VIDEO: FPS/TPS Using StarCraft II Engine

Status
Not open for further replies.

dameon51

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2006
204
0
18,680
Cool. I can almost see in the future there will simply be a "game" engine, not specifically tailored to a specific genre.
 

g_h0_st

Distinguished
Apr 30, 2010
3
0
18,510
You know, with a little bit of tailoring and some fine tuning, this could amount to something close to what SC:Ghost was supposed to be in the first place.
 

twisted politiks

Distinguished
Dec 3, 2008
209
0
18,690
[citation][nom]g_h0_st[/nom]You know, with a little bit of tailoring and some fine tuning, this could amount to something close to what SC:Ghost was supposed to be in the first place.[/citation]

One can dream XD
 

evolve60

Distinguished
Jun 1, 2009
68
0
18,630
The sad thing is the game engine on this looks just as good as most FPS engines but this doesn't require you to have a $500 GPU to run.
 

husker

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
1,209
222
19,670
Nice work. But off topic a bit: I noticed that at times in the 3rd person view, that the character went in and out of focus. I think that is a feature of directx 11, which personally I do not care for. I don't want the game to tell me what to focus my eyes on, just because it "thinks" it knows what I want.
 

descendency

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2008
582
0
18,990
Nice work for an engine designed for a RTS game. It needs a lot of cleanup work before anything is sold though. Plus, they need a better angle for the TPS view.
 

matt87_50

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2009
1,150
0
19,280
I love blizzard RTSs but one of my favourite features in them is their awesome world editors! can't wait to see what we get with the SCII one!
 

bearracuda

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2010
77
0
18,630
[citation][nom]evolve60[/nom]The sad thing is the game engine on this looks just as good as most FPS engines but this doesn't require you to have a $500 GPU to run.[/citation]
No, what's sad is the clause in the SC2 Terms of Use courtesy of Kotick (Activision's CEO) That states that you forfeit the copright, and any other legal and moral rights to anything you create in the Starcraft 2 editor to activision. Immediately. Just by building it with the Starcraft 2 editor. I'd hate to see someone put years of work into a SC2 FPS and have activision pull the plug and say "It's ours now, you can't even edit it anymore." Which, legally, they can do (again thanks to Kotick and his manipulative little clause) Activision has also said they're gonna charge for "premium maps" which are maps created by players that are really popular. >.> So as soon as this becomes popular, activision's gonna start exacting their pound of flesh for something they didn't even make. They've "said" they'll pay royalties to the creator, but as it's not in the terms of use, and as Kotick has clearly stated he prefers paying his lawyers over paying his employees, I doubt they'll go through with that. He even fired 85% of the makers of Guitar Hero the second he decided he couldn't milk Guitar Hero for any more money. So why would Activision give a crap about anyone making things in the SC2 editor?
 
G

Guest

Guest
imagine hordes of zergs fighting against hundreds of humans, and each character being controlled by one pc user
 

djab

Distinguished
Feb 18, 2009
121
0
18,680
[citation][nom]bearracuda[/nom]No, what's sad is the clause in the SC2 Terms of Use courtesy of Kotick (Activision's CEO) That states that you forfeit the copright, and any other legal and moral rights to anything you create in the Starcraft 2 editor to activision. Immediately. Just by building it with the Starcraft 2 editor. I'd hate to see someone put years of work into a SC2 FPS and have activision pull the plug and say "It's ours now, you can't even edit it anymore." Which, legally, they can do (again thanks to Kotick and his manipulative little clause) Activision has also said they're gonna charge for "premium maps" which are maps created by players that are really popular. >.> So as soon as this becomes popular, activision's gonna start exacting their pound of flesh for something they didn't even make. They've "said" they'll pay royalties to the creator, but as it's not in the terms of use, and as Kotick has clearly stated he prefers paying his lawyers over paying his employees, I doubt they'll go through with that. He even fired 85% of the makers of Guitar Hero the second he decided he couldn't milk Guitar Hero for any more money. So why would Activision give a crap about anyone making things in the SC2 editor?[/citation]

That is sad but as you said it is totally possible.
For those who do not know Kotik, here is a summary from a SC team forum on the evil activity of Kotik these last years and the possible impact on the new BattleNet:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252
 

Regulas

Distinguished
May 11, 2008
1,202
0
19,280
I just hope there is no memory leaking like the first engine that cases the game to suddenly quit. Happened on various machines and OS's so it has to be the program.
 

theubersmurf

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2008
221
0
18,680
[citation][nom]evolve60[/nom]The sad thing is the game engine on this looks just as good as most FPS engines but this doesn't require you to have a $500 GPU to run.[/citation]The avatar is a bit mechanical, but the environment looks great.
 

beayn

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
947
0
18,990
[citation][nom]dameon51[/nom]Cool. I can almost see in the future there will simply be a "game" engine, not specifically tailored to a specific genre.[/citation]

John Carmack (id Software) has said that he wanted to make a generalized game engine that would scale limitlessly with texture sizes, memory and all that so he could retire.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.