Dominion = 100%

[TheEconomist]

Strange, isn't it.

Yes, it is. I have no idea how you think I insulted you. All I'm saying is that your preference for FMV-quality in-engine cutscenes is not in the least bit even remotely possible at this given time. The "little computer" comment was not condescending. It was a phrase used to illustrate what your computer would be like trying to run such a monstrosity of computing power.

Sorry if I offended you but I don't know how you responded in such a way. Still, I'll be more careful of my words when speaking of computers in such a way so hopefully this can be avoided in the future.

(Really though, no more derail please.)

@#4: That's hyperbole if I ever saw one. Sure, there are some spots where the textures a bit ugly but the overall look seems to be on par with what is being done now in other games today.

.

[Areoseph]

I don't really see the big issue here with mixing the in-game with the CGI. The game will most assuredly be blended and will probably phase in and out between in-game and CGI. This is a great thing, and many fantastic games do this. It is what I expect to see from SC2, as a matter of fact. I figure I'll be going along, playing standard fare RTS in the game, then an in-mission cut scene occurs using game graphics; solid. Then maybe you go back to the Hyperion and get a non-rts cut scene (like the Zeratul scene), which is sweet. After that perhaps the game cuts to a CGI scene. I see no issue with this at all.

If anything it's an evolution of SC1's style. As for the trailer, I really enjoyed it being blended. Why? Because they were willing to show us some game-rendered cinematics, and for game-rendered cinematics, they were great. I also did not find the transition jarring at all. Since I knew they were game-rendered, I didn't expect them to be CGI, and so I adjusted. The vast majority of fans and non SC fans (but who play games) will be able to make that transition in their minds easily as well. I hope no one is saying in in-game graphics are sub-par, because that would be completely silly.

Also, they most likely were tying to fill in the story using the available clips they had, some of which could only come from in-game cutscenes. Let's just be realistic about the trailer. From a cinematic perspective, from a 'movie like' trailer perspective, I found it very compelling and it drew me in. I thought it was well put together. /2cents

Areo

[Hammy]

I
n
-
e
n
g
i
n
e

It's the nature of the beast. The alternative is to have less cutscenes. Surely you don't want that. Just like huge games like Crysis have to skimp on a texture here and there to make the overall scene the best it can be, the cut scenes have to skimp here and there to get the overall scene the best it can be.

No, the alternative is having a real cinematic that's all pre-rendered, and cut scenes (which a perfect transition when you're going from one map to another in the campaign). But there should be a gorgeous cinematic for an introduction and an epilogue, not a mash-up.

If that intro needs to be shorter because it's 100% pre-redered, then so be it. Quality over quantity.

Spelling out words won't help, trying to understand where I'm coming from might

Anyways, I doubt this is the actual intro. I don't think they would have released it (I hope not at least). I hope they'll stick to the usual epicness and keep the pre-redered and the cut-scenes apart : )

[pure.Wasted]

The fully animated cinematics were beautiful, but why the hell would they mix full animation with the other cut scenes? Like when Raynor puts a gun in his holster? That was really ugly. And the marine fights looked terrible to me. The cinematics with Zeratul, human Kerrigan, infested Kerrigan... THAT is what expected, even if the video were only 45s long... this... meh... much lower quality than what blizzard's gotten us used to imo

The trailer of your dreams already exists, it's the NBA spot from a month back. There's nothing but gorgeous pre-rendered CGI, and it's a heck of a lot longer than 45 seconds.

So... if you already got what you wanted... what were you expecting this time around? That's the trailer for the game's cinematics. This is the trailer for the game's actual story. The game's story cannot be glimpsed from the pre-rendered cinematics, because most of it is told in in-game rendered cut-scenes. You have your trailer, and those who want the story now have theirs.

Just the fact that you're comparing the two tells me you're approaching this from all the wrong angles. They're not meant to be compared. The in-game cut-scenes are a BONUS, something other RTSes don't have at all (RA3) or, if they do, never bother to use to tell the actual story (Company of Heroes) and only use to set the mood. Think for a moment what the alternatives were.

WC3 got RAVE reviews (ESPECIALLY for its story) by doing no more than zooming in on its low-poly models, which were, by the way, a lot more low-poly for their time than these in-game rendered cut scenes are for theirs. We could have had that -- zoom on actual units. We could have had mission briefing heads like in SC1. We could have had craptastic live performers duking it out against green screen effects from the 80s, a la C&C.

