DarthMuffin Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 It is possible that I am late with this (just came back from vacations), but I wanted to tell all those 'AoM ownz wc3' people that : WC3 OWNED AOM AT GAMESPY Warcraft III 56% Age of Mythology 16.6% Check by yourself... http://www.gamespy.com/goty2002/fanvote/finalresults/08_pcstrategy_results.shtml WC3 also ownz AoM for the overall best game... Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos 16.8% Battlefield 1942 13.4% Medal Of Honor: Allied Assault 8.4% Neverwinter Nights 8.1% Unreal Tournament 2003 7.4% Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind 6.1% Grand Theft Auto 3 5.3% Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast 4.8% Age of Mythology 3.7% Mafia 3.6% Again, check by yourself : http://www.gamespy.com/goty2002/fanvote/finalresults/10_pcoverall_results.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 That's beacuse WC3 is played by little children who don't know the meaning of balance, stratergy, proper extent of game options, distinguishing RPG from RTS and techincally it could help their education by training them to click faster ("I can cast more heroe spells than u in 2.6 seconds!" "Oh no u can't. I can click faster than u!" "Can not! "Can too!" "Can not!") That's fun too, in the form of Serios Sam and other not-so-serios shooters. AoM, though I haven't played, has far better graphics and more stratergic options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherack Nhar Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 I wouldn't agree on AoM's graphics being superior, and that WC3 is played by children, but it's true that inconditional Blizzard fans are aplenty. A popularity contest doesn't determine which game is better than the other. If a good game was automatically popular, then Grim Fandango would still be the number one seller today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 It all depends upon your preferences. I tried WCIII and didn't like it, looked to cartoonie. While AOM I liked since it delt with mythology. Neither game is superior to the other, both are good games. It just comes down to what you prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 I think WC3 also has a good doze of strategy in it. The sheer variety of units and heros and their abilities makes it so diverse giving room to lots of strategy. And then - so does AOM, in its own way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 WC3 Stratergy: Click faster to deploy ur heroe spells quicker. Guys there are only 2 tactics for WC3- 1) Using ur heroes spells by frantically clicking. 2) Sitting back and letting ur ally do the clicking. Guys I think Civ2 is better in terms of graphics! Only reasons why WC3 is so redicoulosly popular: 1) It's campaigns, which, I will admit, are above average. 2) Battle.Net is better than the Zone (but nothing can beat GameSpy) 3) Allowing people to have contest with thier friends over who can click most. 4) Some people like cartoony graphics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 I was posting a very very long rant about people dissing on WC3, but it wouldn't post, but essentially here were my points: 1. There's a REASON Blizzard is popular 2. At least all the races are different in WC3 unlike some other games I could mention 3. I doubt Crazy Dog here has played WC3 that much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDI_MASTA Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 lol... CLICKFEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 serriously tho... AoM is a great game... just because 90% of the people cant figure it out isnt my problem, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 I should also point out that ANY RTS, regardless, requires many amounts of clicking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted January 5, 2003 Share Posted January 5, 2003 And, CrazyDog, it isn't all about speed clicking...The slowest clicker in the world could still win a game against a faster clicker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treacherous Mercenary Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 I didn't like WCIII all that much anyways. I tried the demo and didn't like the limited number of units there could be total. I prefer massive battles instead... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Originally posted by Imperial Sardaukar I didn't like WCIII all that much anyways. I tried the demo and didn't like the limited number of units there could be total. I prefer massive battles instead... That's another important factor! Some people don't like massive battles, which is why WC3 is liked by them. And no, i don't think that makes it more of an RPG - 90 persons is still quite an army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Rommel Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 AOM is a great game, but most of us have already played it. It really isn't all that different from AOK when it all comes down to it... which really isn't a bad thing, except for the fact that I've already played AOK to death. Another thing: Aren't we all getting tired of the the whole medevial thing? AOM is your basic RTS... the BEST basic RTS, but WC3 has something new to offer. The whole hero thing is a really cool idea. BTW, I sure hope the next Age. of... RTS is based on something that happened in the (mid ) 20th century. War is never a good thing, but atleast it was exciting to read about before long-range missiles. Does anyone know anything about the WW2 RTS that's supposed to be in development? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Well, AOM isn't exactly medieval, but i get what you're saying. The whole boats, horses, siege thing is kinda like AOK. Although we have those in WC3 as well, you must admit, it's vastly unique for each race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 WC3 was one of the only RTS' that held my attention for more that a month, I guess that says something (Yes, Clefo has a short attention span) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherack Nhar Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Originally posted by Clefo 1. There's a REASON Blizzard is popular Yes, they released Warcraft II and Diablo, which were amazing games. I don't think Blizzard's latest games deserved the gigantic amount of hype they always receive(especially Diablo II, ugh). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Originally posted by Clefo I was posting a very very long rant about people dissing on WC3, but it wouldn't post, but essentially here were my points: 1. There's a REASON Blizzard is popular 2. At least all the races are different in WC3 unlike some other games I could mention 3. I doubt Crazy Dog here has played WC3 that much 1) Well that is correct, as it is a fact, not a statement. 3) U're right, as I got bored playing the demo for 1 1/2 hrs anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Originally posted by Sherack Nhar Yes, they released Warcraft II and Diablo, which were amazing games. I don't think Blizzard's latest games deserved the gigantic amount of hype they always receive(especially Diablo II, ugh). I never really liked the Diablo series, and Warcraft II wasn't that great, but Starcraft was what got me having faith in Blizzard's game making abilities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthMuffin Posted January 6, 2003 Author Share Posted January 6, 2003 Diablo 2 is really addicting for a couple of months, but I got pissed of it really fast. I like doing quests like in NWN or BG2, not some item hunting (and the real D2 players know what I'm taking about). IMO, D2 put too much emphasis (sp) on items. What I didn't like about AoM is.... 1.the heros---should have more special abilities 2.myth units---you can,t even use their special abilities when you want 3.too much like AoK/SWGB I'll say it again, wc3 is not a RTS, its a RPS I hope they gonna make SC2:o... IMO, blizzard and bioware are the best game makers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfmanNCSU Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 I hate to ride the fense on this discussion, but I really enjoyed both games, AoM and War3. I liked the fact that they are on different ends of the RTS/RPS specturm. I decide to play which ever I am in the mood for. I started playing War 3 first since it was released earlier, then swaped to AoM after its release, and now I am starting to head back to War 3 for a abit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 I have not played either of these games. Kinda burned out on RTS after GB. Nothing seems to be worthwhile in getting yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treacherous Mercenary Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Originally posted by STTCT I have not played either of these games. Kinda burned out on RTS after GB. Nothing seems to be worthwhile in getting yet.... You can always get the demos to both as I have and liked both.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherack Nhar Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Unless you already have Neverwinter Nights, Shannon, there IS something worthwhile to get in stores right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted January 6, 2003 Share Posted January 6, 2003 Yes, I'm with Sherack here, for once Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Haven't tried AOM yet, but I wasn't very impressed with WC3. It sucked donkey arse in comparison to StarCraft and it's non-cartoonish look. But that's just me. One thing I'm certain of, however: "Statistics does not a good game make." No matter what the sales charts and reviewers say, some times they're just plain wrong in your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.