Warcraft 3 - dont hold your breath - its crap

[darthfergie]

More proof that one person's trash is another person's treasure...

 

Originally posted by DarthMaulUK

If a major release like Warcraft 3 is a poor game, gaming magazines won't always tell you ( I remember PC zone giving Force Commander 81% - just because they got the demo on their cover mount CD). Force Commander deserves 1%.

 

I think you would be heavily diputed by alot of FoCom addicts. It wasn't the best...but that doesn't mean it was the worst. I'd give it more towards a 72% or so personally because remember for that time this really was a decent game with a few bugs in it, like alot of games are today.

[duder]

Originally posted by darthfergie

More proof that one person's trash is another person's treasure...

 

 

 

I think you would be heavily diputed by alot of FoCom addicts. It wasn't the best...but that doesn't mean it was the worst. I'd give it more towards a 72% or so personally because remember for that time this really was a decent game with a few bugs in it, like alot of games are today.

 

Star Wars geeks will persevere with any crap LucasArts produce. The game is possibly the weakest, flawed piece of **** I have ever had the misfortune to play.

[darthfergie]

Originally posted by duder

Star Wars geeks will persevere with any crap LucasArts produce. The game is possibly the weakest, flawed piece of **** I have ever had the misfortune to play.

 

Your opinion, but I'm pretty sure that any game reviewer would say without any hesitation that they've seen MUCH worse.

[Gaming Nut]

perhaps the survivor games beats it but not much else dose.

[Clefo]

Boy.. THAT was inchoherent

 

I think there should be a wise adage saying that you shouldn't bank on one man's opinion.. Of course if said adage was followed Rush Limbaugh would be on the streets

[polaris_crd]

I signed up to be a beta tester for AoM, so in less then 3 weeks I will know if I get to test the game online next month. If I do I will tell everyone here what I thought of the game. The only bad thing is the beta only comes with two factions of the Greek culture, but just playing the game will make me happy:)

 

From exeperience I know that Enemble studios is a slightly better company then Blizzard entertainment. Like many long time RTS fans one of my favorite games is Starcraft. It was a huge let down when Blizzard Entertainment refused to make another Starcraft game. It felt like a slap in the face and that Blizzard didn't care which game to release as long as they made the green. In my opinion I think there are way more people that like Starcraft then they ever did Warcraft.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

AoM is such an impressive game I can't help but to talk about it. Here are some facts about the game.

 

Villagers are better workers in AoM then they were in AoE/AoK, so you don't need as many villagers to bring in the resourses. Farms provide unlimited food but are slightly more expensive and easier to destroy by the enemy. The market works the same in AoM with a few added benifits, In AoM you can use trade carts to trade with your own town center to get extra gold. With all the new econ improvements you will spend more time building armies and less time fooling with your economy.

 

AoM is truely a perfect balance. By default the camera is locked into a standard RTS model, but for those who like to fool with the camera they can do so. Multiplayer will lock the camera to compesate for lag.

 

Cool Multiplayer news. AoM will be a direct match making system kind of like B-net but with BETTER SERVERS. AoM will actually support up to 12 players online! Some of the concern was that AoM would lag a lot more then AoE/AoK because of the graphics, but from what I've heard from the VIP testers at AoM this isn't true. Graphics and sound are "not" sent through your internet connection just unit and game status. They also went on to say the AoM engine runs more efficiently so you will actually have improved lag that will support more players. I was told that a great deal of lag is actually computer lag. A slower computer on a broadband connection can lag as much as a 56k. I'm happy to learn that AoM will be able to support 56k. I wish they offered better in my area but they dont:( My connection will be maximized because I plan on getting a new computer that is loaded for bear:). I was spoiled at my old school because they offered us T1 connections in the computer lab...man...Even 56kers have a lot better connection speed if there is a T1 host, although sometimes it can be troublesome.

[polaris_crd]

DMUK, you are absolutely right! AoM wins by a long shot. My friend beta tested WC3 and he was not impressed a bit, although he says EE was worse with the biggest let down ever. The problem with low population caps is your game depends on upgrades and special abilities with everyone building one or two unit types concidered to be the strongest unit(s) for that civ.

 

But... AoM's Bruce Shelly wanted to make an inovative 3D game with better graphics without compromising the game play and population limits. He wanted the game to be familar to players but at the same time unique and fun to play. I.E he didn't want you to get lost like some players felt in WC3. In AoM you can actually have maps 150% larger then the biggest map in AoK!!!!