That's what this is the 'equivalent' of. Though naturally there's nothing equivalent about it...

(damn, I hate WoW now, but their cinematics were EPIC! And the same goes for Wc3's real cinematics, Stracraft's and even Wc2's (for their time of course).

WoW's cinematics may be "epic," but they are not good. For one thing, with the notable, sole exception of the Forsaken event in WOTLK, it HAS no in-game cutscenes to compare with. For another, the actual pre-rendered cinematics? They have zero story value. They're the equivalent of the Dropship flying/Hydralisk slashing splitsecond splices at the end of the Tychus cinematic. Great, they work as a teaser. That's about all they do.

Here... it's just a mash of two styles which don't blend at all, and it's like they got the guy who does every single blockbuster trailer off-voice to do all of the voices.

Clotworthy is doing Raynor's voice. Harper is still doing Mengsk's. Tychus's is still the same voice that everyone fell in love with in the original reveal. Which voices is it exactly that you have a problem with? Horner? He has 2 lines, which sound... ...normal. Because he's a normal person. Not everyone can (or SHOULD) sound as distinct as Tyke and Mengsk.

Looks like they just tried to make it look like a movie... and that's definitely not what a gaming experience is about.

Actually that is what the SC2 single-player experience is largely about. So... not quite correct.

[TheEconomist]

@Hammy: I see the problem. You misunderstood. This is not an intro cinematic. This is just a trailer. Hence, the name. What gave you the idea that this was the intro cinematic? And, obviously, they will keep the cinematics and in-engine cut scenes separate given the whole purpose of each.

Also, no, your option is not feasible. It takes the Blizzard team months and months to do each cinematic. Doing an hour or more of FMV would be ridiculously costly and would delay the game for several more years.

The ONLY alternative is the one they have taken. Sure, you can argue that the in-engine cutscenes should be better but I doubt they could without being a beast to process.

[Santrega]

Anyways, I doubt this is the actual intro. I don't think they would have released it (I hope not at least). I hope they'll stick to the usual epicness and keep the pre-redered and the cut-scenes apart : )

I dont think this is an intro at all. I think its just a combination of clips from the all of the cinematics. They did a good job putting them together for one solid theme.

It caused my excitement to spike quite a bit.. I can't wait to play it next week.

[TheEconomist]

The title of the video is "Ghosts Of The Past Trailer". So, uhmmm, yeeeaaaah

[Xyvik]

Yes, it is. I have no idea how you think I insulted you. All I'm saying is that your preference for FMV-quality in-engine cutscenes is not in the least bit even remotely possible at this given time. The "little computer" comment was not condescending. It was a phrase used to illustrate what your computer would be like trying to run such a monstrosity of computing power.

Sorry if I offended you but I don't know how you responded in such a way. Still, I'll be more careful of my words when speaking of computers in such a way so hopefully this can be avoided in the future.

My temper's a bit short today, so I shall also apologize.

Anyway, I was just expecting a bit more from these unlocks. They were fun little distractions, but nothing more. But then again, they were probably directed at people who are not as "in" to StarCraft as we are (even if I'm a heathen non-true-fan )

So I suppose they served their purpose. Just the hype was too much. *goes to watch trailer in 720p this time*

[TheEconomist]

Wait, so what is it again that you're having a problem with. The quality of the graphics, the trailer, or the fact that this was a hyped up unlockable?

[pure.Wasted]

So I suppose they served their purpose. Just the hype was too much. *goes to watch trailer in 720p this time*

I don't think that'll do it, Xyv.

As I said in response to Hammy, I think doing that is exactly how you're setting yourself up for disappointment. The two are not meant to be compared. The FMVs are undoubtedly superior, and no amount of squinting to blur the HD away is going to make the in-game stuff look straight up equivalent.

But it shouldn't. This is extra, this is on top of everything else. Remember when Arthas the evil DK killed Uther in the second UD mission, and we didn't get a cinematic for that? That's what this would be. Now, we would get a cinematic. Not full on FMV, but still, a lot better than low-rez poly Arthas stabbing right through Uther without the attack and death animations synching up in the slightest, don't you think?