WiCs mp is on awhole nother level.

All Starcraft has is hype and a loyal WoW like fanbase who will call what ever Blizzard gives them "amazing" :roll:

SC2 had a good SP, yeah I admit that but its multiplayer is really dated compared to WiCs 16 player online and built in clan vs clan system.

WiC compared to SC2 on a technical level is like comparing N64 to 360, big difference.

SC2 did nothing to change the RTS genre, WiC did and it succeeded (won many RTS of the year awards and got 9.5s from like everywhere)

WiC>>SC2

WiC is a lot of fun online, but its too shallow. The mechanics are to simple compared to other RTS's. I played the game a lot at launch and it all boiled down to very simple rock-paper-sissors mechanics.

That is your opinion. Not much who'd agree, but you're entitled to it.

As Voltaire once said:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

WiC is a lot of fun online, but its too shallow. The mechanics are to simple compared to other RTS's. I played the game a lot at launch and it all boiled down to very simple rock-paper-sissors mechanics.

cobrax25

WiC is a lot of fun online, but its too shallow. The mechanics are to simple compared to other RTS's. I played the game a lot at launch and it all boiled down to very simple rock-paper-sissors mechanics.

*sigh*

Coming from the same guy who claimed APB would kill WoW...

WiC MP makes SC2 MP look outdated?

So, how does WiC fare in competitive gaming? Does it even have a competitive scene? Right...you failed even before starting to write the first post in the thread.

Not really... I hate WOW and I am loving starcraft2.

World In Conflict is a great game but I dont think its better then Starcraft2.

Wait wait wait, are you honestly trying to compare WiC and SC2? /facepalm I guess that's your opinion, but it'll be hard to find people that agree.hexashadow13

Not really, some people is really delusional when it comes to Blizzard games, and claim everything about them sucks because they are not innovative or don't have enough depth. For some odd reason, I would bet my arms that these guys all suck hard at them.

[QUOTE="hexashadow13"]Wait wait wait, are you honestly trying to compare WiC and SC2? /facepalm I guess that's your opinion, but it'll be hard to find people that agree.N30F3N1X

Not really, some people is really delusional when it comes to Blizzard games, and claim everything about them sucks because they are not innovative or don't have enough depth. For some odd reason, I would bet my arms that these guys all suck hard at them.

WiC focuses on teamwork alot more than individual skill, though I don't really like playing either online. I much preferred WC3 :)

*sigh*

Coming from the same guy who claimed APB would kill WoW...

WiC MP makes SC2 MP look outdated?

So, how does WiC fare in competitive gaming? Does it even have a competitive scene? Right...you failed even before starting to write the first post in the thread.

N30F3N1X

Not sure if it still has some but there used to be tournies where people would play for some prize money. Also yes the game is very competititive more along the lines of a team sport such as soccer or football; where every player on the team needs to be doing their job. As for being more competitve than SC2 probably not.

Really? I think World in Conflict just feels like a quick pick up and play console kind of RTS thing without a soul. It's a nice idea, but like I said it lacks a lot of soul, which is something Starcraft 2 has a lot of... and since I never played SC online SC2 feels really fresh to me.

WiC is a lot of fun online, but its too shallow. The mechanics are to simple compared to other RTS's. I played the game a lot at launch and it all boiled down to very simple rock-paper-sissors mechanics.

Starcraft II is without doubt an example of how far brand will take you over quality, I agree with you, all flash, more mainstreaming ... but just so far behind.Birdy09

Starcraft II is without doubt an example of how far brand will take you over quality, I agree with you, all flash, more mainstreaming ... but just so far behind.Birdy09

So far behind what, exactly?

SC2's online is pretty much Warcraft3 with different skins and such. At least that's the feel I got when I played it.Ringx55

Company of Heroes makes SC2 look dated.

Company of Heroes makes SC2 look dated.

Orchid87

SC2's online is pretty much Warcraft3 with different skins and such. At least that's the feel I got when I played it.Ringx55

Huh? SC2 moves so much faster and has much much less emphasis on individual units and much large battles.

Company of Heroes makes SC2 look dated.

Orchid87

Not really. People need to understand gameplay cannot be dated. If everything tried to be like COH then SC2s gameplay would be far less common (which it is actually) and everyone would complain everything is a COH clone. There are main different types of RTS and many different playstyles, none of them can be "outdated" sure they can overused but never outdated.

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

Company of Heroes makes SC2 look dated.

smokeydabear076

I don't mean the defining game mechanics (for example resources system). I mean the tactical possibilities - an area in which CoH excels while SC2 is still at 1998 level.

I don't mean the defining game mechanics (for example resources system). I mean the tactical possibilities - an area in which CoH excels while SC2 is still at 1998 level.

