If that really is a new adjutant model, it'll be the third version.
I agree, the first "green one" looked like ass.
The second one is much improved and acceptable.
This one, (I don't know for sure) if it's a third model, is also acceptable (IMO).
Printable View
If that really is a new adjutant model, it'll be the third version.
I agree, the first "green one" looked like ass.
The second one is much improved and acceptable.
This one, (I don't know for sure) if it's a third model, is also acceptable (IMO).
just because this is the latest adjutant we've seen doesn't mean it's the newest one
True, but either way if it's different from the second one we've seen, it's still a third model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricmole
Agreed...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandonetho
That's the reason I chose it as my avatar... I wish SCII portrait was better too...
Would be nice if it was a bit more atmospheric.Quote:
Originally Posted by Josue
Perhaps it's a character, a differet, more advanced Adjutant, that's present in the campaign? Would explain why her portrait is on that wall with campaign-only characters...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandonetho
I wouldn't be surprised if the Dominion, Combine, or Protectorate had access to a more advanced looking Adjutant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex06
I'd rather Raynor be stuck a faulty sparking one we've been seeing in the Battle Reports, though. It's fitting, in my opinion.
Cool idea actually. I like that a lot.Quote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the Dominion, Combine, or Protectorate had access to a more advanced looking Adjutant.
I'd rather Raynor be stuck a faulty sparking one we've been seeing in the Battle Reports, though. It's fitting, in my opinion.
Same here. I support the idea.Quote:
Cool idea actually. I like that a lot.
*stamp of approvalQuote:
Originally Posted by Muspelli
Looking back at old videos, I think it's the second one. This angle make her look better though imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandonetho
EDIT: wait, no. It's a new one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scr63qkJeWA at 1:24, you can see that she doesn't have the 4 round spot on her for heads near the lines and also the eyes are whiter on the new version. You can also see than the yellow light down her neck is closer to her neck on the new vers and closer to her breast on the old one.
I don't get your point here... Sorry, English is not my native languaje...Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldrius
If you are talking about Zeratul's SCII portrait, I think you're right, it's somewhat disappointing when you compare to the original SC1 portrait.
Well. Not just MORE like the SC1 portrait.Quote:
Originally Posted by Josue
I like the design of the SC2 one better, you can see stuff better and the details are superior. But overall it's just kinda... plain. Like the SC1 Zeratul one is a little bit creepy in it's use of lighting. It makes you feel things, it's mysterious. The SC2 one just sort of... looks cool, I guess. There's not much to it.
But here's the question... are those pictures of finalized, 3D renders or simply reference art? If it's the latter, it explains the lack of shadows since that would obscure features and defeat the entire point of it.
It could be reference art, or existing models without lighting effects (which could serve the same purpose). Looking back on them, the looked CGI, so I'm willing to bet it's the latter.
But I agree, Zeratul especially could use similar lighting to the original.
Something's off with Kerrigan's too, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Oh well.
I'd say it's the difference in angle and lighting. In the original she was like looking up to you (anglewise, in the unit portrait) and all those green lights came from the bottom of the portrait screen and she had that evilish smirk on her face. now she kinda looks like any other unit. i guess its just reference art for the final portraits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muspelli
and agree to the zeratul one, not atmospheric at all
the all unit and hero portraits is hanging on the wall(blizzard HQ).and nobody fhotograpy of this wall..amazed.
It was in a no-photo section. Those photos are NDAed. =/Quote:
Originally Posted by scorpio19
I'm pretty sure that none of these are independently animated portraits. They LOOK like they're just animated screen shots of their in-game models (i.e. on the Hyperion) which could explain why they're so plain-looking. (And how there are so many of them in such a short period of time when we haven't even seen all the multiplayer unit portraits...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Muspelli
My hope is that they'll edit these to include more visual effects and things. Especially for the more memorable characters, but they may not bother.
I agree it looks cool by itself, but it should be darker, creepier... I don't know, I still think it should be somewhat fitting the powerful and mysterious feelign the dark Templars and Zeratul gave in SC1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldrius
As do I.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldrius