SC: RM Feedback/Inconsistencies Mega-Thread [Archive]

Undeadprotoss

03-28-2017, 07:26 PM

So from the very beginning I've thought that the art style in StarCraft 1 played an essential role in the player's enjoyment of the story, because it helped create a dark sci-fi atmosphere. This thread is just my idea of cataloging all the potential differences between the original StarCraft and the Remastered version.

i'm personally worried when it comes to all things splash art related (https://giphy.com/gifs/blizzard-ent-starcraft-brood-war-xUPGcuHQiGu7XF2N9K) but ESPECIALLY with the unit portraits. Unit portraits back in the day were done with specific backgrounds, angles, effects that made the units seem mysterious, which played on your imagination.

In SC2, you basically have all god damn units looking directly at the camera without anything interesting going on. Unlike in SC1 where you had the Archon's eyes obscured by purple flame, and the High Templar's face was perpetually covered by shadow.

The Protoss concern me especially, instead of having the leathery/spotted skin they are depicted in virtually all old concept art such as:

http://classic.battle.net/images/broodwar/pix/wall/fenixprev.jpg
http://classic.battle.net/images/broodwar/pix/wall/zeraprev.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/b7/2e/8b/b72e8b884729267dd0b9e7f4c328cc92.jpg
http://classic.battle.net/images/broodwar/pix/wall/protprev.jpg
https://www.diablowiki.net/images/0/0a/Mart01_t.jpg
http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/2/26/Tassadar_SC1_Art1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20071115114821
http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/b/bd/ZealotLarva_SC1_Cncpt1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110810130953

They instead have this saggy skin kind of look, which I don't like at all and am afraid will carry over to Tassadar, Fenix, Aldaris, Zeratul, etc. Even with the zerg in the gif I link to earlier in this post, the Hydralisk loses its trademark boney, skeletal look and instead goes for something much more muscular and meaty, which wasn't how the SC1 hydralisks looked at all.

But those are just some of my first impressions and concerns, what are yours?

Robear

03-28-2017, 08:06 PM

I wouldn't worry about those 3 promo art faces at all. Yes, this hydralisk looks like crap, but it's because it's just a hastily edited version of the SC2 hydralisk model, and won't be in the actual game.

If you look at the SC2 hydra model, you can see all its features, from the bony structure around the eyes to the thick, meaty mandibles with very large teeth on the ends, to that one silly pointy tooth in the middle of the upper jaw, the ugly bumpy nose area... All those features are in the Remastered splash art hydra unchanged, they just made it brown and shiny and called it a day.

https://static.starcraft.com/images/content/races/zerg/zerg-bust-194ea5e0e633bdba8aa602e1343d26163b9ec732bf7bb6993d 06ce9d3795b140c322a22c155446afc78a2be53c880085a17d 70b1fe1462ddccae27ddb8b228b3.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/oLku8uA.jpg

For the actual portraits in game, this is the new remastered hydralisk face design they are using, which is a departure from the original, yes, but at least it looks badass, and has a similar sense of lighting, angle, saliva streaming from its mouth, etc. And the background looks very similar to the old one.

http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/lichter/SCR/Hydralisk.jpg
Not really sure why they wanted to change the old design at all, but I actually think this is way better than the SC2 hydra. Definitely hope they don't put that ugly one in the launcher as the logo or anything though.

I am curious to see what they do with the Protoss faces... But they're at least trying to stay mostly faithful with the other portraits they have shown. Like, I'm satisfied with the wraith (http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/lichter/SCR/Wraith.jpg), SCV, and the guardian (https://i.imgur.com/AmfolmM.jpg) is also fine. Battlecruiser looks very like the original.

http://i.imgur.com/mHxKqNw.png

http://i.imgur.com/tDLtyLN.png

Undeadprotoss

03-28-2017, 08:21 PM

Thanks a ton for the clarification on the hydralisk face Robear.

I wonder how different the still unit portraits like the other Hydralisk picture you posted will be from the mobile unit portraits (In SC1 I believe they were all mobile, behaving a lot like Gifs). If that's the case, there could be more room for the remastered hydralisk to look more similar to it's original counterpart. That's really where a lot of the camera angles come into play with these unit portraits.

On the topic of Protoss faces, I noticed that they seemed to use the same kind of skin for the Protoss Archon portrait, AND it seems like they are making the eyes visible,just as they did on the remastered model with little slits for eyes (which in all fairness, may make the model cooler/more ominous) but in general, I think the more obscurity the better with those kinds of things.

