StarCraft does Warhammer better then Warhammer

Who else here thinks that Blizzards version of Warhammer is better then Warhammer itself. I love Relic and their pursuit of innovation, but to me the Warhammer universe itself is aesthetically outdated. Simplistic design and and way more cartoony then the lore presents itself as. I mean Orks? In a sci-fi setting? Come on! IMO its lame and the over-arching design of the Uni is decades old and it shows.

StarCraft and part 2 specifically looks totally badass; realistic while maintaining a cartoon-lite aesthetic thats way less evident then in a game like WoW. The uni looks totally cohesive and detailed as hell. The mini animated pre-renders of each unit continue to add tons of atmosphere to the sequel. It really stomps Warhammer in the audio dept. too. All the different units audio cues are perfect once again and greatly contribute to the aesthetic cohesion of the uni. Anyone else feel the same or oppose?

Who else here thinks that Blizzards version of Warhammer is better then Warhammer itself. I love Relic and their pursuit of innovation, but to me the Warhammer universe itself is aesthetically outdated. Simplistic design and and way more cartoony then the lore presents itself as. I mean Orks? In a sci-fi setting? Come on! IMO its lame and the over-arching design of the Uni is decades old and it shows.

StarCraft and part 2 specifically looks totally badass; realistic while maintaining a cartoon-lite aesthetic thats way less evident then in a game like WoW. The uni looks totally cohesive and detailed as hell. The mini animated pre-renders of each unit continue to add tons of atmosphere to the sequel. It really stomps Warhammer in the audio dept. too. All the different units audio cues are perfect once again and greatly contribute to the aesthetic cohesion of the uni. Anyone else feel the same or oppose?

Rawtheory333

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.Roland123_basic

the warhammer 40k universe is awesome... and the games are so different i dont even think they can even be compared.

if youre talking about the story telling in the games, then yes starcraft by far is the better of the two.

the weird thing is that as generic/traditional starcraft 2 might look, i think its the only high profile rts still using that formula. dawn of war, C&C, supreme commander, all seem to be focusing on instant action, and very little base building. I almost want it for that reason alone...heh

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"]nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.Makari

WH40K as a fiction and universe is so far above Starcraft in terms of quality of make and depth and breadth. Don't take this as me being defensive because I'm not, but by the way you talk about it, you don't sound as though you know much about WH40K beyond what of it is depicted in the Dawn of War video game franchise (correct me if I'm wrong), which in no way does justice to the overall lore.

Also, I wouldn't say Starcraft does Warhammer at all, it's a very different fiction despite all the similarities due to it originally being intended to be a 40K game in its very early stages.

nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

Roland123_basic

Are all of your posts an incoherent and hate-filled mess as this one is?

"build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" have you ever even played StarCraft?

Enough to grasp the basics about it, I mean. A bunch of matches where your opponent wipes the floor with you isn't what I'd call "played".

It's common knowledge among gamers StarCraft's strategy and tactics depth is unrivaled, it's beyond me how can you even dream of saying that.

StarCraft 2 looks to you...judging by which criterias? Your "knowledge" of RTSs and the beta, of which I bet you haven't even watched ten minutes dismissing it as generic even before opening the links to the live streams?

Luckily you aren't representative of all the Relic community. But you sure are trying hard to make it look bad to everyone.

[QUOTE="Makari"][QUOTE="Roland123_basic"]nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.Roland123_basic

If you stop being ignorant and think then you'd see that:

1) A game, Starcraft 2, is not only multiplayer and you are not "people" but a random guy, people buy SC 2 for both sp and multiplayer, only some buy it especially for mutiplayer but even they care about the sp campaign.

2) Every game has an entire campaign and adds new units to the multiplayer.

3) Nobody complained about DoW for example (looots of expansions) so all you're looking for is to vent you're hatred because you have absolutely no valid argument.

4) They do not make you buy the other two, you can play just fine with the first one, but you wouldn't be trolling now would ya?

