World in Conflict multiplayer makes Starcraft 2 look as dated as it really is.

It is. But CoH mechanics is a step forward in reducing the unnecessary micro/multi-tasking in RTS thus resulted in a much more tactical/battlefield focus gameplay rather than click fest.

Ravenchrome

I kinda agree.

[QUOTE="Ravenchrome"]

It is. But CoH mechanics is a step forward in reducing the unnecessary micro/multi-tasking in RTS thus resulted in a much more tactical/battlefield focus gameplay rather than click fest.

Orchid87

I kinda agree.

For me, that's unnecessary challenge as RTS is supposed to concentrate on making decision and experimentation rather who can multi-task the best.

When I won a match in Sc or Sc2, I felt like I was simply faster and more experience than my opponent. It's an emotional satisfaction but not an intellectual one.

On the other hand in CoH, I felt like I was out-smarting my opponent. It's intellectually satisfying and that's what RTS or any form of strategy games should strive to be.

Do I have to mention that CoH actually allows a player who was under pressure to come back with a good plan?

[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.smokeydabear076

Starcraft2 online is way way better then Company Of Heroes of WIC.

The campaigns though for COH and WIC are very good imo.

[QUOTE="NanoMan88"]

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

N30F3N1X

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

If your such a master at SC and dont care about other games, why do you come into a topic featuring a some game you dont care about being pitted up against starcraft?

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"]

[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.Birdy09

Still prefer the better game

Starcraft 2

If your such a master at SC and dont care about other games, why do you come into a topic featuring a some game you dont care about being pitted up against starcraft?

NanoMan88

What? Those are your assumptions.

[QUOTE="NanoMan88"]

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

N30F3N1X

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

Oh yeah so if your such a master at COH because you played starcraft why dont you enroll yourself in a COH tournment and earn some money? Like its so easy and your already familiar with the depth of the game without playing it? I bet your sorry ass would be knocked out round 1. Im not claiming to know the ins and outs of starcraft like you and knowing how deep of a game it is. Also posting your little cartoon pictures without providing a valid rebuttle is sort of sad but I would expect that from a child like you.

Each of these games has its respective depth and you cannot judge its depth unless you have mastered it.

Oh yeah so if your such a master at COH because you played starcraft why dont you enroll yourself in a COH tournment and earn some money? Like its so easy and your already familiar with the depth of the game without playing it? I bet your sorry ass would be knocked out round 1. Im not claiming to know the ins and outs of starcraft like you and knowing how deep of a game it is. Also posting your little cartoon pictures without providing a valid rebuttle is sort of sad but I would expect that from a child like you.

Each of these games has its respective depth and you cannot judge its depth unless you have mastered it.

NanoMan88

A valid rebuttle is given as answer for a valid reply.

According to your logic, noone should judge any game unless they're pro at it.

Also, nice job with all those assumptions pulled out from your bottom. You've created a conspiracy theory.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

[QUOTE="Birdy09"] I agree, but Starcraft II other than its presentation hasnt giving me any feeling other than "Ive played this before, only this looks like its from 2005+". great game, but its just like C&C 3 as far as im concerned, only actually good.AncientDozer

Well I dont see why they would change the formula? Millions of people are happy with it. Why would you abandon your loyal fans for some relativiley unknown group who doesnt care much for your games.

Each of these games has very different gameplay and are deeper in their respective catagories.

People need to understand though that COH plays a bigger roles in tactics over micro which Starcraft plays more importance to. Hell in COH if your tanks are in a straight line none of them can fire but the one in the front because the others will just hit the tank that's infront of them. That sort of thing needs a special kind of skill and awareness to be competitive with.

[QUOTE="NanoMan88"]

Oh yeah so if your such a master at COH because you played starcraft why dont you enroll yourself in a COH tournment and earn some money? Like its so easy and your already familiar with the depth of the game without playing it? I bet your sorry ass would be knocked out round 1. Im not claiming to know the ins and outs of starcraft like you and knowing how deep of a game it is. Also posting your little cartoon pictures without providing a valid rebuttle is sort of sad but I would expect that from a child like you.

Each of these games has its respective depth and you cannot judge its depth unless you have mastered it.

