StarCraft 2 Gameplay Video

May 20, 2007 9:59 PM

A full 20 minutes of StarCraft 2 video footage is now available over at FileShack in HD resolution showing off several new units and abilities featured in the upcoming StarCraft sequel.

Steve Gibson

Steve Gibson is the cofounder of Shacknews.com. Originally known as sCary's Quakeholio back in 1996, Steve is now President of Gearbox Publishing after selling Shacknews to GameFly in 2009.

Filed Under

StarCraft 2

From The Chatty

Refresh Go To Thread

abe2000

 reply
May 21, 2007 3:33 AM

Too much compression! I hope they release a new one. :'(
- moneyshot
  
   reply
  May 21, 2007 4:44 AM
  
  Yeh I was quite disappointed with the quality given the size of the file! So many compression artifacts. Those flv ones linked here http://www.shacknews.com/ja.zz?id=14430188 are almost better.
  - SpaecKow
    
     reply
    May 21, 2007 4:49 AM
    
    The detail is where it counts, any significantly animated element on the screen is rendered quite effectively. The video allows you to appreciate the metallic shine on the terran buildings much better then even the screenshots do. This thing has sold me on the look of the game much better then anything else has.
    - razorblade79
      
       reply
      May 21, 2007 5:41 AM
      
      Damn you work, why can't I be at home d'ling? >:[
      
      Blizzard what did you do to me again, I want this so badly now :(
      - razorblade79
        
         reply
        May 21, 2007 5:41 AM
        
        Wasn't supposd to be an answer ... -.-
- felizk
  
   reply
  May 21, 2007 6:01 AM
  
  Yea im pretty amazed they'd allow such appalling quality. Why not use some nice compression algoritms like the ones used for quicktime. The divx days are over, xvid and especially the h264 algorithms are much much better.
  - Faluzure
    
     reply
    May 21, 2007 6:27 AM
    
    They've used Divx forever. I agree that there are other codecs that are better but I think Divx is the most widely used across various machines (with quicktime being in 2nd place). Of course that's speculation.
    - ifallible
      
       reply
      May 21, 2007 10:14 AM
      
      Bink4ever!
      - pillzer
        
         reply
        May 21, 2007 10:46 AM
        
        Haha, but for a 1280*720 video? I doubt it. :p
- code-e255
  
   reply
  May 21, 2007 6:29 AM
  
  Que? I thought the quality of the movie was damn good... I can only recommend everyone to check it out.
  - moneyshot
    
     reply
    May 21, 2007 6:44 AM
    
    Oh it's definitely worth checking out, but it could have been way better using a different compression method. If you've seen x264 media you'd know what I mean. The compression artifacts in this stand out like dogs balls.
    - jayacheess
      
       reply
      May 21, 2007 10:05 AM
      
      x264 media sometimes won't play properly on my machine. The video lags.
      
      I'm using an older machine, or course, but x264 has been the only one to ever cause those kinds of problems.
      - ZaldronGG
        
         reply
        May 21, 2007 11:04 AM
        
        It's extremely CPU intensive. To the point newer vidcards are offering some playback speed improvements. It looks great, but I couldn't handle a 1280 vid up until a few months ago either.
        
        moneyshot
        
         reply
        May 21, 2007 5:34 PM
        
        True, I forgot it's a real resource hog and a lot of people wanting to view the video wouldn't be able to. I can live with that ;) Maybe xvid would be a better choice?
      - yuried
        
         reply
        May 22, 2007 8:26 AM
        
        QFT, it's really sad when a game VIDEO runs worse than the game itself so I'm actually happy with Blizzard's codec choice - all these funky new H.264 720p trailers are often a slideshow on my comp (they don't have to be, but they are...)