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"][QUOTE="Makari"] While I agree that WH is superior to SC as an overall universe, Blizzard is charging you 1x for the same game. Starcraft 1: 30 mission SP campaign Starcraft 2: 26-30 mission SP campaign That they're fleshing out the Terran experience and focusing the entire campaign on that first isn't exactly a horrible thing automatically.DanielDust

If you stop being ignorant and think then you'd see that:

1) A game, Starcraft 2, is not only multiplayer and you are not "people" but a random guy, people buy SC 2 for both sp and multiplayer, only some buy it especially for mutiplayer but even they care about the sp campaign.

2) Every game has an entire campaign and adds new units to the multiplayer.

3) Nobody complained about DoW for example (looots of expansions) so all you're looking for is to vent you're hatred because you have absolutely no valid argument.

4) They do not make you buy the other two, you can play just fine with the first one, but you wouldn't be trolling now would ya?

nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

Roland123_basic

OMG! Relic is splitted the game in 4 parts! What a bunch of bastards!

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"] nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

RichardStallman

OMG! Relic is splitted the game in 4 parts! What a bunch of bastards!

WH40K as a fiction and universe is so far above Starcraft in terms of quality of make and depth and breadth. Don't take this as me being defensive because I'm not, but by the way you talk about it, you don't sound as though you know much about WH40K beyond what of it is depicted in the Dawn of War video game franchise (correct me if I'm wrong), which in no way does justice to the overall lore.

Also, I wouldn't say Starcraft does Warhammer at all, it's a very different fiction despite all the similarities due to it originally being intended to be a 40K game in its very early stages.

JP_Russell

i need to agree here comparing starcraft to warhammer 40k is dumb.. like it or not we have a history, a lore, books, a TABETOP GAME OLDER THAN YOU PROBABLY ARE, and depth that has spanned generations of dedicated fanbase. what is starcraft a poop board game, 2.5 video games (.5 being brood war), and a m,ass addicition in s. korea. theres just no comparing. its like comparing monty python to jeff dunham. monty python and the associated comic troup had year to perfect there art dunham has been with us what 2-3 years :P

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"] nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

Mograine

Are all of your posts an incoherent and hate-filled mess as this one is?

"build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" have you ever even played StarCraft?

Enough to grasp the basics about it, I mean. A bunch of matches where your opponent wipes the floor with you isn't what I'd call "played".

It's common knowledge among gamers StarCraft's strategy and tactics depth is unrivaled, it's beyond me how can you even dream of saying that.

StarCraft 2 looks to you...judging by which criterias? Your "knowledge" of RTSs and the beta, of which I bet you haven't even watched ten minutes dismissing it as generic even before opening the links to the live streams?

Luckily you aren't representative of all the Relic community. But you sure are trying hard to make it look bad to everyone.

actually the bolded part is bang on starcraft 1 and what starcraft 2 is becoming is more classic generic rts..ness it has no stunning bits that make it unique. C&C has super weapons, CoH has a setting rarely seen in good quality, sup commander has its MASSIVE scale, wc3 has its hero system, DoW has its lack of resource management (and now) base building. starcraft was warcraft 2 in space they need to seriously bring a STUNNING program in order to make it really stand out. the days of old are dead let em stay that way plz.

[QUOTE="JP_Russell"]

WH40K as a fiction and universe is so far above Starcraft in terms of quality of make and depth and breadth. Don't take this as me being defensive because I'm not, but by the way you talk about it, you don't sound as though you know much about WH40K beyond what of it is depicted in the Dawn of War video game franchise (correct me if I'm wrong), which in no way does justice to the overall lore.

Also, I wouldn't say Starcraft does Warhammer at all, it's a very different fiction despite all the similarities due to it originally being intended to be a 40K game in its very early stages.

aura_enchanted

i need to agree here comparing starcraft to warhammer 40k is dumb.. like it or not we have a history, a lore, books, a TABETOP GAME OLDER THAN YOU PROBABLY ARE, and depth that has spanned generations of dedicated fanbase. what is starcraft a poop board game, 2.5 video games (.5 being brood war), and a m,ass addicition in s. korea. theres just no comparing. its like comparing monty python to jeff dunham. monty python and the associated comic troup had year to perfect there art dunham has been with us what 2-3 years :P

Confirmed. Also I was born in 1993, Warhammer was created in 1987, games got me beat by six whole years.

it has no stunning bits that make it unique.

aura_enchanted

Stopped reading there.

