StarCraft does Warhammer better then Warhammer

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

It seems that Blizzard paired down the 40k uni and tailored it to a RTS design, then wrapped it in a story that worked for a game environment.

For how brutal and epic in scope the 40k uni is, I don't think DoW does the job. Something on the scale of Total War would be a lot more effective for conveying its grit and scope, even if the table top is just skirmish focused.

DanielDust

I've always wished that Gas Powered Games would get the licence for Epic 40K, would be an awesome game.

But I think the scale in DoW1 was quite right for a Warhammer 40k game.

3. Idunno I thought Starcraft 2 looked good until I saw the beta gameplay on Gamespot and Giantbomb...then I realized Blizzard is doing what they always do and appealing to Nostalgia.

mrbojangles25

[QUOTE="Roland123_basic"][QUOTE="aura_enchanted"]

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.

ProudLarry

Agreed, and what's wrong with fleshing out the races in single-player? Nothing.

I look forward to the single-player of SC2 just as much as the multiplayer.

honestly, I thought Dawn of War 1 was a pretty strong game. I still like Starcraft more, because I found it had more replayability to it, thats just MY OPINION.

Both games are great games, so I don't know why people are arguing about it

honestly, I thought Dawn of War 1 was a pretty strong game. I still like Starcraft more, because I found it had more replayability to it, thats just MY OPINION.

Both games are great games, so I don't know why people are arguing about it

m0tl3ysl4y3r

Envy.

OP, you claimed you were refering to the Game's aesthetics, but this is your first message in the thread:

"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 I love Relic and their pursuit of innovation, but to me the Warhammer universe itself is aesthetically outdated.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."

You specifically refer to the WH40k Universe which the relic game is based on. relic didn't create the art style or the lore, they made a game out of it. All of the game models are exact replicas of the GamesWorkshop models. So if you say the game art looks oudated, you're actually saying GamesWorkshop Art is oudated. If Relic had any say as to the art direction they would have made it different, more like COH.

Majd_Abdulqadir

Yeah I do think the GamesWorkshop art is out dated. Said that many times.

Techno-goth outdated? HERETIC!

I find the fantasy universe more interesting than 40k, but 40k is MASSIVE and MANLY.

Oh and regarding the orks - their background in 40k is fascinating. You just have preconceptions because of their name.

[QUOTE="warmaster670"]

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

Rawtheory333

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.

He just said that dawn of war is NOT respresentitive of the 40k universe.

It would help to read things properly before posting.

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

[QUOTE="warmaster670"]

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

sammysalsa

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.

He just said that dawn of war is NOT respresentitive of the 40k universe.

It would help to read things properly before posting.

It's not stealing ideas ffs. It's being inspired or influenced by them. It's all about adding something and giving it your own direction which determines the value of the product anyway. For example many of apple's products are heaviliy influenced by Dieter Rams and yet did Dieter Rams say it was stolen? No he said it was a compliment, because that is what it truly is.

_Pedro_

You can call it whatever you want. Games Workshop calls it theft and so do I.

irrelevant

airshocker

:lol:

Just like Blizzard should call theft WAR, right?

:lol:

Just like Blizzard should call theft WAR, right?

Mograine

Well, considering that sentence makes no sense whatsoever, do I really have to respond? :lol:

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

:lol:

Just like Blizzard should call theft WAR, right?

airshocker

Well, considering that sentence makes no sense whatsoever, do I really have to respond? :lol:

A wrong sentence, made with wrong preconceptions.

Why should I have bothered with a meaningful answer to a random hater?

[QUOTE="dlindenb2000"]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. Roland123_basic

A wrong sentence, made with wrong preconceptions.

Why should I have bothered with a meaningful answer to a random hater?

Mograine

Random hater? You were the one who tried to be snarky with me. I was simply pointing out maybe you should write a proper sentence before you try and get smart with somebody.

Secondly, we're not talking about game-design theft. I fully understand most recent MMOs use WoW as a building block for success. That is perfectly acceptable as long as they aren't infringing on the IP.

What we ARE talking about is IP theft. That is, Blizzard stealing the whole concept of 40K and Warhammer and making brand new IPs that have way too much in common with the original to be merely coincidence.

The simple fact of the matter is Blizzard did steal Game Workshop's IP. They changed enough about it to get away with it, but the theft is still there. You can make irrelevent parallels all you want, it doesn't change the fact.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

A wrong sentence, made with wrong preconceptions.

Why should I have bothered with a meaningful answer to a random hater?

airshocker

Random hater? You were the one who tried to be snarky with me. I was simply pointing out maybe you should write a proper sentence before you try and get smart with somebody.

Secondly, we're not talking about game-design theft. I fully understand most recent MMOs use WoW as a building block for success. That is perfectly acceptable as long as they aren't infringing on the IP.