2496

- - - Updated - - -

Come to think of it, I think the art style they are employing with the article may simply be the art style that they are using for the comic book series and still frames. The guardian and especially the wraith came out very well indeed.

Visions of Khas

03-28-2017, 08:35 PM

They instead have this saggy skin kind of look, which I don't like at all and am afraid will carry over to Tassadar, Fenix, Aldaris, Zeratul, etc

There seems to be some variation. Some Protoss have what appear to be this thicker, leathery texture to the skin, potentially formed of scutes or osteoderms, often with ornate cranial ridges. This can be seen in High Templar and the SCRM promo pic. Others, like Artanis, have a more delicately textured skin, with intricate patterns emerging from the scales. Finally, females have very smooth skin and delicately structured cranial ridges (a sign of neoteny).

So the scales and cranial ridge, taken together, indicate age. So everything we've seen from Wings of Liberty forward (including existant content from the Remastered version) should all be canonical. So I expect to see both variation going forward.

Undeadprotoss

03-28-2017, 08:37 PM

Now that I think about it even more, I think the lack of darkness and the lighting in a lot of these shots is what I don't like. Having the SCV be in a dark shot and having the Battlecruiser pilot be in a poorly lit portrait helps create a foreboding atmosphere. I think that's what a lot of these portraits are missing, they're very faithful, but if they JUST had the lighting right they would be godly.

I think that all goes back to a fundamental misunderstanding of StarCraft and it's atmosphere. I appreciate all of what the design team has done, but it's just this tiny detail.

Visions of Khas

03-28-2017, 08:45 PM

Now that I think about it even more, I think the lack of darkness and the lighting in a lot of these shots is what I don't like... I think that all goes back to a fundamental misunderstanding of StarCraft and it's atmosphere. I appreciate all of what the design team has done, but it's just this tiny detail.
I think it's actually because of technical limitations that the original was so much better atmospherically. When developing StarCraft I, with their processing power and resources extremely limited, Blizzard artists were forced to think outside the box to push character and atmosphere. Today, many artists focus on minute details in texture and models -- because that's what people expect. But this leads them away from implementing the additional atmospheric details.

When you closely examine some of the assets, as I have recently in learning the Editor, you can see this huge gulf in detail between models. This indicates a major push for quantity over quality.

KaiserStratosTygo

03-28-2017, 08:50 PM

I can easily understand the concern over this, as I have some reservations too. hopefully they don't SC2ize this game, I will explode into a supernova if they pull that shit.

Undeadprotoss

03-28-2017, 08:51 PM

I think it's actually because of technical limitations that the original was so much better atmospherically. When developing StarCraft I, with their processing power and resources extremely limited, Blizzard artists were forced to think outside the box to push character and atmosphere. Today, many artists focus on minute details in texture and models -- because that's what people expect. But this leads them away from implementing the additional atmospheric details.

When you closely examine some of the assets, as I have recently in learning the Editor, you can see this huge gulf in detail between models. This indicates a major push for quantity over quality.

I completely agree, it's even more apparent when you consider the particular circumstances of SC1. It was during an incredibly pivotal moment for Blizzard as a company, there were several times when the team almost couldn't make payroll, and I think Mike Morhaim, Frank Pearce, and a couple other guys cashed in their debit cards at their local supermarkets to make sure they could have payroll every week. They were working with incredibly strained resources.

I would say though, having shadows and dim lighting is much easier to do with mobile portraits because the character will move around and occasionally you'll catch a larger glimpse of him/her/it. With a still portrait though, dim lighting means you can't see the damn character.

If there is one detail that would perfect SC:RM, it would be this, I pray they notice it in time.

Undeadprotoss

03-28-2017, 09:00 PM

I can easily understand the concern over this, as I have some reservations too. hopefully they don't SC2ize this game, I will explode into a supernova if they pull that shit.

I feel like they definitely get that there are differences in the art style between SC1 and SC2, but I don't know if the art team knows how vast they potentially are. I doubt they would try to emulate SC2 though.

Visions of Khas

03-28-2017, 09:03 PM

I think it might also be a matter of artistic pride. When an artist puts a lot of time and work into textures and models, they want it to be seen. Aside from Amon's portraits, atmosphere is almost totally non-existent in unit portraits.

KaiserStratosTygo

03-28-2017, 09:04 PM

I feel like they definitely get that there are differences in the art style between SC1 and SC2, but I don't know if the art team knows how vast they potentially are. I doubt they would try to emulate SC2 though.