Orchid87

Cars use wheels.

Wheels were invented ten thousand years before Christ, that's a thousand decades before today.

Cars are outdated!

[QUOTE="Birdy09"]Starcraft II is without doubt an example of how far brand will take you over quality, I agree with you, all flash, more mainstreaming ... but just so far behind.N30F3N1X

So far behind what, exactly?

How can RTS even be dated anyway? The formula has been the same for decades.

SC2 is so great because it is easy to learn but difficult to master.Zero5000X

That can really be said about any RTS.

Ninja-Hippo

Edit that...a pic alone is moddable as disruptive posting.

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

I don't mean the defining game mechanics (for example resources system). I mean the tactical possibilities - an area in which CoH excels while SC2 is still at 1998 level.

N30F3N1X

Cars use wheels.

Wheels were invented ten thousand years before Christ, that's a thousand decades before today.

Cars are outdated!

There are wooden wheels and there are Goodyear wheels :P

WiCs competitive scene is huge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTxLOoCd7d0

Its just team based since it isn't1 v 1 type game like Starcraft

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"]SC2 is so great because it is easy to learn but difficult to master.NanoMan88

That can really be said about any RTS.

True though starcraft has a huge gap between moderates and pros. It's kind of like Quake.

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"]

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

Company of Heroes makes SC2 look dated.

Orchid87

I don't mean the defining game mechanics (for example resources system). I mean the tactical possibilities - an area in which CoH excels while SC2 is still at 1998 level.

Starcraft II is without doubt an example of how far brand will take you over quality, I agree with you, all flash, more mainstreaming ... but just so far behind.Birdy09

lol you really think sc2 has no tactics? it has INFINITELY more than CoH.

ironman388

Stopped reading right there

Oh Instashot, is there anything you think that isn't ridiculous? How's APB coming btw?

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"]What happens when everything else is like Company of Heroes? Would you want Starcraft 2 to be like CoH? That would essentially make it DoW with different skins.

ironman388

I don't mean the defining game mechanics (for example resources system). I mean the tactical possibilities - an area in which CoH excels while SC2 is still at 1998 level.

I find it funny when starcraft fanboys get all patriotic about their games and to try to make themselves feel better insult other games. COH does not put your dudes in cover automatically, only when they are really close to it and I mean really close. Most of the time you have to put your own troops behind cover. I have a feeling you havent even played one online match. COH, SC2 and WIC are all different from each other and play different. Just because you have mastered SC doesnt mean you automatically know everything about all other RTS games

I find it funny when starcraft fanboys get all patriotic about their games and to try to make themselves feel better insult other games. COH does not put your dudes in cover automatically, only when they are really close to it and I mean really close. Most of the time you have to put your own troops behind cover. I have a feeling you havent even played one online match. COH, SC2 and WIC are all different from each other and play different. Just because you have mastered SC doesnt mean you automatically know everything about all other RTS games

NanoMan88

You worded it wrong. It's "If you mastered SC, you couldn't care less about other RTSs".

Also nobody other than probably the people who went pro at these respective games has the right to talk abouthow much depth it has.

You worded it wrong. It's "If you mastered SC, you couldn't care less about other RTSs".

N30F3N1X

That actually sums up the fanboys. But I must confess - I love SC2. Just not as much as CoH. :oops:

Also nobody other than probably the people who went pro at these respective games has the right to talk abouthow much depth it has.

NanoMan88

Surely we can twist that "depth" into every other thing that comes to mind when you make a comparison...right?

No its doesn't there both great games that offer fantastic sp and mp experiences. There just different style of rts calling one type outdated is stupid i for one prefer variety and sc2 is a welcome game in a time when most rts are going the no basebuilding/resource gathering route i was begining to think dune style rts where dying out and sc2 is the best and most polished one in years.

That actually sums up the fanboys. But I must confess - I love SC2. Just not as much as CoH. :oops:

Orchid87

Fanboys?

Do you have a remote idea of what "mastering SC" means?

Do you have a remote idea of what "mastering SC" means?

N30F3N1X

Lets not start the talk about elitism and Korea, please :P

Lets not start the talk about elitism and Korea, please :P

Orchid87

Fine.

Do you have a remote idea of what "mastering SC2" means?

[spoiler] I'm kidding, don't get mad =_= [/spoiler]

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

Lets not start the talk about elitism and Korea, please :P

N30F3N1X

Fine.

Do you have a remote idea of what "mastering SC2" means?

Are you implying that SC is harder to master than CoH?

[QUOTE="N30F3N1X"]

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

Lets not start the talk about elitism and Korea, please :P

Orchid87

Fine.

Do you have a remote idea of what "mastering SC2" means?

Are you implying that SC is harder to master than CoH?