What we ARE talking about is IP theft. That is, Blizzard stealing the whole concept of 40K and Warhammer and making brand new IPs that have way too much in common with the original to be merely coincidence.

The simple fact of the matter is Blizzard did steal Game Workshop's IP. They changed enough about it to get away with it, but the theft is still there. You can make irrelevent parallels all you want, it doesn't change the fact.

[QUOTE="_Pedro_"]

It's not stealing ideas ffs. It's being inspired or influenced by them. It's all about adding something and giving it your own direction which determines the value of the product anyway. For example many of apple's products are heaviliy influenced by Dieter Rams and yet did Dieter Rams say it was stolen? No he said it was a compliment, because that is what it truly is.

airshocker

You can call it whatever you want. Games Workshop calls it theft and so do I.

edit:

or what the Nordic people had to say about Tolkien :P Not to mention everyone "stealing" everything from the greeks and the greeks themselves "stealing" it from other cultures. Oh let's not forget mister Mozart.

[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

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

[QUOTE="warmaster670"]

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

sammysalsa

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.

He just said that dawn of war is NOT respresentitive of the 40k universe.

It would help to read things properly before posting.

I'm talking about the art direction of the franchises as rep'd in game not the lore you dolt. I said that over and over. And the next time you want to talk **** to me about my thread make sure you read through it first.

@F1_2004

They are adding new units with each expansion pack.

Relic add 2 new races with each expansion, Blizzard add none. That's a massive difference. Blizzard had better not add any new multiplayer units with each expansion. If they don't, then the exp. packs are overpriced but at least only the diehard blizz fanboys would buy all of them. If they add new units, then anyone wanting to be competitive in online play would have to buy all 3 and it would be ridiculous.F1_2004

If the singleplayer campaigns are as well made and expansive as the Terran one and they add new units, (which they obviously will), then the only peeps that'll complain will be the haters. And they'll **** and moan regardless.

@F1_2004

They are adding new units with each expansion pack.

Renevent42

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

@F1_2004

They are adding new units with each expansion pack.

F1_2004

OK that's just ****ing retarded. I'm not buying the game 3 times... let's face it nobody plays singleplayer or buys starcraft for the singleplayer.F1_2004

StarCraft's legacy is in its MP and SP. Its SP campaigns are the absolute best I've experienced in the RTS genre even over ten years later. If the new campaigns for each game is bigger then all three from the OG one then I think thats a good thing and a great way to expand the SC lore.

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

@F1_2004

They are adding new units with each expansion pack.

F1_2004

[QUOTE="F1_2004"]OK that's just ****ing retarded. I'm not buying the game 3 times... let's face it nobody plays singleplayer or buys starcraft for the singleplayer.Rawtheory333

StarCraft's legacy is in its MP and SP. Its SP campaigns are the absolute best I've experienced in the RTS genre even over ten years later. If the new campaigns for each game is bigger then all three from the OG one then I think thats a good thing and a great ways to expand the SC lore.

No way, Starcraft's legacy is by far its MP. Not even debatable. And frankly I think we're now past the age where expansions to RTS games can add just a couple new units and some single-player missions. Most RTS expansions nowadays add more substantial material like new races. Adding some token units is just a cheap way to force anyone who plays MP into buying the game.

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

[QUOTE="F1_2004"]OK that's just ****ing retarded. I'm not buying the game 3 times... let's face it nobody plays singleplayer or buys starcraft for the singleplayer.F1_2004

StarCraft's legacy is in its MP and SP. Its SP campaigns are the absolute best I've experienced in the RTS genre even over ten years later. If the new campaigns for each game is bigger then all three from the OG one then I think thats a good thing and a great ways to expand the SC lore.

No way, Starcraft's legacy is by far its MP. Not even debatable. And frankly I think we're now past the age where expansions to RTS games can add just a couple new units and some single-player missions. Most RTS expansions nowadays add more substantial material like new races. Adding some token units is just a cheap way to force anyone who plays MP into buying the game.

No way, Starcraft's legacy is by far its MP. Not even debatable. And frankly I think we're now past the age where expansions to RTS games can add just a couple new units and some single-player missions. Most RTS expansions nowadays add more substantial material like new races. Adding some token units is just a cheap way to force anyone who plays MP into buying the game.

F1_2004

It is debatable. I had tons on fun in both modes and millions of other people did too. If you were right then SC2 would be MP only and probably some kind of RTS/MMO hybrid since that would be the right way to fleece their fans rather then 2 more campaigns.

[QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

StarCraft's legacy is in its MP and SP. Its SP campaigns are the absolute best I've experienced in the RTS genre even over ten years later. If the new campaigns for each game is bigger then all three from the OG one then I think thats a good thing and a great ways to expand the SC lore.

