Heresy! DoW2>SC2

I'm sure I'll be playing both for a stretch but DoW's appealing more to me than SC2. Source material wise it's what the SC continuity's derivative of. But the deciding factor is gameplay mechanics. SC's design is old-fashioned for the sake of being old fashioned. Reverence for tradition doesn't make sense. Even basic logical improvements the AI have criticism from idiots who think if a pro's time isn't wasted he has nowhere to expend his energy and gain an advantage. The new mechanics are slight and meh like destructible barriers and a resource tweak.
Dawn of War 2 has firing-on-the-move, ranged+melee modes for each unit, units with a sense of self-preservation like real soldiers, per-soldier upgrades, and focuses much more on fighting than base building. Aren't RTS games supposed to simulate battlefield tactics? What general won a campaign by the arrangement of his subordinates' tents?
Don't misunderstand me; I like Starcraft 2, yet Blizzard starts to seem like a JRPG developer going "we'll stick to cruder mechanics invented when the hardware couldn't handle better because improvements will alienate fans" while Relic's like a western rpg developer going "what should a game in this genre be that it hasn't been yet?" Maybe they'll get bolder with SC3.

 

You dont know what youre talkin about.... - its just your opinion though, and we respect that, but i think that you dont have to post in general discussion about your personal angst and emotional constipations about the game, coz the way i see it, your comparisons of SC2 with other rts games that some of these guiys never even heard of is kinda out of league. Making a sequel for a game that has been so much successful compared to a totally different RTS is not the proper way to compare this game with... and besides, starcraft already made its mark on history being the greatest RTS of all time and that dow thing is just starting its footsteps,.

Reverence for tradition doesnt make sense? - i really want to stop reading by this point....

 

I frankly agree with you in respect to Blizzard catering too much to their hardcore audience (of whom seem to live in a box as to when a new idea comes along they shoot it down to preserve their little box. Fear of the unknown through ignorance on other titles it would seem.

Where starcraft 2 really excels - for me, will be the singleplayer (which will indeed be trying some new ideas and actually doing them WELL for a change, (dow dark crusade failed at multiple mission selection). As well as, quite simply replayability through the map editor and intense details and effort.

Starcraft 2 wins in terms of the sheer effort is being put in here. If you think about the amount of cinematics they're pulling for this, as well as the far more detailed characters and plot you can really see where starcraft 2 as a whole already seems to have overtaken what dawn of war 2 could be.

But you are talking in respect to gameplay. And gameplay only it seems, and in this case yes, i agree that blizzard are playing this too safe, they will repeat the phrase if it aint broken dont fix it however, which is in a way... kinda true.

If its any consolation, the single player experience will vary im sure between small squad managment to large epic battles - blizzard have already admitted that they want each chosen mission to have a cool different vibe, or 'minigame' idea to it. One example being the train hijack which they mentioned.

Dont expect the standard build a base, send units etc idea for the singleplayer campaign, its evolved to so much more than that, you will see! :O.

 

This is all null because I doubt you've played Starcraft 2.

1) Dawn of War 2 has all those mechanics because it's a squad-based RTS.

2) RTS games are meant to simulate battlefield tactics, but... all RTS games are really BASE BUILDIN', RESOURCE GATHERIN', BASE BUILDIN', ARMY TRAININ', and BASE DEMOLITION. Dawn of War 2 gets credit for doing something else, but Starcraft 2 is sticking to the generic formula for good reason. It works.

 

Have you played Starcraft 2?

And why is your argument solely placed in the realm of the Multiplayer?

Not to into campaigns?

From what i have seen the Starcraft 2 Single-Player Campaign is one of the most revolutionary ideas ive seen in RTS Gaming.

I have played DoW2 through the Beta and i mostly just used it to check to see if my computer could run next gen RTS's on high graphics, im happy to report it can flawlessly

But overall i thought the multiplayer was actually fun but there is not much use for lower tiered units later in the game and it is mostly just a race to see who can get the higher more OP tech units first. and with those, stomp the lower tiered units.

