How do you suppose you would make a pro-quality game as opposed to all of the games everyone here is making? I mean, consider StarCraft as a prime example. It''s really high-quality graphics were in 256 colors and 640x480, right? Not bad. This probably contributed to its speed on a really slow computer (by today''s standards). Do you think that its graphics are still viable today? I mean, if a new game were to come out with graphics on a par with StarCraft and great gameplay, would you buy it? Did they use a standard graphics API, or did they write their own little routines. Obviously they did their own for, say, the archons who were slightly transparent, using the old trick of palette pair matching for fake translucency. I would give anything just to talk to the makers of StarCraft for a few hours. I have been programming for over half my life (I am almost 16) and I have always fallen short of greatness because I cannot produce quality on a par with the pros. Sometimes it is quite discouraging. I need a good artist. ~BenDilts( void ); Come to my Web Site and see my new SCREENSHOTS FOR BEANWARS! www.geocities.com/benbeandogdilts/downloads.html

ummm -- i think starcraft is 800x600x16 bit
what do you mean by "APIs"?

Starcraft is not 800x600 16 bit, it is 640x480 8 bit.

To answer your question, no I do not think that StarCraft''s graphics are good eneough for modern games. Also, of course you will not be able to make a game of pro quality, despite you having a whole eight years experience. It took a TEAM of programmers(who have been programming for MUCH longer than eight years), designers and artists to make StarCraft, and it took them two years to do so.

One of the biggest mistakes you can make is comparing your self and/or your projects to someone else and/or their projects. By comparing yourself to a professional team is only making a normally big mistake even bigger.

Nope, SC is definately in 640x480x8, and by APIs he means DirectDraw, OpenGL, etc.

I'm sure some of the routines were done in-house, there are usually at least a few. Starcraft does need DirectDraw to function though, it installs DX3 (i think) when you install it.

Whenever I see how crappy one of my projects is compared to a commercial one, I just imagine all of the people that put in huge amounts of time on the project. Starcraft was not a simple task and it took the efforts of many people to get it as good as it is.

Then, when I look back at mine, I say: "Damn, that ain't bad for a couple weeks work of one person!"

As for whether I would by another game like it, I sure as hell would. Graphics aren't all that important to me, as long as they aren't HORRIBLE. Starcraft looks alot better than some 16 and 32-bit color games I've seen. I would buy the original 16-color Hero's Quest from Sierra over some crappy "Kill everything with vertices" FPSs that have come out lately.

In the end, gameplay matters more than graphics, Rouge, NetHack, Moria, and Scorched Earth are some of the most entertaining games on the planet.

Edited by - Rappler on May 10, 2000 8:42:17 PM

Don''t feel down BeanDog. Think about it like this. The Starcraft team is probably composed of about 3-4 programmers, 3-4 artists, and 2-3 sound guys. They worked on this game for more than a year. Make you feel any better?

-Icarus

you forgot designers, animators, PR, HR, beta testers, and that guy who doesn''t really work at the company but kicks everyone''s ass at air hockey.

--
Float like a butterfly, bite like a crocodile.

Yeah I agree totally. People often forget that commercial games are done by so many talented people over so much time. I was curious...is diablo only 8 bit color too? If so, that's some incredible graphics also. Also, in Diablo, did they have to draw a seperate image for every different possible weapon you can have? Like one where you're holding a sword, one where you're holding a sword and a shield etc. I guess they must have because it's 2d...That would be quite a task, but again, they probably had about 3 or 4 artists.

Edited by - Nazrix on May 10, 2000 9:21:10 PM

" you forgot designers, animators, PR, HR, beta testers, and that guy who doesn''t really work at the company but kicks everyone''s ass at air hockey. "

Heh, damn that air hockey guy!

About Diablo, I''m not sure what the color depth is, but as for drawing new images for every combination of weapons, that would seem like a big waste of space to me. What they probably did is just draw the various armors and shields and such, and the basic character sprites. Then, when you change your equipment, it takes the main character sprite and lays the drawings of his equipment down on top of him to create the custom player image, which is then stored and reused. But keep in mind that this is just a guess from someone who''s only written simple DOS games. ^_^

-Ironblayde
Aeon Software

Diablo is 8 bit.. try pressing Ctrl-Alt-Delete in the game.. See the color of the program manager..

Also interesting to note, Blizzard programs do not seem to call DirectDraw Flip at all.. as the Program manager will always turn up. For my programs, if I use Flip, there is only a 50 % chance of it turning up..

..

Yeah, I thought about he fact that they may just reuse the images too, but it seems like it would be hard to make it accurately look like the character is holding the different items and everything. Plus, I noticed that when you equip each weapon the shadow even changes. Maybe they do reuse them though...

That is interesting, void. I wonder why they wouldn''t to use Flip...