N30F3N1X

A valid rebuttle is given as answer for a valid reply.

According to your logic, noone should judge any game unless they're pro at it.

Also, nice job with all those assumptions pulled out from your bottom. You've created a conspiracy theory.

Dude im not the one religiously defending the game against a topic creator who's sole purpose was to get anger from SC fanboys and look he suceeded; im sure thats why you chose the Fenix avatar cause he's mad all the time right? Your the one twisting my words; go ahead judge the game but you cant comment the depth of the game unless your actually good at it. Im not too good at Starcraft 2 but if I said it lacks depth im sure there are thousands of peopel who would disagree with me then proceed to school me at the game. Your the one claiming that these other games lack depth compared to SC but depth is measured different ways. To me SC has poor depth for teamplay but WIC's depth for teamplay is the best in the genre.

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

Instashot

Dude im not the one religiously defending the game against a topic creator who's sole purpose was to get anger from SC fanboys and look he suceeded; im sure thats why you chose the Fenix avatar cause he's mad all the time right? Your the one twisting my words; go ahead judge the game but you cant comment the depth of the game unless your actually good at it. Im not too good at Starcraft 2 but if I said it lacks depth im sure there are thousands of peopel who would disagree with me then proceed to school me at the game. Your the one claiming that these other games lack depth compared to SC but depth is measured different ways. To me SC has poor depth for teamplay but WIC's depth for teamplay is the best in the genre.

NanoMan88

He actually didn't do that for trolling purposes. Not completely, at least. TC is the kind of poster that always makes threads considered weird from a common sense oriented viewpoint.

Fenix is never mad...the correct word is "fervid".

As for the rest, you're the one twisting my words actually...I never once said WiC lacks depth. Go ahead and look around in all the thread if you want lol. I just said it's ludicrous that you have to be pro at the game to judge its depth.

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

How many RTS games are coming back that play like they used to? CnC 4 was not the same, WiC was not, SupCom 2 was streamlined unbelievably. While SC2's gameplay has been done before, we only call it dated because its just like SCI. If this was the first in the SC series we wouldn't be saying any of this.

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

Instashot

[QUOTE="NanoMan88"]

Dude im not the one religiously defending the game against a topic creator who's sole purpose was to get anger from SC fanboys and look he suceeded; im sure thats why you chose the Fenix avatar cause he's mad all the time right? Your the one twisting my words; go ahead judge the game but you cant comment the depth of the game unless your actually good at it. Im not too good at Starcraft 2 but if I said it lacks depth im sure there are thousands of peopel who would disagree with me then proceed to school me at the game. Your the one claiming that these other games lack depth compared to SC but depth is measured different ways. To me SC has poor depth for teamplay but WIC's depth for teamplay is the best in the genre.

N30F3N1X

He actually didn't do that for trolling purposes. Not completely, at least. TC is the kind of poster that always makes threads considered weird from a common sense oriented viewpoint.

Fenix is never mad...the correct word is "fervid".

As for the rest, you're the one twisting my words actually...I never once said WiC lacks depth. Go ahead and look around in all the thread if you want lol. I just said it's ludicrous that you have to be pro at the game to judge its depth.

i still stand by my statement that to understand the depth of a game you have to be good. Also that post was intended for ironman88 who you can see doesnt understand the depth of COH but relies on his blind fanboyism to make it seem inferior when he has no clue what he is talking about.

Also anybody who says

"WiC compared to SC2 on a technical level is like comparing N64 to 360, big difference" is a troll in my books

Starcraft2 online is way way better then Company Of Heroes of WIC.

The campaigns though for COH and WIC are very good imo.

kozzy1234

[QUOTE="Instashot"]

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

Dead-Memories

I dont think its about the APM its about the teamwork.

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Starcraft2 online is way way better then Company Of Heroes of WIC.

The campaigns though for COH and WIC are very good imo.

SparkyProtocol

This

[QUOTE="Dead-Memories"][QUOTE="Instashot"]

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

NanoMan88

I dont think its about the APM its about the teamwork.

[QUOTE="NanoMan88"]

[QUOTE="Dead-Memories"] those guys need what? maybe 20 APM? Dead-Memories

I dont think its about the APM its about the teamwork.

