Okay guys, let's weigh in on this.
What is the better game?
Printable View
Okay guys, let's weigh in on this.
What is the better game?
I represent 100% of the votes currently. The results clearly show that Starcraft is the superior game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike
No, but really. I enjoyed Starcraft more because of the number of units a player can control at once. Not to mention the futuristic setting, and coolish storyline.
Though I admit Brood War made the protoss ludicrously powerful.
There's no way Warcraft can win this, though I'll put my vote in for it anyway. I've played Warcraft 3 nearly every free day I've had since it came out. I love it, even though it's desperately crying to be fucking patched for balance already.
Starcraft was ok but I thought it was WAY too overhyped, it wasn't the greatest thing to ever come to this Earth. I played more WC2 but I never got into the third one as I mostly suck at RTS games.
WCIII gets balanced, then unbalanced, then re-whatever. I played alot of both, i prefer WCIII, it seems to be more strategy than the micro of sc.
Um, really? Blizzard publically let us know that Warcraft's focus on smaller units and faster battles was so they took the weight off of resource and building macromanagement so you can spend more time on unit control and battle micromanagement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Destin
Starcraft is micro-less until high-level play. Your success in WC3 depends almost entirely on your micro.
Starcraft easily.
I love Warcraft III... but as omfgStibbons noted... it doesn't reach the balanced perfection that was Starcraft.
Warcraft III will lose, but I'll mostly just say Starcraft owns because Siege Tanks are one of the coolest units in all of creation.
The actual game no longer interests me. After playing Kohan, no other RTS has ever held my attention in the least bit.
I have never played starcraft.... don't revolk my license. I just never got in to the whole experience. I love Warcraft but 3 was definitely not as good as 2 (for me atleast) and I couldn't pitch a fair vote here.
But I'm not fair and I'm voting for warcraft.
That's nostalgia clouding your judgment. After Starcraft and Warcraft 3, I could never play 2 again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
WC3 is extremely micro and reflex intensive and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone that's not willing to invest some time into mastering it, just like any good twitch-based shooter (that's no exaggeration, there are replays out there from tournaments with guys clicking in with over 100 mouse clicks a minute, just from moving units around). Starcraft is more about resource management and counter-based strategy. They're both on opposite ends of the RTS genre, and if you don't like one, you generally like the other.
I'm going for Warcraft because...I really don't know. I havn't played SC in awhile but there were too many "NO RUsHING 15 MIN!!!" games than I can count. While it may be well balanced, few could get around not having to say no rushing for x minutes to have a game last more than 5 minutes. Of course it's pretty much the same in WC, but at this point I'm waiting for the next patch (for the love of god finish it soon!) to make WC fun again. I love the variety and look that WC brings and it's my current best RTS game. I'm a Blizzard whore, so it doesn't matter much to me. I fully expect my life to end when WoW is released and I may shit myself when Starcraft 2 is announced. Just like 500,000 other people.
EDIT: Oh yeah, I didn't like the Broodwar expansion (fucked with my Zerg way too much and Protoss is just...Protoss) while I'm a fan of Frozen Throne.
Warcraft is a better game. It just hasn't benefitted from all the game balancing tweaks and patches yet. In my book, the game is a way more FUN experience.
The new micromanagement tools (like being able to queue upgrades, idle peon locators, the mini map beacon, etc) alone make the experience far more enjoyable.
The unit AI is far better in WCIII. For instance, I can group 3 Dragonhawk Riders and ask them to cast Cloud. I can point-click, point-click, point-click and get 3 clouds to take out an entire row of towers. In SC, I get 3 Defilers and point-click a Dark Swarm and I get a Dark Swarm 3 deep in one location.
The low unit count gives it more strategy and less of a prodcution war. It also makes the games less susceptible to rushing and crazy base unit massing. Maybe because I'm not that good at either game, but in SC, it seems like whoever makes the most Goons/Hydras/Tanks or whatever will be the winner.
The engine is more versatile and robust. For the times that you want to play something other than the normal game, there's a plethora of custom games available like Sheep Tag :D
Starcraft; although I don't like either very much because I can't seem to get a game gonig for more than 10 minutes. Rushing kills both games for me.
Starcraft. I still play quite often. Username "Criticom" on East and West. :-)
Starcraft, definitely, for pretty much the exact reasons omfg stated. Though War3 is obviously an extremely well made game, I much prefer the large scale management and strategy over the insane in-battle micromanaging. To me, it takes a lot of the actual strategy out of it. Losing a battle that you had prepared better for, outnumber your enemy in not only sheer numbers, but units directly countering the enemy's choice of units, only because the enemy micromanages to the point where he makes every single unit who starts taking damage, run circles around the battle over and over, sucks huge fucking dick. And that's how 95% of the lvl 10+ War3 players play. To be honest, even though the game isn't as well made, I've had much, much more fun with C&C Generals: Zero Hour than War3 online. :/
Starcraft. I don't think I need to explain its positives to anyone.
I like Warcraft III, especially the single player game...
But not nearly as much as playing multiplayer in Starcraft.
I might eventually like WCIII more, but I've never taken anywhere the amount of time it takes to get good on bnet as I have with SC.
