Starcraft 2

[Drakron]

I agree, besides Kerrigan is not full Zerg yet ... she still have some humanity left and that is starting to show up during the expansion.

 

Arcturus is responsible for turning Sarah into the Queen of Blaces and I am not going to ever forget that, any chance I have to end his patetic live is a chance I am going to take ... expect in the case I can return Sarah back to herself.

[kumquatq3]

I hope you can't turn her back. The dark storyline, where heros lose, is party of what made SC, SC

[Percival]

I hope you can't turn her back. The dark storyline, where heros lose, is party of what made SC, SC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually, that's the storyline of all Blizzard games. Quite predictable after, what, 8 storylines where the villains win and make way for a sequel

[Azarkon]

Nah, WC and WC2 didn't follow their stand plot, but that's because back then they didn't even do the integrated plotlines. In WC and WC2 the side you played was the side that "won", I believe, though the official storyline is that in WC, the orcs won. Then in WC2, the humans won by closing the dark portal. Then in WC2 expansion, the humans won again by destroying the dark portal.

 

After WC and WC2, it's become their practice to have the good guys win (via sacrifice) in the main game by destroying the super-villain, and then the villains in the expansion/sequel win by becoming some kind of new super-villain (WC3: Archimonde gets killed by wisps in RoC, but Arthas becomes Lich King and "wins" in FT; SC: Tassadar destroys Overmind in original, but Kerrigan becomes new Zerg Queen in BW; in Diablo, the hero kills Diablo, but in Diablo 2, he becomes Diablo). Makes it possible to do sequels.

 

Speaking of storylines, Diablo I/II and SC had the best storylines of any of Blizzard's games, imho. Many people consider Diablo I/II standard hack 'n slashes - and they are - but they actually had a Nietszche undercurrent of hero-becoming-monster that's well presented. Diablo II's cutscenes, especially, are amazing in how well they told the story - way different than the actual game's lackluster presentation.

[Ivan the Terrible]

I hope you can't turn her back. The dark storyline, where heros lose, is party of what made SC, SC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I find it entirely unlikely she'll ever turn back.

 

That's what made both Kerrigan and Arthas interesting villains; there was no Darth Vader-style redemption. They seem to actively enjoy what they've become.

[Ivan the Terrible]

Actually, that's the storyline of all Blizzard games. Quite predictable after, what, 8 storylines where the villains win and make way for a sequel

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Still better than other company's 'the good guys won BUT A NEWER AND NASTIER THREAT SUDDENLY APPEARS FROM NOWHERE AND LET'S US MAKE A SEQUEL!'

[Berserk]

I hope you can't turn her back. The dark storyline, where heros lose, is party of what made SC, SC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I find it entirely unlikely she'll ever turn back.

 

That's what made both Kerrigan and Arthas interesting villains; there was no Darth Vader-style redemption. They seem to actively enjoy what they've become.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree, no halfassed "redemptions" but a full on embrace of what you have become. It sure made SC:s "heroes" far more interesting than the average "run-of-the-mill" protagonists of other games.

[Darque]

I hope you can't turn her back. The dark storyline, where heros lose, is party of what made SC, SC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I find it entirely unlikely she'll ever turn back.

 

That's what made both Kerrigan and Arthas interesting villains; there was no Darth Vader-style redemption. They seem to actively enjoy what they've become.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree, no halfassed "redemptions" but a full on embrace of what you have become. It sure made SC:s "heroes" far more interesting than the average "run-of-the-mill" protagonists of other games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I agree as well.

[Percival]

Still better than other company's 'the good guys won BUT A NEWER AND NASTIER THREAT SUDDENLY APPEARS FROM NOWHERE AND LET'S US MAKE A SEQUEL!'

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In Blizzard's case, I don't particulary find their twists to be anything worthwile - at least in the Warcraft sage. The first 3 steps of destroy evil, enter new evil, evil wins is okay, but then they simply started screwing up the factions and turning them against each other, turning them from good allies into bloodthirsty enemies and thus joining the honourable good guys with the bad ones (as we can see with the orcs teaming up with the undead and restarting the war against the humans).

 

Consistency thrown away just so they can spice up things isnt really my thing.

[roshan]

True, thats why the warcraft 3 storyline sucked.

 

BTW in warcraft 1 the orcs lost. In warcraft 2 they launched a new invasion after their previous defeat.

[Drakron]

I find it entirely unlikely she'll ever turn back.

 

That's what made both Kerrigan and Arthas interesting villains; there was no Darth Vader-style redemption. They seem to actively enjoy what they've become.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There many diferences, she was forced into being what she is and during Broodwar she starts to show doubts and raise questions over her own actions.