Artwise I don't think they would either, but those "comic book" briefing things have me a bit worried (as well as potential re-recorded lines)

Undeadprotoss

03-28-2017, 09:12 PM

I think they also don't see a need to not have the unit portraits facing the camera directly, because the paradigm they're reasoning with is that you want to see as much of the unit as possible. Though I still am curious to see how the mobile unit portraits will turn out.

On a side note: Do you think there'd be any way we could influence the art team on this? I was thinking to make a Reddit post or something before it's too late.

sandwich_bird

03-29-2017, 09:38 AM

Wait a minute... you're telling me they're using still cartoon drawings for the unit portraits??? How did I miss that.. Ugh, that's pretty bad. Why not just take the 3d models they used for sc1 and try to upgrade them? Or, depending on how many frames the portraits had, they could just upscale, use some filters to sharpen and have an artist draw over to clean. The process probably isn't a lot more different/demanding than what they're already doing with the unit sprites. These portrait animations had like what, 10-15 frames? You don't even need to redo every single frames, just the major ones and use other techniques to generate the in-betweens.

Maybe the whole reason we have drawn storyboards instead of old-school briefings and cinematics (I'm guessing the cinematics are gone too?) is because they weren't able to make their old 3d assets look good or it was too expensive to make them look good vs just having a bunch of 2d art. I can't argue with the effectiveness of their choice but it's disappointing.

It was during an incredibly pivotal moment for Blizzard as a company, there were several times when the team almost couldn't make payroll, and I think Mike Morhaim, Frank Pearce, and a couple other guys cashed in their debit cards at their local supermarkets to make sure they could have payroll every week. They were working with incredibly strained resources.

I'm not sure about that part. I know I heard this from Morhaim in their 20th anniversary video or something like that but I think the particular situation you're describing was pre-warcraft 1 or pre-warcraft 2 but I'd find it hard to believe that it was post-warcraft 2. I would expect them to be well off financially after the success of WC2.

Robear

03-29-2017, 11:17 AM

Why not just take the 3d models they used for sc1 and try to upgrade them? Or, depending on how many frames the portraits had, they could just upscale, use some filters to sharpen and have an artist draw over to clean.

They no longer have the original 3D files for the portraits, and if they did they'd probably be horribly broken after having to be imported through 20 years of iteration in 3D software and file formats.
Additionally, each of the portraits has like hundreds of frames. Way too many to touch up by hand. Maybe also a reason they also don't want to straight up reuse the originals is because the terrans' mouth movements aren't actually synced to the lines they say. Which didn't bother anyone back in the day, but now they might want to avoid.

or it was too expensive to make them look good vs just having a bunch of 2d art

Yeah this is my guess, and I'm sure they won't be doing redoing the cinematics. :( Would be awesome, but would be way too expensive.

That said, they do seem to be animating the new portraits— if you look at the 3rd clip here, after it shows the old Aldaris and Sci Vessel portraits, you can see the new Battlecruiser portrait moving (http://giant.gfycat.com/OrneryPettyFlies.mp4). I'm not sure, but maybe they'll be taking the 2D paintings and then projection mapping them onto simple 3D models, just to give them the ability to slightly change angle and blink and stuff. I'm definitely very curious to see how much they do.

TheEconomist

03-29-2017, 11:20 AM

Oh, man .. Those unit portraits .. Not sure how I feel about this...

Visions of Khas

03-29-2017, 12:10 PM

Comic- and animatic-style cutscenes and portraits have made a comeback in video games over the last few years. They'll cite comic book movies as an influence, but I'm convinced it's a matter of saving time and resources rather than a genuine desire for stylistic diversity.

sandwich_bird

03-29-2017, 12:17 PM

That said, they do seem to be animating the new portraits— if you look at the 3rd clip here, after it shows the old Aldaris and Sci Vessel portraits, you can see the new Battlecruiser portrait moving (http://giant.gfycat.com/OrneryPettyFlies.mp4). I'm not sure, but maybe they'll be taking the 2D paintings and then projection mapping them onto simple 3D models, just to give them the ability to slightly change angle and blink and stuff. I'm definitely very curious to see how much they do.

Seeing the BC portrait in your link vs the image posted earlier, I'd say it looks better in-game than taken out of context I guess. The SCV though... Ugh, we'll see!

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 04:32 PM

To Robear: I just saw the link and it indeed does look like the Battlecrusier portrait is mobile. Yet it also seems as if the lights are pointing directly as his face, which might mean a pretty well-lit picture when it's through with development.

There's no doubt in my mind that Blizzard will do moving portraits. The problem is, the more things the Classic Games team needs to do from scratch. the more ambiguity they are introduced with, and it becomes less likely they can/will preserve the exact atmosphere and lighting that is distilled within those portraits.

