Hmm... let's think for a second... The beta states that it's Korhal. Blizzard made the beta. Do you mean to say that Blizzard don't know what they're talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
Printable View
Hmm... let's think for a second... The beta states that it's Korhal. Blizzard made the beta. Do you mean to say that Blizzard don't know what they're talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
No, I'm saying that when programmers or designers document assets, their isnt a meeting, they just do it. I doubt metzen was involved in this process, and hes, more or less, the "god" of the SC universe. It isn't really Korhal until in game evidence written by metzen arrives. Not documentation by level designers.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. peasant
Uh....I'm pretty sure Korhal isn't the only developed Terran world. We know Tarsonis was heavily developed, so is a place called "Brontes" (which I don't think got zergified), and I'm sure their are countless more I'm missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
And this is why I'd rather just wait and see - Also in terms of population;Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
Ie. that news reporter line with "billions dead" could just as well be changed - although that part of the campaign did look finished.
Tarsonis was not a city planet like that. You can see it from orbit. You could not see the cities of Tarsonis from orbit. It covers the entire planet, Tarsonis's city did not. As for Brontes, please provide more information.Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
There is also a huge difference between developed and a freaking city planet. Your talking about the entire 100% of its surface being covered in a urban environment.
Why should we assume that level designers don't know what planets they're making again? They named it Korhal, therefore it is Korhal. If you're going to say that the level designer's documentation is wrong or misleading then you should have some evidence.
I'm with Grad on this one. If Metzen didn't sit in on the meeting, or if the level designers don't know what they're talking about, why would they even bother naming it after an actual pre-existing planet with lore surrounding it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gradius
Is there a chance Korhal won't actually look like that? Sure! But there's a chance of anything being true at this point, and that's not good enough reason to disbelieve this info.
Well, sometimes they just name stuff. They had a bunch of weird names for stuff internally in WC3 that made no sense at all.
But in this case, there's no reason to name it Korhal unless it actually is Korhal. Especially since we've been told the Korhal tileset is now 'cityscape' instead of desert.
Brontes and Brontes IV cause confusion. They might be the same planet, or they might not.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhanttoM
Brontes IV was only mentioned twice; in StarCraft: Insurrection, where it was one settled planet in the Brontes system that got "eaten" by the zerg, and in preview material for the StarCraft comic. (In the latter case, they just called it Brontes when the comic came out.)
Brontes has been mentioned numerous times. It was invaded by the zerg (mentioned in the original manual) but by Shadow Hunters was a terran system again.
Nobody ever said it was heavily settled. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's listed as both a core and fringe world (just to make things more confusing... how can a fringe world like Mar Sara also be a core world ... conflicting sources).
Thats far more conclusive evidence, because metzen and other lore writers are obviously involved in the creation of the written dialogue in the campaign, although it may be subject to change.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhanttoM
The way assets are documented are just to organize them, their isn't necessarily any lore meaning behind them.
Because its a multiplayer map, and lore is of little concern. Their was obviously no in depth discussion in order to discern the location of a out of canon ladder map for the Beta. I highly doubt Metzen was involved in its design.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gradius
Seeing that old Starcraft maps give Terran Prospectors 20 megaton devices, the Terran Confederacy a planetary super weapon, and the industry to build a space platform over the hemisphere of an entire planet in short amount of time, I think that lore is heavily involved with map descriptions and the such.Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
We see brontes in the comics. It is clearly a highly developed, multilayed city where transport is primarily done through hovercars (which suggests infrastructure similar to this), though we are never given an orbital view.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
While Metalopolis is 'just' a multiplayer map, you must realize that the map designers don't just do multiplayer maps. They also design and script the campaign maps. And it's from here that they'd know which planets are which. I highly doubt there are so many different teams so that one just builds maps while another scripts the events while a third just inserts the loading screens (which is what the artworks are for).Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
Moreover, here's something to ponder over: Do you think that the map designers are going to receive a stack of untitled art? Obviously, the art department would title/label each piece for easy referencing. These titles would then be used in all departments. I highly doubt that that the map designers can/would simply pluck a name at random when labeling individual elements in the game's engine.
Strange that the planetary ring formed from the debris of the original nuking is completely gone.
Perhaps they mined it all out and filled in the craters and whatnot.