StarCraft is still unrivaled. No other RTS has ever managed to reach such strategy and tactics depth using only units and terrain. They all have to put something to distract you from real RTS play that in the long run kills the game.

StarCraft 2 is made with the same concepts. Give the player a bunch of maps and units and don't add extra hassles and let him do what he wants, how he wants.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"] nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

aura_enchanted

Are all of your posts an incoherent and hate-filled mess as this one is?

"build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" have you ever even played StarCraft?

Enough to grasp the basics about it, I mean. A bunch of matches where your opponent wipes the floor with you isn't what I'd call "played".

It's common knowledge among gamers StarCraft's strategy and tactics depth is unrivaled, it's beyond me how can you even dream of saying that.

StarCraft 2 looks to you...judging by which criterias? Your "knowledge" of RTSs and the beta, of which I bet you haven't even watched ten minutes dismissing it as generic even before opening the links to the live streams?

Luckily you aren't representative of all the Relic community. But you sure are trying hard to make it look bad to everyone.

actually the bolded part is bang on starcraft 1 and what starcraft 2 is becoming is more classic generic rts..ness it has no stunning bits that make it unique. C&C has super weapons, CoH has a setting rarely seen in good quality, sup commander has its MASSIVE scale, wc3 has its hero system, DoW has its lack of resource management (and now) base building. starcraft was warcraft 2 in space they need to seriously bring a STUNNING program in order to make it really stand out. the days of old are dead let em stay that way plz.

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"] nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

Mograine

Are all of your posts an incoherent and hate-filled mess as this one is?

"build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" have you ever even played StarCraft?

Enough to grasp the basics about it, I mean. A bunch of matches where your opponent wipes the floor with you isn't what I'd call "played".

It's common knowledge among gamers StarCraft's strategy and tactics depth is unrivaled, it's beyond me how can you even dream of saying that.

StarCraft 2 looks to you...judging by which criterias? Your "knowledge" of RTSs and the beta, of which I bet you haven't even watched ten minutes dismissing it as generic even before opening the links to the live streams?

Luckily you aren't representative of all the Relic community. But you sure are trying hard to make it look bad to everyone.

I have to totally disagree with the TC.....I watched the SC 2 Beta on GS and felt as if I was looking at the original SC...it didn't impress me. Even before the SC beta was realeased...the Warhammer series has always been much better to me...the visuals, the game-play, the story...I seemed to enjoy these much, much more than SC.

*+

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"][QUOTE="Makari"] While I agree that WH is superior to SC as an overall universe, Blizzard is charging you 1x for the same game. Starcraft 1: 30 mission SP campaign Starcraft 2: 26-30 mission SP campaign That they're fleshing out the Terran experience and focusing the entire campaign on that first isn't exactly a horrible thing automatically.DanielDust

If you stop being ignorant and think then you'd see that:

1) A game, Starcraft 2, is not only multiplayer and you are not "people" but a random guy, people buy SC 2 for both sp and multiplayer, only some buy it especially for mutiplayer but even they care about the sp campaign.

2) Every game has an entire campaign and adds new units to the multiplayer.

3) Nobody complained about DoW for example (looots of expansions) so all you're looking for is to vent you're hatred because you have absolutely no valid argument.

4) They do not make you buy the other two, you can play just fine with the first one, but you wouldn't be trolling now would ya?

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"] nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

RichardStallman

OMG! Relic is splitted the game in 4 parts! What a bunch of bastards!

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"] nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.

starcraft 2 looks to be about as generic of an RTS as you can make. with games like Company of Heroes redefining the genre with REAL TACTICS... there is no place for starcraft 2's "build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" model.

aura_enchanted

Are all of your posts an incoherent and hate-filled mess as this one is?

"build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" have you ever even played StarCraft?

Enough to grasp the basics about it, I mean. A bunch of matches where your opponent wipes the floor with you isn't what I'd call "played".