On a side note, I just got a Linkedin account to see if I could message one of the developers, hopefully they see it.

Artwise I don't think they would either, but those "comic book" briefing things have me a bit worried (as well as potential re-recorded lines)

So I was also really worried about the re-recording of lines, but everything available seems to strongly suggest they are remastering the sounds, sort of like how they did in those old Disney movies (albeit with far better technology). The Official Website (starcraft.com) says that the remastered version will have "remastered dialogue and audio", which leads me to believe that the terms remastered, revised, re-recored, etc are all just taken interchangeably to mean they are updating what they already have. They KNOW how important the voices were in StarCraft 1, I'd be willing to bet money they wouldn't bring in a new voice actor for a single line.

With the briefings, I agree, it is interesting. I really liked the old mission screens and the tattered look they had on them. The new interfaces for all of the races seem much more clean and shiny, which I am a bit concerned about. If you go to (Starcraft.com) there's a picture in the back with Carriers purifying Mar Sara, I think that's the kind of "comic book" style stuff they're going at.

______________________

There's so much potential in this project......anyone remember the mission "Choosing Sides" where you took Tassadar into that facility and every now and then an infested Terran would try to explode right next to you? That kind of stuff was incredibly atmospheric back then, if they do the atmosphere right, you could potentially have a StarCraft 1 experience that was better and more immersive than even the original was, oh boy, I have high hopes.

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 04:35 PM

Can't delete this post either, universe is a cruel place.

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 04:39 PM

Tried deleting this post can't for some reason

Robear

03-29-2017, 05:15 PM

TheEconomist

03-29-2017, 05:24 PM

Hmmmm, must assimiliate new information. Not sure what to think.

Also, nice patch notes. Looking forward to it.

Who would of that that a remaster of SCBW would get me possibly more excited than the mission packs.

Gradius

03-29-2017, 05:40 PM

TheEconomist

03-29-2017, 05:42 PM

Harsh ... but, possibly true. We shall see how little they mess up.

Also, I'm going to change my last statement back to the original 'more excited than HotS and LotV' since that might even be true.

Nissa

03-29-2017, 05:43 PM

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 05:52 PM

....

NO. BAD BLIZZARD. GET IN YOUR CORNER.

*sigh*

I just want them to leave the old stuff alone. I liked the art style the way it was. On the plus side, maybe this'll get people playing the original again, maybe get the newbies up to speed on why the original was so good.

I share your love of the old art style/atmosphere. I think some of the portraits are encouraging, even if they are still missing out on the subtleties that make them atmospheric and visceral. Keep a note though that all of the portraits are still drawings, they don't have the digital realism that they will hopefully have when released.

With the portrait Pete Stilwell is using in that forum link for instance, the skin/body of the archon is actually visible, instead of in SC1 where just the outline was visible but clouded by smoke.

TheEconomist

03-29-2017, 05:56 PM

....

NO. BAD BLIZZARD. GET IN YOUR CORNER.

*sigh*

I just want them to leave the old stuff alone. I liked the art style the way it was. On the plus side, maybe this'll get people playing the original again, maybe get the newbies up to speed on why the original was so good.

You can always go back to the old client. This new stuff is for people that want a modern Battle.net for SCBW, and, if it delivers on that, it is worth it. Not much more damage can be done to SCBW that hasn't already been done, the worst that can happen is that we ignore the remake for story.

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 06:02 PM

Is it just me, or did some of the portraits get darker these past few days? That sounds crazy.

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 06:30 PM

Oh shit, looks like a lot of the portraits are available on the bnet forums. They look.... mixed.

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/starcraft/topic/20753915707

BC and Hydra are the best because they're dark. The drone is also spot-on...

https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/user_avatar/v0/V0SMW9XPHCT21490387685456.jpeg

But the Zergling is not good. At all.

https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/user_avatar/18/18MQTXXMWY6O1490387689254.jpeg

:(

While the Zergling looks too different from the original, I would still say it's a good sign that the carapace seems to follow the SC1 style well. I'd also note that this Zergling is a drawing, and not what the mobile portrait will look like (hopefully)

By the way, I NEVER noticed the big, buggy, red eyes on the drone. I think the original background (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNHJ3Xr6EQI) was a similar shade of red so I saw them as not having eyes. Interesting.

Robear

03-29-2017, 06:44 PM

By the way, I NEVER noticed the big, buggy, red eyes on the drone. I think the original background (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNHJ3Xr6EQI) was a similar shade of red so I saw them as not having eyes. Interesting.

