SC 2 - 3D or Advanced 2D?

Advanced 2D, or 3D graphics?

  • Advanced 2D graphics

    Votes: 12 63.2%
  • 3D graphics (Similar to WC3)

    Votes: 7 36.8%

  • Total voters
    19

Renzokuken

Saved
Joined
Oct 11, 2002
Messages
8,812
Reaction score
12
Location
Zanarkand
Now i know this has been asked in the past, but i thought i might bring it up again.

Would you like SC 2 to have 3D graphics, similar to WC3, or advanced 2D graphics?
 

Moof-Ader

Member!
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
Messages
1,276
Reaction score
0
Location
In my room
Website
www.battleforums.com
SC 2 should have graphics like WC3 because WC3 is a really good game. 3D graphics are just so much better, the graphics should be good because it has to have good graphics to make it be a super game. Not saying that the graphics are the whole game, but it looks so much better with better graphics.
 

Guest

Premium Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2003
Messages
3,905
Reaction score
2
Location
New york
Website
gamerz-lounge.com
If you asked me which just blunted outmI'd say 2-d. Mailly because instead f your avrage 90 supply it is 200(unless they make up 200 for3-D, Which I highly doubt). That is .....one.....two......three.....110 more supply!! But know to the point. I voted 3-D because that is probably what Blzzard is going to do. Make 3-D graphics off War III's because they are lazy bastards and don't want to start a whole new graphics project.
 

Supa

Member!
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Location
Sturgeon Bay, WI
I must go with
"Shity Graphics 2D"

2D would keep the Ultra Massing Style of gameplay :), which we have all grown to love..and the shity graphics would allow us to keep all those Mideval style maps..Which make up a HUGE portion of UMS...

You would loose some of the cool camera functions...etc...

They should infact release 4 versions of the game...
1 would be a low graphic 3d version
2 would be a high graphic 3d version.
3 would be a low graphic 2d version.
4 would be a high graphic 2d version.

Yes i know how long that would take for blizzard...but...umm...
Ahh who cares...as long as it gets released..

I vote for 2d!
 

TrongaMonga

Grumpy Old Grandpa
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Messages
10,126
Reaction score
41
Location
Portugal
My computer sucks, and I'm used to play SC in 2D :)
 

Wing Zero

lol just as planned
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
12,206
Reaction score
16
2d SC make ur army look bigger

3d makes look puny
 

Renzokuken

Saved
Joined
Oct 11, 2002
Messages
8,812
Reaction score
12
Location
Zanarkand
If SC-2 came out tomorrow, i'd vote 2D. But since it isn't, i voted 3D because it'd just be a nice change to the 2D graphics we see today on SC & BW, and hopefully my computer will be good enough by then to run SC 2.

Also, i doubt Blizzard would make SC-2 2D, because honestly, the gaming media would critisize Blizzard for making a game that is so similar to it's predecessor, and Blizzard wont want that. So i reckon we should expect a 3D game similar to WC3, if we are to expect a SC-2 at all. Besides, i like the fact that WC3 only has 90 food supply, so you have to rely on awesome strategies and micro-management. Hopefully they don't install invincible heroes that can wipe out an entire army :rolleyes
 

Guest

Premium Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2003
Messages
3,905
Reaction score
2
Location
New york
Website
gamerz-lounge.com
Originally posted by Renzokuken
Hopefully they don't install invincible heroes that can wipe out an entire army :rolleyes
Lol. I can imgane a level 10 Zeatual that takes out 24 archons in like 10 seconds.
 

FakeNameHere

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
3,090
Reaction score
0
Website
www.battleforums.com
Both choices suck since Blizzard always develops a NEW graphics engine, one that will surpass the WC3's Cartoonish [Yes it is designed to look cartoonish] into life-like and serious resolutions. The engine will be faster and smoother then any graphics engine we've seen before.
 

dreamcrusader

Member!
Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
268
Reaction score
0
Location
City 17
Website
Visit site
I say advance 2d. Warcraft is goofy looking in my opinion even though the game is great. I just hope that if its advance 2d Blizzard bumps ip the resolution. and as FakeNameHere said, in the past they always make a new engine. So im perrty satasfied.
 

Sakuhta

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
3,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Originally posted by Renzokuken
Now i know this has been asked in the past, but i thought i might bring it up again.
Obviously it's been asked in the past... you stole this poll directly off of StarGhost.com...
 

Goliath[SGL]

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2004
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
BC, Canada
Website
www.battlefourms.com
Yah, I'd pick 3-d cause I'd make the game way cooler, although, I want them to have those cool animated portraits, like in the original SC, not like in WC3 which is kinda lame...

So I vote for : 3-D!!
 

Guest

Premium Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2003
Messages
3,905
Reaction score
2
Location
New york
Website
gamerz-lounge.com
Maybe a toggle abilty might work....though it would take a long time :(.
 

l)aRkArTaNiS-

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2004
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Pewaukee, Wisconsin
I really like the graphics in warcraft3....so i voted for 3D
But obviously as Fakenamehere said, they would come out with a whole new engine to make the graphics for SC 2
 

New threads

Top