/shrugs

Cause tc is a sucessful troll?

i love both games, probably wont ever sell them. But I gotta say, starcraft 2 is just on an entire other level.

[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="smokeydabear076"]A new direction doesn't always help... Command and Conquer 4 for example...

Vaasman

No actually WiC's MP is great, its just different from SC as in WIC requires MUCH more teamwork online, but can also be much more fulfilling. Plus I don't even want to mention SC2 cartoonish graphics. I don't know why it took Blizzard so long to make such a graphically dated game. WIC on the other hand looks amazing especially the explosions and destruction. SC2 didn't innovate as much as WIC but I doubt we will ever see a WIC2 which is a real shame. The game was very polished. What can I say about SC though. Its SC!1q3er5

I don't know, I'm watching the ESL SC2 Grand Finals live stream right now and it's pretty exciting.

I prefer WiC, but they're really different kind of games with different aims.

You can't compare these games, they're totally different.

Hermits vs Hermits.. again. :P

WiC needs a ton of team work from what i played. Have not got SCII yet..

Hate to tell ya Insta, but I never got into WiC multiplayer. Loved and beat the single player but just never got into the mp. So I respectfully disagree. :) WiC is an incredible game though.

No actually WiC's MP is great, its just different from SC as in WIC requires MUCH more teamwork online, but can also be much more fulfilling. Plus I don't even want to mention SC2 cartoonish graphics. I don't know why it took Blizzard so long to make such a graphically dated game. WIC on the other hand looks amazing especially the explosions and destruction. SC2 didn't innovate as much as WIC but I doubt we will ever see a WIC2 which is a real shame. The game was very polished. What can I say about SC though. Its SC!1q3er5

i am not saying WiC doesnt require this much teamwork (it does), but to think that SC2 doesnt require any teamwork in 2v2 or 3v3 is quite a ridiculous statement

ooo burn

[QUOTE="1q3er5"]No actually WiC's MP is great, its just different from SC as in WIC requires MUCH more teamwork online, but can also be much more fulfilling. Plus I don't even want to mention SC2 cartoonish graphics. I don't know why it took Blizzard so long to make such a graphically dated game. WIC on the other hand looks amazing especially the explosions and destruction. SC2 didn't innovate as much as WIC but I doubt we will ever see a WIC2 which is a real shame. The game was very polished. What can I say about SC though. Its SC!ironman388

i am not saying WiC doesnt require this much teamwork (it does), but to think that SC2 doesnt require any teamwork in 2v2 or 3v3 is quite a ridiculous statement

You have no clue of the amount of teamwork required in WIC particularly in a clan match. I have played both online and have a 2v2 partner for SC2 and when it comes to teamwork WIC requires 10x more hands down. Sometimes one person is controlling the choppers and the other person is in command of the infantry inside them because you have to maximize your resources (air gets cheaper choppers, infantry gets cheap infantry), everything needs to be executed flawlessly or the other clan will school you and if one person messes up its all over. 2v2 is SC2 requires alot of teamwork but not as much as WIC (anyone saying SC2 2v2 doesnt require teamwork has no clue); 3v3 and 4v4 is a joke and unit spam.

[QUOTE="1q3er5"]No actually WiC's MP is great, its just different from SC as in WIC requires MUCH more teamwork online, but can also be much more fulfilling. Plus I don't even want to mention SC2 cartoonish graphics. I don't know why it took Blizzard so long to make such a graphically dated game. WIC on the other hand looks amazing especially the explosions and destruction. SC2 didn't innovate as much as WIC but I doubt we will ever see a WIC2 which is a real shame. The game was very polished. What can I say about SC though. Its SC!TerrorRizzing

Starcraft 2 took longer to produce than WIC so I dont know what your talking about

I personally dont like SC2 cartoony GFX it doesnt suit the game, they should go back to SC1 gritty GFX

I want to get Starcraft 2,but it isn't on Steam. :(

I want to get Starcraft 2,but it isn't on Steam. :(

heretrix

Yeah that irked me at first but its a pretty good game you should just buy it. Forget about the blizzard store same price and it doesnt come with guest passes.