This isn't even close. Before Broodwar, Starcraft was a fantastic game. After Broodwar, it became the best RTS game ever. Warcraft 3 on the other had, was completely not what I wanted from a Blizzard RTS. Frozen throne does little to solve the whole Unit cap/Unit Tax. The game looks fantastic, and I halfway expect the next real Warcraft game (not including WoW, i mean RTS) to be just awesome. But thats only halfway expect. It used to be I always expected it.
Solve it? The unit cap and tax is there to keep battles small and microintensive. I love it. They only rose the limit to 100 food max because of the extra peons you need to get more wood since wood costs increased on everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Error
There really isn't an RTS like WC3, and that's why I'm glad Blizzard took the chance to try it.
Really? I think that's a great feature of WarCraft. Just having units isn't enough, you actually have to play them. I almost never used the "micro" skills in SC, but I use almost all of them in a WC3 game. The FT expansion was really pretty insane and brought a ton to the game, more the Brood War did (except for in story, where BW kills it).Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy
As far as running units? Just group attack his whole force. He can't make them all run.
Well if you're talking about managing the heroes, then yes, I definitely agree there. Managing the heroes is fun and has a lot of strategy you have to consider, but I still think the way everybody plays, by having every single unit constantly run away whenever attacked, is utter bullshit. It's one thing when you're doing that with a hero, I can't blame someone there, but doing it with every foot soldier or ghoul is just annoying as all hell, enough to make me just want to quit the game. I mean honestly, if it's going to take 10 minutes to finish a battle between 10 units because everybody runs and nobody dies, it's just not worth it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FuryFox
Don't get me wrong, I still think War3 is a fantastic game, the single player is excellent, the multi is theoretically excellent, the game is meticulously well thought out, and it plays unlike any other, but there are just things like that, at least online, that annoy me to no end. I guess the game also has a hugly systematic feeling, down to each exact move, that it takes away almost all of the spontaneity that I love of the genre, and that turns me off as well.
omfgninjas:
OK, fix wasn't the right word. Basically before War3 came out I wanted War3 to continue the gameplay style of Starcraft etc. (Obviously, I thought it was best RTS ever right?) Blizzard chose to alter the style of play radically, from Macro to Micro. I didn't find this change enjoyable, and I had hoped that Frozen Trone would at least increase the number of units you could use a bit more substantially than it did. Of course, if they had done this the game would have changed completely, from the style you are enjoying to the style I enjoy.
I'd say the same, except switch Kohan with Empire Earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Victrix
I prefer Siege Engines to Siege Tanks.
http://www.battle.net/war3/images/hu...iegeengine.gif
Nothing says destruction like a Siege Engine.
The multiplayer in Warcraft 3 is too hard for my pussy blood cells. Me and 2 of my friends played LAN against it, and they took us all out before we could have a decent defensive line mustered up.Quote:
Originally Posted by omfgninjas
The one thing I liked about Warcraft 2 was the naval battles with all of those 1000 island maps. Because I could alot a lot of resources in to a second base and build units from it. So if one of my bases were destroyed, chances are the enemy fleet was well depleted enough for me to launch a crippling counter attack.
I'm sure some nostalgia is attached, but man, I loved that game. But the animated sequences in Warcraft 3 make SquareEnix's animation team look like slackers.
The sequence where the orc fights off the big enemy was awesome. I think he died, I can't remember. I just remember a lot of rock and an amazing amount of realism and detail in those animations
I think I'd like Starcraft, but Warcraft will always be better for me. I like primitive weapons and magic over advanced technology and science.
Oh yeah, and I'm a production whore. I like having the option to mount an amazing defense or offense. Just makes it more fun for me.
Perhaps it's because I suck.
Starcraft. I enjoyed myself playing this game more that Warcraft3. I suck at both games, but I suck less at SC. I think it's because I can't wrap my head around doing both building units and getting them organized, along with sending out heros to level up against npc's. I just flat out can't do both at the same time.
Maybe I'm just old. :)
Thats interesting. I haven't played starcraft at high levels, but from what i have seen of the koreans playing, micro plays a HUGE HUGE part in who wins. Or maybe that is just the strong difference i see between thier sc micro and mine. Conversly, i played 2v2 WCIII at high levels, and scouting and strategy was everything. Everyone could micro good enough that it almost became negligable, it became using the correct units for the correct times. The times micro DID matter alot of where similar armys would clash, but i can think of many more cases where that was not the case at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by omfgninjas
Have any of you seen the video about the starcraft champion? It's crazy. He wins in like 5 minutes, but they have this crazy announcer and announce team and everything set up for the event. Even spectators.
I really like Starcraft, played a ton of games on bnet... but I can never get into any of the Warcrafts. Odd.
I play Starcraft almost every night still.
"EightyEightMPH" on US East.
I pretty much only play Map settings games these days, but if anyone wants a game hit me up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icepick
When I get my DSL back (damn Bell Canada bastards :curse: ), I'm game!
Pay attention to what he said:Quote:
Originally Posted by Destin
Quote:
Originally Posted by omfgninjas
For anyone who's a fan of Warcraft III, a little heads up. The 1.13 patch was released today.
And it rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Oh, well, i wasn't actually disagreeing with the notion of common play either. I was just trying to point out that when you get good enough, strategy beings to take a back seat in both genres. In essence, showing i agree.
What?
I managed to confused myself...
Oooooooo sexy. I have to get out and download that then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpy