as lowly as the Space Construction Vehicle? If you're worried that it might look too much like the Reaper's jet-pack, then make the SCV's flame more red, or more orange, so that it can be differentiated.
Marine: Not much complaint here. The bayonet is smaller now, which is good, but it would still be appreciated if it was removed entirely if it doesn't serve any purpose other than just being there.
Banshee: The model is great, but is suffers from a lack of team identification markings. Adding a few, small colored patched around the rotors (read: NOT the whole thing, just part-way around) would be nice.
Cobra: I like the design, regardless of what others might say. Its both sleek and functional; all it needs is a little wear to make it look more Terran-esqe.
Viking: The concept art was spot-on, but the in-game model seems to have differentiated from the original blueprints for the worse. On paper it looked functional and menacing, in-game it just looks clumsy. See what you can do to bring it more in-line with the original concept.
Battlecruiser: I don't know why, really, but there's just something about the new model that makes it look
smaller than it should be. Perhaps the new design is just a little bit
too busy, with various bits sticking out here and there at exaggerated positions. If you made it look a little more formal, like the command ship its supposed to be, that might help.
Quote
|
How does the Protoss faction look visually?
|
Thus far? Very nice. All the Protoss models are very shiny new-looking, which is good for their paradigm. Nevertheless, there are some irks about some matters:
Team Colors: Psi blades, pylons, and the like should not need to be team colored. If they detract from a model's identifyability, then perhaps you need to tone down the glow, or up the amount of color on the model itself. If you absolutely insist, then at least try to have the player's color "pulse" through periodically, instead of displaying it 24/7.
Zealots: Some people have complained about this, so I'll give it some mention. The current Zealot, although it looks stellar in design, is animated as such so that it looks like a prancing ninja. We though that the
Dark Templar were the ninjas? And more than that, the attack is so slow it looks, visually, weak. If there is more than one attack animation then this doesn't matter so much, but as it stands it doesn't hold up well.
Stalkers: The current model will do, but the concept art looked better. Other than that, no real complaints.
Dark Templar: Heavy armor and unwieldily warp-scythes are not befitting of a unit that is supposed to be an assassin. If anything, that sort of armor should belong to the the Zealots. If you absolutely
insist on a two-handed weapon, then use something more subtle, like a staff.
Quote
|
What overall theme do you think fits the SC universe best? (i.e. realistic, huge disproportionalities, etc)
|
Semi-realistic. Where applicable, it is appropriate over-exaggerate things, but a unit looks a whole lot less menacing when is doesn't look very believable. So, at the very least, the
ilusion of reality needs to be maintained, even in a universe with battling aliens and space marines.
Quote
|
Do you feel that SCII's art is more like SC or WCIII?
|
You know, the art honestly
tries to look like the SC1 sprites, but a lot of the time, it ends up looking like WCIII's lower-polygon models.
Quote
|
How much cartooniness is necessary in the SC universe?
|
Some is required, in order to suspend disbelief. However, the larger the unit gets, the more noticeable it is, and, therefore, a lot less 'cartooniness' is permissible. In a battle, people are going to be paying more attention to a Thor or a Battlecruiser than a lowly Marine.
Quote
|
How should the switch to 3d affect this universe's art?
|
If all goes well, it should get more detailed than before, instead of less so.
Quote
|
Do you like SCII's art style?
|
So far, its a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it I've absolutely fallen in love with, but at other time's I'm far from certain I actually like a new model.
Connect with Facebook
[December Discussion Topic] Art Direction
Few complaints here. It would be nice to see a little less team color and a little more rusty metal standard colors. Prime candidates include the Thor and some of the structures. It would help if the textures on buildings were given a little more depth; if it's just gray, that's no better than it being just purple. It needs to look a little worn, a little grimy. Patches here and there, so it doesn't look like all shiny plates of one color intermixed with another.
I love the model, but I think there's just a bit too much color on him that's overbearing, and it's really unimmersive, reminds us that we're playing a game and not seeing an actual war unfold. For contrast, the Marines have a nice mix of color and look great in that screenshot, very un-toyish. 
Linear Mode
