What truly makes starcraft better then warcraft?

[WarManta]

Is it the:
Lore? = 1
Graphics? = 2
Engine Speed? = 3
A improved editor that could be made for warcraft? = 4
Completed trackables? = 5
Lack of multiplayer?= 6
Something else? If so please post it. = 7


I do not want nasty comments in my thread, so try to refrain yourself from doing so.

This is not just another thread complaining about the comparisons of these two games or a start of a argument, but more of a improvement for warcraft.

Numbers on the poll represent what you see above you with the equal signs.

Hidden Option

Nothing = 8 - # = 5

- -SoulBurn, ragingspeedhorn, Aeroblyctos, Fan, dead-man-walking

 

[-SoulBurn]

There should be an option "Nothing = 8"

 

[Piwlady]

7.
Because it's one daamn good game with good graphics, good gameplay and good lore.

 

[WarManta]

Agreed -SoulBurn but what kind of poll would it be then?

Piwlady, why do you think this is better then warcraft?
Warcraft is a good game with good graphics if chose too do that and it has good lore too, does it not?

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

I don't like Starcraft all that much and doesn't find it better than Warcraft.

 

[Aeroblyctos]

Nothing = 8

 

[WarManta]

Fine I added in a private new secret option.

 

[rcshaggy]

Well I like Warcraft more than Starcraft, but that doesn't mean I hate Starcraft.
It's just people like their own games and such.

 

[WarManta]

Well from what I have observed star-craft two is getting more attention then warcraft from those 7 visible options up there.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Wait.. lack of multiplayer?

 

[WarManta]

Yes, from what I recall there is no LAN and only poor WAN with no chat rooms and other stuff from what I have heard.

 

[TwistedImage]

How on Earth could lack of multiplayer possibly make a game better, though?

Also I find the lack of a 'gameplay' vote option amusing.

 

[Pharaoh_]

I don't like Starcraft all that much and doesn't find it better than Warcraft.

That. The only reason I'm going for this game is the graphics and the enhanced editor, nothing more. I doubt I'll ever try the campaign, and, if I do so, it will be due to the new environment I'm going to experience.

 

[Vengeancekael]

Ehm you can't really compare these 2 games, the gameplay is completely different.
But well for graphics, yes, starcraft 2 is better, as well as the editor. And perhaps the campaign as well.

Engine Speed

Ehm this game is a completely new game and warcraft 3 was released in 2002.

Lack of multiplayer

Definitely not, starcraft 2's matchmaking system is great, there are custom maps and you can play cooperatively. Yes, the custom map system isn't that good, but they said they will be changing the system.
About LAN, you should really get over it, every company is trying to make their newest games online only.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Yes, from what I recall there is no LAN and only poor WAN with no chat rooms and other stuff from what I have heard.

Who the hell defined multiplayer as offline-only? If you're on a LAN chances are you've also got internet. Assembling a party and playing together online is just as easy as offline, plus it eliminates LAN abuse like Garena. The matchmaking system is excellent as well.

Also, if you're going to compare two widely different games, you need a larger amount of options and criteria. Not to mention accounting for the vast difference in release-date.

 

[kola]

Also, if you're going to compare two widely different games, you need a larger amount of options and criteria.

the 7 is there for this...

and

7.
because the gameplay is much more intense in Sc2

 

[mrzwach]

SC2's campaign is significantly better than WC3's, the missions are unique and fun, and the overall mechanics are nice. Lore is eh.

The editor has its faults, but the increased customization available and things like custom UI make up for that.

Graphics are way better, but should be expected as it was made 7 years after WC3. Lack of LAN is fine, pretty much the main reason anyone used LAN anyways was so that they could play with friends illegally. :|

 

[Deleted member 157129]

the 7 is there for this...

and

7.
because the gameplay is much more intense in Sc2

If #7 is supposed to cover all of that, then this thread would've been better off without a poll in the first place.

 

[PROXY]

8 = Nothing.

 

[WarManta]

Quoted as well answered.

How on Earth could lack of multiplayer possibly make a game better, though?

Also I find the lack of a 'gameplay' vote option amusing.

Well it appears that some people highly prefer WAN over LAN while I think LAN and WAN are both required and I just put the vote in there anyway since I figured somebody would select it sooner or later...

"I don't like Starcraft all that much and doesn't find it better than Warcraft."
That. The only reason I'm going for this game is the graphics and the enhanced editor, nothing more. I doubt I'll ever try the campaign, and, if I do so, it will be due to the new environment I'm going to experience.

Warcraft could do the same thing could it not?

Ehm you can't really compare these 2 games, the gameplay is completely different.
But well for graphics, yes, starcraft 2 is better, as well as the editor. And perhaps the campaign as well.
Quote:
Engine Speed
Ehm this game is a completely new game and warcraft 3 was released in 2002.
Quote:
Lack of multiplayer
Definitely not, starcraft 2's matchmaking system is great, there are custom maps and you can play cooperatively. Yes, the custom map system isn't that good, but they said they will be changing the system.
About LAN, you should really get over it, every company is trying to make their newest games online only.