 

I've watched all the movies and trailers for the game and the terrain looks alive... its so realistic. AoM is definately going to win RTS game of the year when it comes out.

[Clefo]

I'm one who thinks both games will be good, and isn't caught up in such.. petty competition (Which is kinda stupid IMO) I actually signed up to be an Alpha Tester for AOM, cause it has elements I like in it, I'm also gonna buy WCIII cause it too has elements I like

[Treacherous Mercenary]

Originally posted by polaris_crd

Villagers are better workers in AoM then they were in AoE/AoK, so you don't need as many villagers to bring in the resourses. Farms provide unlimited food but are slightly more expensive and easier to destroy by the enemy. The market works the same in AoM with a few added benifits, In AoM you can use trade carts to trade with your own town center to get extra gold. With all the new econ improvements you will spend more time building armies and less time fooling with your economy.

 

This is great to hear. Thanks for the news PC. In AOK, I had alot of trouble with economy and thus, game up on the game until recently I started playing again and got better in the beginning which kills you if you do horrible... You have officially convinced me to get the game .

[Fishflesh]

Dont you all see

 

DMUK wants us to keep playing CC!

[AU_Andy_Ewok]

I also dowloaded warcraft 3 and i disagree with DMUK about it being bad but it defiantly isn't good. It's so very average. I may be wrong but i don't think you can select more than 12 units at once. WC3 is very micro intensive selecting hero's to use items, target enemies and do spells on enemys all in the same battle can be hard.

 

Since i got WC3 i've played alot more CC. I do think that when i get AoM next month *prays* that i'll play a lot more AoM. AoM looks more unique than CC or the other Age games. The 9 civs are all unique and the inclusion of call Myth Units and the God Powers seem cool. I think it will be alot different to CC. In CC most people just go random civ cos all civs are the same to play but in AoM there are lots of clear differences making it harder to play as certain civs.

 

For example the 3 civs in the Norse Culture gain favor by killing other units. Obviously some one who like booming in t3 and going havy army in the t4 will not play as Norse. The rushers will choose Norse so they can get the important MU's before there enemies. I think people will definatly have favirote civs and cultures. Im thinking Greek culture and the poisedan will be best.

 

I think AoM will be the best ever RTS. i think SWGB CC is better than Warcraft3.

[Guest DarthMaulUK]

so in other words, its crap ;-p

 

The main reason why it is crap is because its taken 3 years. That's along time to produce a decent RTS title.

 

DMUK

[Fishflesh]

Thats True 3 jear is a very long time

 

thay say its gone gold but i think its gone old

 

Stil i think i am gonne buy it

[J-5]

Originally posted by Gaming Nut

Thats great expect that one civ can put more then 1 guy on building thats like the empire being able to put 10 workers on a building while rebels can put one on can you say unbalacned?

 

I personaly think the base should be the most important area on the map.

 

Is this RTS or RPG casue frankly spells, items, and, killing computer controled monsters belong in RPGs not RTS.

 

FYI, the Human race is charged gold for each extra worker that they put on a building.

 

Yeah, most people play RTS's to see how much wood they can collect?!?! It's all about the battle!!

 

Mixture of both... I think that its a welcomed and revolutionary change to the genre

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I'm not going to try to convince everyone to get the game. I think the game can speak for itself. I'd like to see how many of us will be buying WC3 when it comes out, however.

 

P.S. AoM sounds like a great game, when does it come out?

[Treacherous Mercenary]

Originally posted by J-5

P.S. AoM sounds like a great game, when does it come out?

 

Sometime in September or October.. Basically in the fall.

[Gaming Nut]

How much? If it's 5 per minutes and buildings build in 45 seconds well. If its 50 ever 10 seconds well then its a nice pointless thing to try and make the civs seem different.

 

Most experts do measure success in the amount of villagers and cash they have at a certain point and when they research techs. In the end it is about fighting but getting the money to fight is FAR more important then fights themselves.

 

I don’t think I’d call it revolutionary new perhaps still it’s mainly a gimmick theirs no reason that these spells couldn’t have been given to units commanded by civs and that combat with other players could give hero’s experience.