 

Kerrigan is diferent that a infested human and appears to start question Zerg instricts and commands .

 

As for Arthas ... he looks like Anakin Skywalker and just because you are not seeing as Vader in RtoJ does not mean they go down that path with him.

 

In Blizzard's case, I don't particulary find their twists to be anything worthwile  ...

Consistency thrown away just so they can spice up things isnt really my thing.

 

Its not exactly better in StarCraft, they done it several times with the only alliance is the (some) human/protass aliance ... they even screw up the Zerg in Broodwar by making Korrigan ally with the Protass/Humans just to stab then in the back.

 

I would not be suprised if in StarCraft 2 they comtely destroy Korrigan Zerg in favor of the new Zerg/protass hybrid since looking at it there is not really room for Kerrigan Zerg with the new Zerg/Protoss enemy.

[Darque]

Kerrigan is diferent that a infested human and appears to start question Zerg instricts and commands .

 

Well yeah, the overmind put a LOT of effort into her.

 

But she was still entralled to it until it died.

[Maedhros]

War 3 is probably one of the most overrated so called "strategy" games around. And that's not to say there's a lot of good ones around anyway.

 

When each race only has one or two winning "strategies", where everything revolves around how fast your microing is, the game loses its feel. Heroes are what made the game so .. broken. At higher levels they can take on entire armies, and once you lose a hero, you might just as well surrender.

 

Now, if you consider balance, heh, I don't really consider 1 year of caster craft, 6 months of ancient abuse, 6 months of beastmaster abuse and of course, who could forget, the ever on going hero nukes, I wouldnt call that a job well done in the balancing department.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In defense of Warcraft: Saying that each race has only one or two winning "strategies" is just wrong. I play the race which is known to have least strategies (Human), and I know at least 10 strategies for each matchup, that would work pretty well.

 

It's true that the game used to be imbalanced in the earlier patches, but since 1.15 the game has been really balanced. Just nerf Nelf some and it'll be fine..

 

As to Starcraft...I never really got into it because I played it after I had player War3. Looking forward to Starcraft 2 though, hope they add heroes just to annoy Starcraft fans. "

[Ivan the Terrible]

True, thats why the warcraft 3 storyline sucked.

 

Gonna have to disagree on this. I enjoyed it a great deal.

 

Again, all this Warcraft III bashing is throwing me off. I really enjoyed it; what's with all the hate?

 

BTW in warcraft 1 the orcs lost. In warcraft 2 they launched a new invasion after their previous defeat.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uhhhh....no. Check the storyline in the manual again.

 

Officially, the Orcs defeated Azeroth in Warcraft. The remnants of that country then fled across the ocean to Lordaeron, where all the various nations and factions of that region aligned together to fight the Horde. Then, owing largely to Gul'Dan's betrayal, the Orcs were put on the defensive and eventually beaten by the Alliance.

[Berserk]

There many diferences, she was forced into being what she is and during Broodwar she starts to show doubts and raise questions over her own actions.

Well, she sure seemed enjoy her slaughter of the three fleets that assault her in the last mission of Broodwar, and she was positively gloating her victory in the ending cinematic...

[Ivan the Terrible]

Well, she sure seemed enjoy her slaughter of the three fleets that assault her in the last mission of Broodwar, and she was positively gloating her victory in the ending cinematic...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yep. Most of the traces of 'humanity' which have manifested themselves have been hardly the stuff redemption is made of; vanity, hate, cruelty, vengeance, sadistic glee. None of those qualities would probably be associated with the Overmind or the Cerebrates; they existed only to assimilate lifeforms and spread the Swarm, and weren't really overtly 'evil' anymore than a virus is 'evil'.

 

By comparison, Kerrigan acts much more human, but not in a good way.

[Laozi]

Warcraft III I bought from a friend for $5 dollars american, and needless to say we aren't friends anymore, you just can't do that to someone you care about

[Dranoel]

It all depends upon when you came to the series', the time and the circumstances. Personally I only came to Starcraft recently (last year or so) and I don't much like it particularly as its graphics are so dated now. The definitive RTS for me remains C&C the original which, on an 8 player LAN connection rocked despite the tendency to experiment with cheap tactics (chinook with commando anyone?) and the fact that, if I played it again, I would undoubtedly think it was a truely dated with almost no flexibility. For similar reasons my favourite FPS of all times remains Quake 1. Being able to yell and physically throw things at your opponents in frustration is great (the mods ruled too - grapnels and starwars skins anyone?)

