Great Deceiver
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
- Messages
- 5,903
The irony is really edgy in these last few pages, but Zboj Lamignat has a point, even though I don't agree with his examples necessarily.
I bought Starcraft on launch and played it a lot when it was still relatively fresh (until WC3 came out basically), but something it was never considered was technologically advanced. In fact, Blizzard wasn't known for pushing the technological envelope in those days at all. Diablo 1 was neat, but 2 was very behind technologically when it released in 2000.
I also bought Myth 1 on launch in 1997 (a full year before SC) and that was a much more technically impressive game, with real 3d (deformable) terrain, arrow and explosion physics (if you say those don't matter you've never played Myth), stuff like satchels and fire arrows getting soaked during rain, arrows getting caught on trees, friendly fire, etc. Not to mention the excellent and intuitive interface, full camera control, unit facing actually mattering, creative scenarios with stuff like enemies coming out of the water under a bridge to attack you (was mindblowing at the time), etc.
Now, that's a separate discussion from whether technologically more advanced games of the type could compete in gameplay or had any staying power at all, but to outright dismiss the correct claims that Blizzard games weren't technologically impressive is silly. They were merely competent.
I bought Starcraft on launch and played it a lot when it was still relatively fresh (until WC3 came out basically), but something it was never considered was technologically advanced. In fact, Blizzard wasn't known for pushing the technological envelope in those days at all. Diablo 1 was neat, but 2 was very behind technologically when it released in 2000.
I also bought Myth 1 on launch in 1997 (a full year before SC) and that was a much more technically impressive game, with real 3d (deformable) terrain, arrow and explosion physics (if you say those don't matter you've never played Myth), stuff like satchels and fire arrows getting soaked during rain, arrows getting caught on trees, friendly fire, etc. Not to mention the excellent and intuitive interface, full camera control, unit facing actually mattering, creative scenarios with stuff like enemies coming out of the water under a bridge to attack you (was mindblowing at the time), etc.
Now, that's a separate discussion from whether technologically more advanced games of the type could compete in gameplay or had any staying power at all, but to outright dismiss the correct claims that Blizzard games weren't technologically impressive is silly. They were merely competent.