Renevent42

No way, Starcraft's legacy is by far its MP. Not even debatable. And frankly I think we're now past the age where expansions to RTS games can add just a couple new units and some single-player missions. Most RTS expansions nowadays add more substantial material like new races. Adding some token units is just a cheap way to force anyone who plays MP into buying the game.

So how many units do you think they'll be adding?F1_2004

I'm guessing 3-6. Which is enough to significantly change strats. Same as with Brood War.

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Rawtheory333"]

StarCraft's legacy is in its MP and SP. Its SP campaigns are the absolute best I've experienced in the RTS genre even over ten years later. If the new campaigns for each game is bigger then all three from the OG one then I think thats a good thing and a great ways to expand the SC lore.

F1_2004

No way, Starcraft's legacy is by far its MP. Not even debatable. And frankly I think we're now past the age where expansions to RTS games can add just a couple new units and some single-player missions. Most RTS expansions nowadays add more substantial material like new races. Adding some token units is just a cheap way to force anyone who plays MP into buying the game.

So how many units do you think they'll be adding?F1_2004

You realize how much research and balancing effort does it take to implement units in a game that is perfectly balanced with the mechanics it was first built on, right?

[QUOTE="F1_2004"]

So how many units do you think they'll be adding?Rawtheory333

I'm guessing 3-6. Which is enough to significantly change strats. Same as with Brood War.

Brood War was basically a much-needed rebalancing of SC, which they sold as an expansion. I'm saying nowadays we're getting more than that for our money.

[QUOTE="F1_2004"] So how many units do you think they'll be adding?Mograine

You realize how much research and balancing effort does it take to implement units in a game that is perfectly balanced with the mechanics it was first built on, right?

Designing the balance in games, and more specifically the balance between unlike teams in RTS games, is a very difficult thing to design and implement. It's a process that has to start all the way from the conception of the game.

There's countless articles written on it and developer discussions if you are actually interested in knowing more about it...instead of just mindlessly bashing the game based on false ideas.

Of course it's not, RTS games are adding entire new races in expansions and they play just fine. Not perfect balance, but neither was SC at release.F1_2004

Make an example where races play in a completely different way to eachother, no unit is like any other and the possible combinations and uses of units are almost limitless like in StarCraft.

Yeah, that's right. None.

RTS adding new races only make new models and layers of colors. New races do not radically influence gameplay, nor bring anything new.

It's not the same thing. Not even far from it.

Make an example where races play in a completely different way to eachother, no unit is like any other and the possible combinations and uses of units are almost limitless like in StarCraft.Mograine

Maybe back in the 20th Century it had the most versatile units, but it doesn't even begin to compare to the versatility of modern RTSs. It still may be more diverse, but it's a joke to suggest that a Terran marine has more uses than a standard infantry squad in CoH.

Swiftstrike5

It's more of a joke to suggest the opposite.

[QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]Maybe back in the 20th Century it had the most versatile units, but it doesn't even begin to compare to the versatility of modern RTSs. It still may be more diverse, but it's a joke to suggest that a Terran marine has more uses than a standard infantry squad in CoH.

Mograine

It's more of a joke to suggest the opposite.

Yeah, sure... No point in arguing with a fanboy. Swiftstrike5

No point in arguing with a clueless guy, either. Seeing your sig is really icing on the cake.

[QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]Yeah, sure... No point in arguing with a fanboy. Mograine

No point in arguing with a clueless guy, either. Seeing your sig is really icing on the cake.

Says the guy who said all games not made by Blizzard are not worth playing.Nerkcon

You really enjoy putting words in my mouth, don't you?

[QUOTE="Mograine"]Make an example where races play in a completely different way to eachother, no unit is like any other and the possible combinations and uses of units are almost limitless like in StarCraft.Swiftstrike5

If I remember correctly the allied infantry squad is a hit an run unit. They can get recoilless rifles and grenades. The could take cover and blow MG nests with the right MM by either surrounding them and/or blowing them with grenades. They're cover jumpers, designed to overwhelm the enemy with numbers and good MM and support armor.

The marine in SC can shoot gound and air units, fortify positions by entering bunkers and can gain armor and weapon range upgrades. The usage of stimpacks makes them viable at overwhelming the enemy and base raping. They are the core support unit of SC just like infantry in CoH

All I see are two different RTS design philosophies. Both are core units that have multiple uses. Neither is better then the other.

Relic did genuinely innovate with CoH and was the best balanced RTS since SC. Both franchises are fantastic.

[QUOTE="Nerkcon"] Says the guy who said all games not made by Blizzard are not worth playing.Mograine

You really enjoy putting words in my mouth, don't you?

That is what you implied all the time though. "There are good RTS developers besides Blizzard and Relic, like who?" - YouNerkcon

It's bull**** and you know it.