It's common knowledge among gamers StarCraft's strategy and tactics depth is unrivaled, it's beyond me how can you even dream of saying that.

StarCraft 2 looks to you...judging by which criterias? Your "knowledge" of RTSs and the beta, of which I bet you haven't even watched ten minutes dismissing it as generic even before opening the links to the live streams?

Luckily you aren't representative of all the Relic community. But you sure are trying hard to make it look bad to everyone.

actually the bolded part is bang on starcraft 1 and what starcraft 2 is becoming is more classic generic rts..ness it has no stunning bits that make it unique. C&C has super weapons, CoH has a setting rarely seen in good quality, sup commander has its MASSIVE scale, wc3 has its hero system, DoW has its lack of resource management (and now) base building. starcraft was warcraft 2 in space they need to seriously bring a STUNNING program in order to make it really stand out. the days of old are dead let em stay that way plz.

No, they have already stated that they will add a few new units with every game. Anyway I don't see your problem, buy only the first game and enjoy your multiplayer or go on without caring about SC2, not everyone has to like it, you'll find games that are especially for your taste.

No, they have already stated that they will add a few new units with every game. Anyway I don't see your problem, but only the first game and enjoy your multiplayer or go on without caring about SC2, not everyone has to like it, you'll find games that are especially for your taste.DanielDust

[QUOTE="Makari"][QUOTE="Roland123_basic"]nope, sorry. Warhammer 40k is a much better property with a more interesting lore and dynamic. blizzard burned their bridges with me when they decided to charge me 3x for the same game, and then charge for player made maps on top of it.Roland123_basic

Blizzard is yet to state the cost of the subsequent packages that will release. For all you know, if you own the Terran pack for 50 dollars, you may be able to just download the zerg and protoss packs for 20 as a download.

[QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

Are all of your posts an incoherent and hate-filled mess as this one is?

"build 100 units and throw them at the enemies 100 units" have you ever even played StarCraft?

Enough to grasp the basics about it, I mean. A bunch of matches where your opponent wipes the floor with you isn't what I'd call "played".

It's common knowledge among gamers StarCraft's strategy and tactics depth is unrivaled, it's beyond me how can you even dream of saying that.

StarCraft 2 looks to you...judging by which criterias? Your "knowledge" of RTSs and the beta, of which I bet you haven't even watched ten minutes dismissing it as generic even before opening the links to the live streams?

Luckily you aren't representative of all the Relic community. But you sure are trying hard to make it look bad to everyone.

Roland123_basic

actually the bolded part is bang on starcraft 1 and what starcraft 2 is becoming is more classic generic rts..ness it has no stunning bits that make it unique. C&C has super weapons, CoH has a setting rarely seen in good quality, sup commander has its MASSIVE scale, wc3 has its hero system, DoW has its lack of resource management (and now) base building. starcraft was warcraft 2 in space they need to seriously bring a STUNNING program in order to make it really stand out. the days of old are dead let em stay that way plz.

The main disappointment for me is this is what they come up with for the sequel after HOW LONG in development ?!!!! .....I would think with that much time working on one game the experience would be nothing short of something like landing on MARS ! ....I really do hope they come out with a superior finished product when it's (finally) released....but from what I have seen to this point it doesn't look promising to me.........:(

*+

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]No, they have already stated that they will add a few new units with every game. Anyway I don't see your problem, but only the first game and enjoy your multiplayer or go on without caring about SC2, not everyone has to like it, you'll find games that are especially for your taste.Roland123_basic

Also, to go back to the original topic: I've always hated the "StarCraft is Warhammer 40K" stuff. StarCraft draws alot more from Starship Troopers when it comes to the relationship between Terrans and Zerg, than it does from WH40K. The Terrans are nothing like the Imperium of Man.

My 300 death skullz orks and 70 Blood Angel space marines sitting on my desk disagree with you.

Lore: 40k > starcraft in so many ways you couldn't possibly imagine.

Gaming: While I enjoy playing both starcraft and dawn of war I'm gonna have to say that Company of Heroes is much better than both of them.