That's pretty funny to me, since it had an animation where it blinks. :P

http://i.imgur.com/JDUN7UU.gif

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 06:52 PM

WHAT??? That's a pretty high quality portrait of the drone, maybe I was always playing on low brightness or something. Gah!

I think the ultimate test of the SC1 art-style is if the images in Economist's avatar can be remastered while retaining soul/atmosphere. The picture of the Protoss behind Mar Sara is what really does it for me.

Undeadprotoss

03-29-2017, 07:18 PM

The new SCV pilot just dosen't look like a GEEK. Imagine hearing his lines (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrcuvk1qApE) from the new guy. The SCV in SC1 was just some poor guy doing his job. You remember that mission with the Psi Emitter in Brood War were you got to pick up all the elite zerg? At one point he said "Um, with all due respect to Miss Kerrigan, sir... these critters make me nervous as hell! I sure would appreciate some immediate evac.". That's a guy that dosen't seem ready for conflict.

Now compare the two:
2497
2498

One of these guys is cool, calm, and collected. The other guy is just trying to get unionized. I think, as is generally the case with most of the still portraits, this won't represent the final product completely. One only has to compare the still photos in SC2 to the actual portraits to get an idea of that.

sandwich_bird

03-29-2017, 09:39 PM

That's pretty funny to me, since it had an animation where it blinks. :P

http://i.imgur.com/JDUN7UU.gif

For some reason I always thought that the eye was the yellow circle:

http://i.imgur.com/RDrLOQs.png

I also thought Raynor was black or at least mulatto and I thought the dragoon had a wig and a monocle(I mean, it is actually some kind of monocle but I was really seeing it as some kind of Renaissance butler)

http://i.imgur.com/VJb4Yh8.png

These graphics were really ambiguous for 10 year old me :p

But, to come back to the new forum finding, I'm hoping that

https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/user_avatar/18/18MQTXXMWY6O1490387689254.jpeg

is a ling without speed and when you get speed it gets the horns like on the original

http://ksam.narod.ru/zzerglin_nm.gif

That's probably just wishful thinking though... I don't know why they'd be faithful to the original in some cases and take more liberties in other cases

Visions of Khas

03-30-2017, 05:44 AM

That Zergling is definitely Mr Jack material. I wonder who did the Drone. Mr Jack is a wonderful artist, but I fear his style is too cartoony for StarCraft.

TheEconomist

03-30-2017, 07:19 AM

For some reason I always thought that the eye was the yellow circle:

I always thought the same thing.

I also thought Raynor was black or at least mulatto and I thought the dragoon had a wig and a monocle(I mean, it is actually some kind of monocle but I was really seeing it as some kind of Renaissance butler)

I never thought this thing :D

I forgot that the Zergling used to have horns like that. Come to think of it, they looked pretty dracon to me.

The new SCV pilot just dosen't look like a GEEK.

You're right. The new SCV looks more like a low-level street corner hustler than a cowardly nerd.

I think the ultimate test of the SC1 art-style is if the images in Economist's avatar can be remastered while retaining soul/atmosphere. The picture of the Protoss behind Mar Sara is what really does it for me.

I agree completely. The Protoss Victory and Defeat splash screens, for me, represent StarCraft and its feel more than just about anything else.

Any news on AI/Pathfinding improvements? If they keep that exactly the same just for nostalgia/teamliquid sake, I'll be pretty disappointed. Hopefully, the missile bug is fixed to and I may actually make a Valkyrie for once in a MP game.

Undeadprotoss

03-30-2017, 07:50 PM

Any news on AI/Pathfinding improvements? If they keep that exactly the same just for nostalgia/teamliquid sake, I'll be pretty disappointed. Hopefully, the missile bug is fixed to and I may actually make a Valkyrie for once in a MP game.

Aggh. I'm afraid to say that the pathfinding/AI will remain *exactly* the same as in SC1/BW in order to preserve the original gameplay. I'm not sure if they plan on fixing any bugs or anything like that as they have become part of the gameplay over the years (missed reaver shots, dragoon AI before singularity charge, etc)

I agree completely. The Protoss Victory and Defeat splash screens, for me, represent StarCraft and its feel more than just about anything else.

There's something about those two splash screens that make them perfect distillations of StarCraft. I honestly think part of the reason the Protoss victory screen looks so good is because it's obviously directly inspired by the story of Protoss showing up above Mar Sara and just a pure desire to make the Protoss look as badass and close to the source material as possible, without any outside meddling or interference.

Back then, splash art was meant to help flesh out the world they couldn't fully bring out with pixels, that's why they're done so well and feel so immersive. I have a feeling (perhaps too optimistic but nonetheless) that a lot of these things will get better with polish in the months leading up to release.

On a side note: I heard that someone said the classic StarCraft box art we all saw initially wasn't actually done by Blizzard, but was outsourced instead. I don't know if that's true or not, but I hope so, would explain the use of SC2's hydralisk model as Robear pointed out.

You're right. The new SCV looks more like a low-level street corner hustler than a cowardly nerd.

I have a glimmer of hope that they'll notice what would be a glaring difference between the look and feel of the portrait, and the sound and feel of the voice when they are paired together.

TheEconomist

03-30-2017, 08:19 PM

I understand that some of the path finding is necessary so as to preserve the game play and the non-clumpiness found in SC2, but, surely, there's some improvements that can be made, like, you know, maybe when you tell a Dragoon to up a ramp, it actually goes up the damn ramp.

GnaReffotsirk

03-30-2017, 08:30 PM

Cern got to the drone portrait. Adding to the Mandela effect list.

TheEconomist

03-31-2017, 06:52 AM

God damnit, I've been mind-fucked too much already. I want to be back home in the Berenstein-verse!

There's something about those two splash screens that make them perfect distillations of StarCraft. I honestly think part of the reason the Protoss victory screen looks so good is because it's obviously directly inspired by the story of Protoss showing up above Mar Sara and just a pure desire to make the Protoss look as badass and close to the source material as possible, without any outside meddling or interference.

I agree COMPLETELY. Now, the splash screens are pretty much just standard landscape shots (although sometimes beautiful) or some action shot that just doesn't do it for me.

Long live creativity under restraints!

GnaReffotsirk

03-31-2017, 07:04 AM

NO! I am your father. Not convinced? Ask the mirror and say, "Magic mirror on the wall..."

And don't forget to wear your ADIDAS shoes on your left golden leg, and the ADDIDAS one on your right silver leg.

Then don't go having SEX and the City, especially after you're done having an INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE.

Because LIFE WAS LIKE A BOX OF CHOCOLATES, and you never want to have to say, HOUSTON WE'VE HAD A PROBLEM.

edit:
Are we getting the menu where there's a satellite, and carriers fighting?

TheEconomist

03-31-2017, 07:24 AM

Are we getting the menu where there's a satellite, and carriers fighting?

We got damn better!

Undeadprotoss

03-31-2017, 09:06 AM

Now, the splash screens are pretty much just standard landscape shots (although sometimes beautiful) or some action shot that just doesn't do it for me.

Long live creativity under restraints!

Now that I started thinking about it, I really think that the "creativity under restraint" mentality also came out in how the units were developed. The Drone/Hydralisk Den have all these weird patterns on their skin, as do a lot of the zerg buildings/units, which are removed or smoothed over in the remaster. I think stuff like that adds an important realism to the Zerg and the other races. They look like what Zerg, Protoss, or Terrans would look like if they actually existed (with all liberties with reality of the lore intact) if we were studying them in some futuristic anthropology class.

That might be looking WAY too into it, but I don't know, I think especially back then, when they didn't intend for SC1 to be played competitvely or anything near that, they took every tiny opportunity to bring the lore into the game via graphics and that clearly shows.

It's especially important to keep those subtle hints that the Zerg are sentient and have a self-actualizing purpose, to be genetically perfect and consume the Protoss.

Undeadprotoss

03-31-2017, 02:21 PM

NEW UNIT PORTRAITS AVAILABLE:

https:/facebook.com/StarCraft/

The Dark Archon WEARS A HOOD, what?? I used to always just assume that the black space to he right of his face was empty space and he was bald or something.

Gradius

03-31-2017, 04:19 PM

NEW UNIT PORTRAITS AVAILABLE:

https://m.facebook.com/StarCraft/

The Dark Archon WEARS A HOOD, what?? I used to always just assume that the black space to he right of his face was empty space and he was bald or something.
I mean yeah. You can tell his face is inside of it.

Undeadprotoss

03-31-2017, 04:27 PM

I mean yeah. You can tell his face is inside of it.

I just assumed the black space to the right was just that: black space. So I never had any reason to consider if he was something other than some baldy, his new stature looks more badass now though.

sandwich_bird

03-31-2017, 04:46 PM

I mean yeah. You can tell his face is inside of it.

man...that forever changes my perception of it. What I saw:

http://i.imgur.com/xEE0O8c.png

But I see the hood now. Wow....

Gradius

03-31-2017, 04:57 PM

Wow that's crazy. That's kind of how I viewed the dragoon and Fenix dragoon. My perception of them was skewed for years.

TheEconomist

03-31-2017, 05:28 PM

Haha, wow, seems like everyone had atleast one unit portrait they really misunderstood. Who would have thought that hardcore fans like us with (I'm sure) thousands of hours, would have this problem?

Also, LOL

ozavA_6LX3c

I anticipate this to be the fate of the StarCraft fandom in the future.

Robear

03-31-2017, 05:53 PM

The thing that's interesting to me is that the Guardian portrait this week is different than the one in the reveal last week. It's good to know that they're still iterating on things and that some things may be slightly improved, although I personally don't care for the change to red on the guardian mouth parts. Last week the colors were more like the original:

http://i.imgur.com/AmfolmM.jpg

I doubt they'll be adding team colors to the portraits, but I guess they could.

TheEconomist

03-31-2017, 06:03 PM

Still not sure how I feel about static artwork for portraits instead of the pixely, animated gobbled mess that I love so much.

GnaReffotsirk

04-01-2017, 12:45 AM

I found this as well: http://tip2006.deviantart.com/art/Dark-Archon-263532789

Apparently, the Dark Archon always had a hood now.

CEEEEEEERRRRRRNNNNN!

TheEconomist

04-01-2017, 06:23 AM

For once since the entire mind-fuck started, I've been on the side of remembering how it is in this universe. I fear much more of this and my brain shall split in two!

GnaReffotsirk

04-01-2017, 09:55 AM

Don't worry. Just turn on the TV, pop open a bottle of JOHNNIE WALKER, and watch an episode or two of the FLINSTONES. You'll never go insane like LOONEY TUNES are.

TheEconomist

04-01-2017, 10:52 AM

I would go mad in a world where Flinstones was the correct spelling *shivers*

Undeadprotoss

04-03-2017, 05:21 PM

So I was looking at the Dark Archon/Archon portraits (the latter is animated, used by Pete Stilwell), and I noticed a small detail.

In the original portraits, you didn't actually see any Protoss facial features. Rather, you saw a vague outline (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VA41XQMUi-4/hqdefault.jpg) of a Protoss that was heavily obscured by smoke. Compare that to the 2499. The latter is much more defined, and you can clearly make out the eyes and facial features, and even some expression. The same is true of the original Dark Archon (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/oFK52devenA/maxresdefault.jpg) versus the remastered Dark Archon (https://twitter.com/StarCraft/status/847882515528298496/photo/1)

To me, the former Archon portraits are much more mysterious and awe-inducing. The fact that you cannot ascertain exactly what is behind that outline implies it to be otherwordly, unnatural, or even godlike. Consider the description of regular Archons from the SC1 manual (http://ftp.blizzard.com/pub/misc/StarCraft.PDF):

These swirling, burning effigies of the Protoss spirit
radiate incalculable power, and their devastating psionic
storms can be unleashed against cowering enemy forces
both in the air and on the ground. Although the Protoss
are loathe to sacrifice valuable Templar, those that do
achieve this final level of commitment are honored in
the annals of the Templar Archives.

And the description of the Dark Archon from the little-known Brood War manual (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzEOSNC4iJX4dzFtWFZEUXZYU3M/view)

The burning, crimson effigy of the Dark Archon
spreads fear across any battlefield. These powerful
creatures of living psionic energy embody the eternal
wrath of the Dark Templar. Created by the merging
of any two Dark Templar warriors, the Dark Archon
can wield the mysterious energies of void. These
dire, volatile beings are so powerful that the Dark
Templar have outlawed their creation for a thousand
years. After the Zerg Swarm destroyed the plant Aiur,
the Dark Templar have realized the necessity of their
greatest weapons.

Both of them paint the picture of the Archons as otherworldly, implacable, and enigmatic. The lines between physical and spiritual are even blurred in their description. You're supposed to be in awe of the Archons, you're supposed to see them as incredibly powerful units that you get only in the most dire of circumstances. Regardless of how that worked in in-game, that's the picture that was painted. The remastered Archons are badasses, but they're not the right badasses for this job. They're too personal, and it'd be very difficult to imagine the old Archon audio playing with both of those guys.

GnaReffotsirk

04-06-2017, 01:54 AM

TheEconomist

04-06-2017, 08:40 AM

Yeah, I always thought of the Archons as more than just beefed up, armor Protoss submerged in energy.

Undeadprotoss

04-06-2017, 10:38 AM

The absence of eyes, and being "drowned" in psionic smoke makes the Archon somewhat a remainder, or shadow, or apparition, peaking through from the "other side".

Like a spirit/ghost almost.

I always thought of archons not as was depicted in the LotV cinematic, but as an entity in another dimension manifesting in this dimension through the energy around it.