 

DoW 2 is quite different, but we cant call it better until SC2 is out. And on top of that ya really gotta wait until each have all their expansions out as well. I loved the DoW 2 beta, but as I said, it's different. I wouldn't say better, just refreshing- I enjoy the squad based mechanics. I also missed base building/management though...

 

I think there's little point of comparing them, as StarCraft II and DoW II are very different games (despite both being RTS), having different foci. In fact, DoW II sort of stretches the definition of RTS, but that's not a bad thing if that's your kind of game. I don't think you can call one game "better", the best you can do is say one is more fun than the other, after playing both. Extensively.

I've only played a little StarCraft II at BlizzCon 2007 (years out of date, literally), and have only seen videos of DoW II.

I like the way DoW II looks, for many of the same reasons I like Warcraft III. I love the micromanagement options; there's a demo video floating around where they showed how to make flank attacks with three different kinds of units.

DoW II either isn't designed for esports or isn't likely to do well there due to the randomness (eg if you have an attack that sends an enemy flying, it looks pretty random to me). I don't care much about esports, so I don't hold that against DoW II.

DoW II got poor reviews for the campaign. I think StarCraft II will stomp all over it in that department... and that happens to be the primary reason I'm waiting for StarCraft II. So unless DoW II completely wows me, it'll just be an interesting diversion for me until StarCraft II comes out.

 

Considering SC2 isnt even in beta, and DoW2 is already out, I will say this.

SC3 > DoW2

gg? or is my opinion void since the game isnt out? i say to hell to you all kind sirs

and that Tink Wars is > then all. (still an idea in progress)

 

Kaloth, do you seriously think everything would be better if SC2 had more similarities with games like DoW2 and Comany of Heroes? Don't you realize they are trying very different things? SC2 isn't 'behind', it's on a completely different chart.

Do you think HL2 episode 2 is behind for having a 100 hp system like HL1, instead of having a non-numerical (to the player's eye) hp system like all the CoD games have? Just because it's a newer system doesn't mean it's better.

 

Blizzard innovating = WarCraft III
Blizzard doing the right thing = StarCraft and Diablo

Clearly, they're doing what's best.

But, this is all irrelevant since Dawn Of War 2 is trash. No one will remember it in short time from now. It's just like Halo Wars. People are frothing at the mouth for it right now but no one will even care about it soon.

(The only reason I state my opinion as fact is because that seems to be the trend in this topic )

 

I agree in that DoW may be a good game but it isn't a game you remember for years and years. Come back to after you've beaten it. I also think imo that the storyline in SC2 will be far superior.

 

I always thought that the Dow storyline is very strong with its grittiness but i think i heard from gamespot that the story was rather weak (i think) but i heard its a great game but its failure is the Steam Service. supposedly, Steam ruins it all. And no, i personally don't think that SC2 is worse than DoW2 simply because the new ideas that are coming up and the refreshing new gritty feel to it and DoW2 to me, just looks like another RTS after watching some vids of it.

 

You need steam for DOWII. Thats really bad.

Hopefully SCII WOL won't need steam or any online activation of any sort.

 

I like steam. But I doubt SCII will need steam since blizzard has their own way of distributing their games online as well as new features from Battle.net2.

And yeah, you can't compare these two games. They have different mechanics. If all games had the same mechanics then whats the point of buying diverse games?

 

Why would Blizzard use steam. They have Battle.net. Even if they wanted to do something like steam they would just make their own. They have the money. They have the clout. They have the talent. They can do whatever that want.

.. hopefully, they don't DRM our game into being **** though.

 

Does anyone here honestly believe that Blizzard might put some sort of DRM scheme on SCII?

I have a suspicion it might happen.

 

WarCraft III had DRM. I'm sure StarCraft 2 will as well but I doubt it'll be anything more than simple disc checks... which are easy to remove.

 

...Warcraft 3 had DRM?

 

not to the extent we see it today, just the usual old.. hey look.. this cd key isnt valid for online play. or maybe even. hey look this isnt the cd that matches this cd key.

etc etc.

nothing like EA's 3 copies and your up deal.

 

what is steam?