Table-top: 40k is one of the funnest games I have probably ever played when it comes to board gaming. The strategy you have to use in one game alone is leaps ahead of anything you have to deal with in a single game of starcraft.

In my tastes:

Warcraft background > Warhammer background

Warhammer 40.000 background > Starcraft background

Also, I like more DoW 1 than Starcraft in online rts, but Starcraft is more balanced.

Despite my personal preferences, I can't wait to enter in the beta.

My OP was about the aesthetics of the games, not the lore or the gameplay. I think it aesthetics of Warhammer as represented by DoW 1 & 2 are not as polished and representative of a cohesive and believable uni as StarCraft 1 and esp 2.

Gameplay innovation wise. CoH> StarCfaft, DoH 1 & 2. I still think StarCraft is a close second though because of its balance.

Polish and community wise StarCraft 2> everything else And this is why I want this game. I think CoH is the best RTS I've ever played but the matchmaking system and the lack of players made me stop playing. Blizzard has the money and independence to polish this game to perfection and I expect battlenet to be well maintained and coded and to have an exponentially larger player base.

I love Relic and I wish they had the money Blizzard does, but aesthetically I think the SC2 is far ahead of DoH 2 and I expect SC2 to have one to the most polished and stable releases of the year.

Who else here thinks that Blizzards version of Warhammer is better then Warhammer itself. I love Relic and their pursuit of innovation, but to me the Warhammer universe itself is aesthetically outdated. Simplistic design and and way more cartoony then the lore presents itself as. I mean Orks? In a sci-fi setting? Come on! IMO its lame and the over-arching design of the Uni is decades old and it shows.

StarCraft and part 2 specifically looks totally badass; realistic while maintaining a cartoon-lite aesthetic thats way less evident then in a game like WoW. The uni looks totally cohesive and detailed as hell. The mini animated pre-renders of each unit continue to add tons of atmosphere to the sequel. It really stomps Warhammer in the audio dept. too. All the different units audio cues are perfect once again and greatly contribute to the aesthetic cohesion of the uni. Anyone else feel the same or oppose?

Rawtheory333

Sorry, Dawn of War =/= warhammer 40k, w40k is grittier than anything blizzard could produce.

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

Who else here thinks that Blizzards version of Warhammer is better then Warhammer itself. I love Relic and their pursuit of innovation, but to me the Warhammer universe itself is aesthetically outdated. Simplistic design and and way more cartoony then the lore presents itself as. I mean Orks? In a sci-fi setting? Come on! IMO its lame and the over-arching design of the Uni is decades old and it shows.

StarCraft and part 2 specifically looks totally badass; realistic while maintaining a cartoon-lite aesthetic thats way less evident then in a game like WoW. The uni looks totally cohesive and detailed as hell. The mini animated pre-renders of each unit continue to add tons of atmosphere to the sequel. It really stomps Warhammer in the audio dept. too. All the different units audio cues are perfect once again and greatly contribute to the aesthetic cohesion of the uni. Anyone else feel the same or oppose?

warmaster670

Sorry, Dawn of War =/= warhammer 40k, w40k is grittier than anything blizzard could produce.

[QUOTE="warmaster670"]

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

Who else here thinks that Blizzards version of Warhammer is better then Warhammer itself. I love Relic and their pursuit of innovation, but to me the Warhammer universe itself is aesthetically outdated. Simplistic design and and way more cartoony then the lore presents itself as. I mean Orks? In a sci-fi setting? Come on! IMO its lame and the over-arching design of the Uni is decades old and it shows.

StarCraft and part 2 specifically looks totally badass; realistic while maintaining a cartoon-lite aesthetic thats way less evident then in a game like WoW. The uni looks totally cohesive and detailed as hell. The mini animated pre-renders of each unit continue to add tons of atmosphere to the sequel. It really stomps Warhammer in the audio dept. too. All the different units audio cues are perfect once again and greatly contribute to the aesthetic cohesion of the uni. Anyone else feel the same or oppose?

ProudLarry

Sorry, Dawn of War =/= warhammer 40k, w40k is grittier than anything blizzard could produce.

its to bad they WoWified diablo 3.

