I don't think you could do starcraft better with pixels, not without an unreasonable amount of work anyway. If you know what you're doing you can get 3D rendered stuff look really good. The work is also easier to control when you can do global changes on your sprites. Realistic ambient occlusion is just a button press away, consistency and editing is easier. I'd like to shun the idea that everything 2D is better if it's made with pixels. Moving up in resolution and colorcount, proper alpha blending with antialiased edges makes rendered stuff work better(though at this point you probably have enough power to do realtime 3D). Most problems come from restrictions and bad art direction that leaves the final product with things that corrode the illusion of the gameworld. Things that contradict with each other. If a sprite looks like it's made in 3D, then it's a major contradiction when the graphic then behaves in a manner that reveals it's 2D-ness. Pre-rendered 3D sprites can be the worst enemy for immersion.
Games like diablo, planescape: torment, sanitarium work allright i guess, but there's this staleness in the graphics. Increased graphical fidelity in lighting and texture creates a break in illusion when it's so static. Your artistic choices create a dimension that needs to be filled enough on all fronts.
Mortal Kombat is awesome because it looks so stupid though.