Like a burning lint in the flame, ever fading, holding energy to itself.

Yeah that's just the thing, they're not supposed to feel material, they're supposed to feel otherwordly. I think the original developers kept it vague on purpose to achieve that effect.

TheEconomist

04-06-2017, 11:24 AM

It's funny that they went the fantasy, abstract, otherwordly route with everything else, but then decided to make what should be and has always been otherwordly into more material.

Undeadprotoss

04-06-2017, 11:31 AM

It is weird, it's almost like StarCraft 1 is the inverse of all of that. We always talk about the gritty, hard-sci element of SC, but there are plenty of straight-up references to souls, spirits of ancestors, etc in the manual and elsewhere. I think SC found that sweet spot where you make the fantastical, abstract, etc seem more intriguing because you place it in the context of a universe that feels more realistic.

Nissa

04-06-2017, 12:33 PM

Not only that, but how the spiritual stuff is used in the story. For example, humans in the K Sector are cynical, gritty, and usual scifi but the Protoss seem to represent all the spirituality lost to the humans. We're "wasteful" and "polluting", and Protoss are a more technologically advanced race who haven't lost hold of spirit, and in fact can be spiritual in ways humans cannot, eg archons, the Khala, void-study, etc. The game uses spirituality to tell the difference between our species, and, ironically enough, even the Zerg come across as more spiritual than the Terrans.

Undeadprotoss

05-02-2017, 11:11 AM

Does anyone feel like the new Dragoon looks/feels a bit different? For comparison this is the new model (https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/gallery/HJIMRH145ATT1492476406520.jpg), and this is the old model. (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/commons/images/c/c7/Dragoon.png).

I feel like the back-legs are a little more prominent in the old model, even though you need to look really closely to see it, the front legs are very pointy and are much smaller compared to the back-legs. The whole old dragoon also looks very sturdy, with the back-legs almost looking like plate. In the new one there is more circuitry, which looks badass, but it might be better if it were less prominent in that way.

KaiserStratosTygo

05-09-2017, 11:43 AM

I think the difference is that the remaster goon is angled more like everything else in the game.

Undeadprotoss

05-12-2017, 05:28 PM

BIG UPDATE

So with the new update (https://starcraft.com/en-us/articles/20722027) from Blizzard, we have portraits for both Tassadar and Raynor.

Old Raynor (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/jtR_xbNx6Q0/hqdefault.jpg)
New Raynor
(https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/gallery/WEO970OIKUWO1494459645378.jpg)
Old Tassadar (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/O8yT1CmTnww/maxresdefault.jpg)
New Tassadar (https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/gallery/mu/MUHQAAPKZYWZ1494459744415.jpg)

What do you guys think? I literally gasped out loud when I saw Tassadar's, it looked very impressive, but I would still say there are some differences in the face/skin/eyes, I'll write something up about it.

TheEconomist

05-12-2017, 06:12 PM

I guess Raynor's face got retconned again.

As for Tassadar, not sure if I can ever gauge the quality accurate given how iconic Tassadar's portrait is to me lol

Undeadprotoss

05-12-2017, 07:13 PM

I guess Raynor's face got retconned again.

As for Tassadar, not sure if I can ever gauge the quality accurate given how iconic Tassadar's portrait is to me lol

I agree Raynor's face looks a little too different, as does the skin/eyes on Tassadar. I think thematically both portraits look a little too "postitive" in contrast to the nigh-apocalptic space (no pun intended) that SC1 approaches sometimes. I'll write something on it.

GnaReffotsirk

05-13-2017, 02:33 PM

2504

This is my 3d sculpt of Tassadar.

Edit: The new terran music is off for some reason. I hope they'd have an option to let me use the old music.

TheEconomist

05-13-2017, 04:19 PM

Any word on the replay featuers? Will we be able to see replays older than the last SC1 patch? Will it autoadjust engine version? How far back does it go?

Undeadprotoss

05-13-2017, 05:30 PM

Any word on the replay featuers? Will we be able to see replays older than the last SC1 patch? Will it autoadjust engine version? How far back does it go?

From my understanding, the replays work across all versions of StarCraft that existed before the remaster. Seeing as you can switch between the Remaster and the classic version at will, I doubt that wouldn't also be the case for replays.

With that said, I have something exciting to announce. I started a blog (sidecraftremastered.blogspot.com) to chronologue the differences in the remaster and the original. The first post (http://sidecraftremastered.blogspot.com/2017/05/protoss-archon-comparison.html) is the thing I talked to you guys a while ago about.