Actually I can compare these two games for both of them being a RTS, only difference is the races and age of them.
Still possible in warcraft isn't it?
C++ can do wonderful things to aid in that...
Even you said it wasn't that great did you not?
LAN is a requirement for it provides real testing while the ability to do illegal stuff .
As well if every company does this then I will quit gaming or start my own company because online only would mean what happens when there is a thunderstorm eh?
The editor and game of SC2 can only be used if you have a internet connection going and no interference with weather and if you did then what would you do then?
I will never get over it for as I have said LAN and offline ability is a requirement of games like these two and which is another reason what makes warcraft so much better.

Who the hell defined multiplayer as offline-only? If you're on a LAN chances are you've also got internet. Assembling a party and playing together online is just as easy as offline, plus it eliminates LAN abuse like Garena. The matchmaking system is excellent as well.

Also, if you're going to compare two widely different games, you need a larger amount of options and criteria. Not to mention accounting for the vast difference in release-date.

Why do you highly prefer WAN and what happens when you go no internet?
Garena does LAN abusement?
The seven is there for that....

the 7 is there for this...

and

7.
because the gameplay is much more intense in Sc2

Thank you for telling them what the seven is for.
But warcraft could do this too couldn't it?
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/supcom-clutch-v21-145940/?prev=search=supcom&d=list&r=20

SC2's campaign is significantly better than WC3's, the missions are unique and fun, and the overall mechanics are nice. Lore is eh.

The editor has its faults, but the increased customization available and things like custom UI make up for that.

Graphics are way better, but should be expected as it was made 7 years after WC3. Lack of LAN is fine, pretty much the main reason anyone used LAN anyways was so that they could play with friends illegally. :|

Well usually any campaign is better now these days and could always make your own unique in warcraft too, how are the mechanics nice? You dislike the lore?

The editor has more faults then warcraft's if you didn't notice and the same amount of customization is available in the editor of warcraft...
Good knowledge of texture and about warcrafts in-game console could do nearly the same.

Tho, graphics could be done just as good in warcraft since WoW models are imported and exported into maps still this day. How can lack of LAN be fine?
I heard you could only update/make a map five times or only space for five maps you could do on SC2.

If #7 is supposed to cover all of that, then this thread would've been better off without a poll in the first place.

Number seven is surpost to cover all of this because I was tired when I made this poll .

I think the poll gave this thread a bit more to do/choose.

 

[Anachron]

About LAN, you should really get over it, every company is trying to make their newest games online only.

That's about right, but still that does not mean that it's a good thing. For example Diablo3 should not be online only, but as I heared, it will be online only.

 

[WarManta]

Sometimes a online only game ruins the game itself.

People who has voted more then once have abused the poll and their votes will not be counted.
I definitely need to learn how to make a poll....


- Requesting a poll fix since I don't know how to do it myself.

 

[dead-man-walking]

8 - Nothing

They are completely different and should never be compared. Plus release dates are far-off (Wc3= 2002, Sc2= 2010).

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Starcraft isn't necessarily better than Warcraft, nor vice versa. They're just different.

Graphics and technological differences like the editor are natural, and if they ever make a Warcraft 4, improving upon those kinds of things would be pretty fucking obvious.

I will say though, that I like Starcraft's aesthetics much better. I guess it's a sci-fi thing.

In terms of gameplay, Starcraft goes for a more streamlined and large-scale game whereas Warcraft 3 is more centralized and small-scale. While Warcraft 3 deviates more from standard RTS formula, it's also incredibly clunky in gameplay in comparison to Starcraft, and races are pretty much made from a template, whereas the variety of the 3 races in Starcraft offers completely different kinds of strategy and gameplay.

In terms of story, Warcraft 3 was essentially borrowing heavily from Starcraft in the first place before WoW and Wings of Liberty both decided to make their respective storylines boring and predictable.

That being said though, SC2's campaign mode was definitely one of the highlights of the game, even despite the lackluster storyline and dialogue. Go figure.

Also, don't say "You can't compare these 2 games. They're too different." That's bullshit. I can compare the complex study of particle physics with an orange if I want to. "Too different" is a hell of a shitty excuse.

The only reason I'm going for this game is the graphics and the enhanced editor, nothing more. I doubt I'll ever try the campaign, and, if I do so, it will be due to the new environment I'm going to experience.

Boohoo.

 

[Darkness-4ever]

I prefer SC2, the campaign was fun and had more variety in terms of mission objectives, along with the many things you could do in between missions. As far as online ago, B.net 2.0 is utter crap at the moment in terms of interacting with other players, I really do miss channels. The editor is miles above WC3 in many respects, even though it cuts back on some areas such as the 1/16 FPS thing, but other than that its just a better editor, you can argue that you can do close to the same with Warcraft 3's but you can only go so far with it. As far as LAN support, I really couldn't care less, really its the region lock thats bothersome, as I have friends in multiple regions. Overall I prefer SC2 over WC3.