 

Personally I'm not too fond of WC3 - wtf is up with all the uber powerful flying units that cause about 3x as much damage as Taurens (cost about the same) plus have their bonus against heavy armour (plz shoot whoever decided to put air units in WC!) Similarly I dislike Dawn of War due to the fact that vehicles take negligible damage from all except certain weapons. Anyone who has been happily progressing with a combo of Dark Reapers, Guardians, Banshees and scouts who is suddenly confronted with a dreadnought should surrender then and there. There are numerous counters but these are costly and don't often have much place in squad to squad combat. The there are the units that should cream vehicles but clearly don't e.g. Dark Reapers (they're all carrying Rocket Launchers FFS!) and Assault Terminators (Their weapons ignore all armour don't they? - not in this game!)

 

That is one of the advantages of C&C. At least everything could kill everything else (theoretically!). Hitler was not giving out Ironcrosses to Hitler Youths who destroyed tanks with other tanks! They climbed on the bloody things and dropped grenades inside etc! Don't get me started on air units in WC3 again... they should rip their bloody wings off!

 

(edit... Personally I think War 3: RoC has a pretty good single player storyline considering, though the missions are quickly repetitive. Good cutscenes too. They alone should justify your $5 you cheapskate!)

[Ivan the Terrible]

Warcraft III I bought from a friend for $5 dollars american, and needless to say we aren't friends anymore, you just can't do that to someone you care about

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You people are nuts.

[Maedhros]

Personally I'm not too fond of WC3 - wtf is up with all the uber powerful flying units that cause about 3x as much damage as Taurens (cost about the same) plus have their bonus against heavy armour (plz shoot whoever decided to put air units in WC!)

 

There is a counter to everything. Human has tanks and gyrocopters, orc has bats and raiders, undead has gargoyles and fiends and Nelf has Hippogryphs, all these units are a strong counter to air.

[Percival]

Personally I'm not too fond of WC3 - wtf is up with all the uber powerful flying units that cause about 3x as much damage as Taurens (cost about the same) plus have their bonus against heavy armour (plz shoot whoever decided to put air units in WC!)

 

There is a counter to everything. Human has tanks and gyrocopters, orc has bats and raiders, undead has gargoyles and fiends and Nelf has Hippogryphs, all these units are a strong counter to air.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In theory yes. If you've ever played any higher level games, or at least mid high level games, you'll be disappointed about the "counter" system of the game.

[Maedhros]

No you won't. Have you even watched the best players play? Personally I watch about 10-15 gosu-games a day so I think I know what I'm talking 'bout.

[Percival]

No you won't. Have you even watched the best players play? Personally I watch about 10-15 gosu-games a day so I think I know what I'm talking 'bout.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I guess that makes you an expert, keke. If you consider "balance" using an AM/MK + rifles and sorcs with slight variations against every possible unit, roofles. Just accept it, War3 tactics are nothing more then a one trick pony. Standard hero (40% + usage of DK/AM/FS/DH) choices, standard unit choices, no variation no matter what your opponent does. Same predictable map creeping patterns, same ambush points used in all games.. It's all about micro and only the basic of strategies. Compared to Starcraft, it's a joke.

[Loof]

The there are the units that should cream vehicles but clearly don't e.g. Dark Reapers (they're all carrying Rocket Launchers FFS!) and Assault Terminators (Their weapons ignore all armour don't they? - not in this game!)

 

Dark reapers carry reaperlanchers and not normal missile lanchears if I recall my 40k correctly these are lightweight lanchers that shoot alot of small missiles instead of one big one hence they are superb vs heavy infantry such as marines but too weak to harm anything but the lightest vehicles.

 

Conserning the Assault terminators I'm less sure but I think they just have abnormaly high strength against vehicles in the board game. It would be very unbalansing for them to have autopenetrate against vehicles since armor is about the only defence they have as oposed to troops that have toughness too.

 

This "info" is from the tabletop game as I recall it... (last time i played 40k was a few years ago)

[Maedhros]

I guess that makes you an expert, keke. If you consider "balance" using an AM/MK + rifles and sorcs with slight variations against every possible unit, roofles. Just accept it, War3 tactics are nothing more then a one trick pony. Standard hero (40% + usage of DK/AM/FS/DH) choices, standard unit choices, no variation no matter what your opponent does. Same predictable map creeping patterns, same ambush points used in all games.. It's all about micro and only the basic of strategies. Compared to Starcraft, it's a joke.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My point was only that there is no "ONE UNIT TO RULE THEM ALL" like Dranoel said.