 

I to think the game speaks for itself and what it says is. This is blizzards frist mediocre game wait for me to come down in price then buy

[J-5]

Originally posted by Gaming Nut

Most experts do measure success in the amount of villagers and cash they have at a certain point and when they research techs. In the end it is about fighting but getting the money to fight is FAR more important then fights themselves.

 

I to think the game speaks for itself and what it says is. This is blizzards frist mediocre game wait for me to come down in price then buy

 

Unless your playing monument race, it is the battle that wins the game. You DO want to win, right Gaming Nut?? How can you say the getting the money is more important?! What are you getting the money for... um... er... oh yeah.. TO FIGHT and kill the other guy!!

I'm not saying economy is worthless, far from, but if fighting is the only road to victory, how can the fights not be most important? You must win now or stand the chance of being crushed later.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You might wait for the price to come down, but eventually you WILL buy it, right? See what I mean, the game isn't crappy enough for you to avoid totally . End of point.

[Gaming Nut]

A fight can not be the most imoprtant part of game in that battles are won and loss on the cash each side has. The side with more cash wins 99 times out of 100 the other one being a stupid mistake by the guy with more money.

 

I may but when it cost 20 bucks for the stroy. If I buy it at all which is a question mark.

[Clefo]

Not exactly true, its depended on WHO uses the resources most wisely. And you usually use these resources by building ARMIES, without ARMIES you LOSE.. Simple as that..

[Gaming Nut]

Without resources losses can't rasie an army., Losses can't be replaced, new units needed to conuter his latest units can't be builts, and units can't be reapired. In genral your armys fairs quite poorly. And army without resources is dead one. A rush is dangerous for a reason not that his army will come back and smash you but that you fall behind in resources.

[Fishflesh]

i have something to say about DMUK

 

almost everywhere he says warcraft 3 sucks

but the game is not even official releast .

and maby he did play the game for a wile but i dont think he know it inside out

 

and a game from blizzard has never realy suckt so it would be the first time , i think he just dont want us to buy warcraft 3 otherwhise you dont set this on the lucasforms.

 

i think he hates blizzard or he is a lucasarts promoter.

[polaris_crd]

I just received a VIP invite from ES_Archangel!!! I can't believe it!!! I'm going to beta test AoM!!! Woooohoooo, I'll keep everyone up to date :-)

 

Other people will be announced around july 3rd or so. I wont take up a slot so there are still 10, 000 chances for all of you.

 

AoM sounds like a hella cool game, and yes AoM will have a Move-Attack command. Don't get me wrong, I like Starcraft, so I don't hate Blizzard. The opening movie at the begining of Broodwars is one of the best damn scenes ever made for any game ever!! I still play starcraft, and I will still play Galactic Battlegrounds. I've spent more time playing GB and CC then you could imagine...lol I don't like warcraft. Warcraft is a boring game in my opinion. I have the first two and wasn't impressed. Starcraft was way better.

 

Here is some more info about AoM.

 

All the civs are equally good at rushing in various ways;

 

Norse are good at rushing because they can foward build, lets not forget that their ulfsark (Military Unit) can build buildings.

 

The Greeks are good at rushing also. Greeks start with a mounted scout which can be used to find the enemy. Egyptians start with a Pharaoh and the Norse start with a Ulfsark, but the paraoh is better used to impower your buildings (I.E improve the efficiency) and the Ulfsark must stay home to build buildings. So the greeks start with a huge scouting advantage plus their infantry are stronger then the other two civs.

 

Egyptians are good rushers because they can get a good economy going faster because most of their buildings are free or cost a small amount of gold. (The down side is it takes the Egyptians longer to build buildings.) The Egyptians units are created faster and cost less to build. The Egyptians start with a Pharaoh that can impower any building to improve its efficiency.

 

The people at AoM have worked very hard to make sure that all the civs / factions are balanced.

[polaris_crd]

Originally posted by Sardaukar

 

Sometime in September or October.. Basically in the fall.

 

It's not official but the last date I heard was October. Who knows though it might be out in september. Hopefully:) Well at least I get to do the beta test in a week or so:)

[Fishflesh]

What has aom got to do whit warcraft 3?

[Young David]

Well ... compititors they are. War Craft 3 the hype it gets, AoM the quality it gets. Yes, yes.

 

But I already tought that WC3 would be disapointed, just because it's way overhyped. I've seen screenshots and I don't like them. With AoM I've seen screenshots and like it because it reminded me of AoK, but just a bit better looking ...