Sorry, Dawn of War =/= warhammer 40k, w40k is grittier than anything blizzard could produce.

warmaster670

Sorry I owned DoW 1 got one expansion and played the DoW2 demo. Looking at those games alone, I got no grit from em. The terran campaign had great moments and felt a lot more life and death then the DoW games. The Warhammer legacy might be gritter but the games don't translate that well enough IMO.

Regarding the comparion of the Starcraft 3 part sale and the Dawn of War 3 expansions. Correct me if I am wrong, as I may have been mis-informed. But the DoW was 1 full price game and 3 expansion priced expansions. Starcraft is 3 full priced products. I can see the issue some people may have with that. dlindenb2000

40k universe > star craft

star craft game > dow 2.

40k should have more units, fair play the table top version isnt like that but just imagine playing huge armies with awesome base building etc. Also a better army painter would have been good..

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"][QUOTE="DanielDust"]No, they have already stated that they will add a few new units with every game. Anyway I don't see your problem, but only the first game and enjoy your multiplayer or go on without caring about SC2, not everyone has to like it, you'll find games that are especially for your taste.DanielDust

let me translate this.... "it doesnt exist and i just said it to sound smart.... so now im going to shrug off the fact that he is challenging me on my info and make it sound like i couldnt care less about what he thinks."

no quote/link, information doesnt exist and you dont know what you are talking about.....

Regarding the comparion of the Starcraft 3 part sale and the Dawn of War 3 expansions. Correct me if I am wrong, as I may have been mis-informed. But the DoW was 1 full price game and 3 expansion priced expansions. Starcraft is 3 full priced products. I can see the issue some people may have with that. dlindenb2000

In reply to the OP regarding the Universes and Lore of starcraft VS WH40K ( I'm not talking about the game interpretations ) I would say this:

This fellow lives in a universe filled with malice and cruelty in which "There is only war". If you get the chance to read some of the books or look at the graphic novels you'll see how fleshed out the races/factions and nations within this universe are. There are epic conflicts and politics. Yes there are also Orks, and they have great lore.

To compare the 40K Marines with any other SciFi Marine is a joke. Read this forum post for a comparison:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.87450-Space-Marines-Theyre-becoming-wimpier-with-each-generation-Now-with-added-ORK

In reply to the OP regarding the Universes and Lore of starcraft VS WH40K ( I'm not talking about the game interpretations ) I would say this:

Majd_Abdulqadir

Already stated that this was about the aesthetics of the games, not the lore of the franchises.

the games at face value are two different horses because of the history and lore without them neither is actually all that good. DoW2 is just bland then and starcraft just isnt engaging enough to be worth anyones time. no lore no game period. this is why we dont have generic shooter 2

the games at face value are two different horses because of the history and lore without them neither is actually all that good. DoW2 is just bland then and starcraft just isnt engaging enough to be worth anyones time. no lore no game period. this is why we dont have generic shooter 2

aura_enchanted

If a gamer has to have a lot of familiarity with the lore of a game's uni before he gets it for it to it be any good, then that means the games probably not that great. StarCraft would still be a classic game w/o the lore. DoW2 on the other hand.....Aesthetically there's a lot of similar themes shared between the 2 (and I know Blizzard hadto take inspiration from WarHammer 30K)but as games, SC2 is far more cohesive, believable and polished, judging from the HD uploads to youtube.

[QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

the games at face value are two different horses because of the history and lore without them neither is actually all that good. DoW2 is just bland then and starcraft just isnt engaging enough to be worth anyones time. no lore no game period. this is why we dont have generic shooter 2

Rawtheory333

If an gamer has to has a lot of familiarity with the lore of a games uni before he gets it to have it be any good then that means the games probably not that good. Actually StarCraft would still be a classic game w/o the lore. DoW2 on the other hand.....Aesthetically there's a lot of similar themes shared between the 2 (and I know Blizzard hadto take inspiration from WarHammer 30K)but as games, SC2 is far more cohesive, believable and polished, judging from the HD uploads to youtube.