awsome

lol everyone in the industry has gone crazy

Yay for more 3-D?

Wow, yet another product hopping onto the 3D bandwagon. I "thought" Blizzard were above gimmicks.

If Blizzard doesn't get on the bandwagon who will...

" Wow, yet another product hopping onto the 3D bandwagon. I "thought" Blizzard were above gimmicks. "

And so many people are going to be playing it in 3d, too!

" @zonerover said:

" Wow, yet another product hopping onto the 3D bandwagon. I "thought" Blizzard were above gimmicks. "

so you were absolutely positive they were above gimmicks? sorry I don't get the quote usage. "

Why do they need to patch in support? The Nvidia drivers works in pretty much all games. It's nothing new.
 
Also, 3D works pretty well in strategy games. Just imagine looking down on a Warhammer table but with moving figurines and you know how it looks.

In cutscenes sure but i doubt a game on a very level playing field would benefit from having 3D... but then so far i haven't seen anything in my life benefit from being in 3D.

Let me get this straight. They won't add a graphic standard that has been around for years, and just about everyone can use, yet they are going to use 3-D, something only a handful of people have the capability to use?  
 
I know 3D is the big new thing nowadays, but to completely neglect a thing as anti-aliasing seems pretty lazy to me.

This has been known for a week now. The fuck are they paying you guys for.

ermmmm. anyone with any idea how it will work or look like? RTS in 3-D? A little skeptical here

It's just an optional feature for those who like this sort of thing, and lets face it, a lot of people do. It's not going to handicap the people who prefer the standard look, so chill. It doesn't sound like they're putting too much time into the 3-D, anyway.

Playing games in 3D that usually tend to go in game sessions of upwards of a few hours is a terrible idea. I like to play RTS's and Turn-based/RTS hybrids like the Total War series( RTS on the battle map/Turn-based on the tactical map) for long periods of time. I think the only place 3D makes a huge impact is on the social/casual market where you play in bite size gaming chunks.

ROFL  no Anti-Aliasing support,  but they're already planning on supporting 3-D?   i hate bandwagons.

Wow, that adds absolutely zero value. You are watching tiny little pixels destroy eachother from a bird's eye view. Little different from an FPS where people are constantly shooting you with a wide variety of projectiles.

" Let me get this straight. They won't add a graphic standard that has been around for years, and just about everyone can use, yet they are going to use 3-D, something only a handful of people have the capability to use?   I know 3D is the big new thing nowadays, but to completely neglect a thing as anti-aliasing seems pretty lazy to me. "

Waste of time.

No AA? really? Thats kind of sad.

"Hell, it's about time"  
 
Well, ok not really

Crysis 2 is in 3D aswell? I'd fear my eyeballs would probably melt at the sight.

All i have to say is thank god they arent delaying the game to implement it. 

Jeese Brad they make you come in on a holiday?  Dang!

" Games already compatible with NVIDIA 3D Vision (ie. everything). "

Next generation of people are going to have terrible eye sight because 3D ruined their eyes. Although I will say, South Korea with the people filling stadiums to see the matches, might be kinda neat for the added 3D effect.

" @Jimbo said:

" Games already compatible with NVIDIA 3D Vision (ie. everything). "

"

" @warxsnake said:

" @Jimbo said:

" Games already compatible with NVIDIA 3D Vision (ie. everything). "

"

"

I have the 3d vision kit for nivida. It works very well when the software is optimized for it. WoW had a patch later on that added a 3d cursor functionality. It worked very very well and it was easy to click on just about everything. However the 3d was later broken in a WoW patch. Blizz still hasnt fixed it.
 
If they get a 3d cursor in starcraft 2, ill play it in 3d.

Well thats.... not particularly enticing? Frankly, I don't see why they're bothering to add in 3D post-launch. They can't use it as a bullet-point on the box, and I don't see the kind of people who buy games digitally caring about 3D.
 
Anyways, implementing 3D in a top-down RTS seems pretty straight forward. Ground stays on the screen, taller units extend upwards, flying units float above. Simple, but nothing particularly interesting.

o look ...the tiny missile on screen ...JUST POPPED OUT AT ME. O GOD IT BURNS. 
 
i'm not buyin new cards and screens just to get a headachey 3d experience. no gracias

Time for a new genre methinks;  
 
RT3DS.

Wait, so they went out of their way to create a graphics engine that they can't anti-alias, yet they have the time to implement 3D? I own a budget games from over a decade ago, and THOSE have AA support. 
 
Honestly, they've had years and years to develop this game with a practically infinite money flow from WoW, and yet they couldn't figure out how to make an engine that can do lighting and AA?  Why do people put up with a company that takes three times as long as anyone else to put out a game that isn't all that much better?

Fuck Blizzard.

How about they delay it for another year to put in the 3D?

Good God, why are people so upset about this?  

Fucking people are so wanting to join the 3D hate bandwagon that they are flat out ignoring the fact that a ton of PC games already support it. This is a total non-issue.

Its pretty strange that StarCraft II doesn't have AA, but that doesn't really matter to me. AA tends to kill performance for me, and as others said, SC2 will have deferred shading, which is unheard of for me until this point in time. 
 
While the 3D effect is negligible for me, having developers such as Blizzard jump on this bandwagon helps the 3D momentum. Right now at this moment there isn't a whole lot of value behind jumping in on the 3D experience, but it will help out in the future where 3D will start to become a standard experience. Just like how we jumped from 2D models to 3D models.

So you take a game that requires you to switch your focus quickly to different parts of the battlefield, and you add... eye-strain inducing 3D?
 
Sounds like an instant headache.

For most games, this isn't too difficult to add, if you don't care about performance/memory, since you can "simply" render the scene twice: once where the camera normally is, and again about 3 inches to the side, and feed one frame to each eye. The thing is, a GPU driver can't do that magically, and the program needs to add specific support for that functionality. "

" So you take a game that requires you to switch your focus quickly to different parts of the battlefield, and you add... eye-strain inducing 3D?  Sounds like an instant headache. "

" Good God, why are people so upset about this?  

Fucking people are so wanting to join the 3D hate bandwagon that they are flat out ignoring the fact that a ton of PC games already support it. This is a total non-issue. "

Cool, it's not hard to implement.