WarCraft 3 - better than StarCraft :-)

[DrSpike]

Depends what you mean Jamski; it's different markets. As a SP game I am sure there are better RTS games than Blizz's games. For MP there is not.

[Jamski]

I'm talking about MP.

SP RTS games are all pants. The AI never learns.

I'm willing to bet you've never played WBC2, so you can't really compare, can you (Sorry, being "bolshi" tonight)

Its the same market, same setting, same genre. I think a straight comparison is allowed.

The only area WC3 wins in is possibly balance... but WBC2 has so many races and hero combinations (12 races, 12 hero races, at least 4 classes for each hero for each race...) that some "über" combo is bound to be invented. But every strat has a counter by a good player.

And the best thing is... you can probably get ot for a fiver now.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Balance and a company committed to providing it are everything for serious gamers.

There is a reason there are over a million active players worldwide in WC3 - it's a great MP game.

[Jamski]

And it was marketed like buggery

I'm not saying it ain't great. But its the cheap 99cent wine compared to posh champagne.

They both make you drunk fine.

But you'd rather have the bubbly.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

There may be something in the marketing argument, but ultimately Blizzard have so many players because they produce the champagne.

[Jamski]

Matter of taste... DAMMIT, I just want to really argue a pointless arguement and be really UNPLEASANT to you

(ignore this bit)
You are clearly a brainwashed Blizzard fanboi, who eats the toenail clippings of dead american presidents if you beleive that this anal rubbish called warcraft 3 has and sembalance of a game hidden within it rotting excrement encrusted exterior. Why don't you get your own damn opinion and not use the worn old crap that its popular so it must be good.
(/ignore this bit)

Sorry. I'll go and BITE someone instead.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Hehe.

Btw I'm not praising Blizzard merely on the numbers of people that play their game. I have played RTS games competitively in the past so I am basing my opinion on much experience.

I haven't played Battlecry II, because it has no real MP following and SP RTS sucks as you say, though I am perfectly willing to believe that Battlecry II sucks less than WC3 is this sphere.

As for MP I stand by my view - you can try and account for Blizzard's success as much as you like, but ultimately the gamers follow the game. Blizzard are successful by providing people the game they want.

[Whoha]

I don't like the rpg stuff so its not better then starcraft to me, but to each his own

[bakalov]

I have played Warlords Battlecry 1 (not 2) and it kept me only for one of the paths for the SP campaign, no longer. I can imagine that 2 is a bit better. Jamski, if you call this the best MP game, then you must be terribly mistaken :-) Oh, my hero could not cast the spell because the random generator was against me .... As a result he was killed and I lost the game ....

[Jamski]

The you shouild have put enough points in spellcraft to get 100% success.

Like all great games, there is an element of chance

-Jam

[MattH]

WTF were they thinking leaving out ships?

[bakalov]

Actually, there are ships - for example in the new maps of the Founding of Durotar campaign in the Frozen Throne; I don't know why they didn't allow them in the normal games.

[bakalov]

Jamski, if you suggest going into a MP with a developed hero, then there is another problem - "My hero casts the xxxx spell at grandmaster level and is now invincible :P"

[Jamski]

Even at "superhero" level no spell lasts longer than about 30 seconds.

And elite caster heros are very vunerable to a cheap trick.

A kickarse fighter hero with the ability to drain Mana. POW!

-Jam

[Barinthus]

I finally installed WC3 two days ago. It's not too shabby - I think I'm starting to get tired of traditional RTS games.

I bought the battle chest so they had free guides from bradygames and sheesh those really suck! :anger: