TW MP vs Blizzard RTS MP

[Magyar Khan]

rome was dissapointed in that... but swoosh imagine that maps are all not balanced could u live with an home and away battle (2 games, each as defenber and attacker) and the game calculates the overall winner...... i think this game mode would make much more maps suitable..... with many people discovering new ways to defend or attack and new armytypes.... and purposes....

[Kocmoc]

Battlenet and the mentioned games are miles ahead from TW.

The balance, the quick patches, the tons of player, the maps.... hell, battlenet is actual working, there are tourneys.


Indeed, it is very hard to compare, but one thing for sure, blizz is really working on the MP part. On the other hand, it is very hard to turn a game like TW in something similar like WC3.
WC3 or SC2 is good balanced (SC2 need some more patches), there are many ways to counter your enemy, its a very nice teamgame and what i really love about it, you can lose a battle, but you dont lose the whole game.
You can always come back and turn the fight, thats something TW will never reach.... hard to compare.

Koc

[Paolai]

I am not talkning about blizzard's games, I am talknig about the work that blizzard put on MP. I have played about 380 SC2 matches, and just one game I had some minutes of lag...just some minutes! I never had a drop.
No lag at all means that the commands work perfectly, you just have to give to your unit a command one time...from RTW to give a commend and to be sure your unit will move where you want you have to give the command more and more time, you never know if your unit will do what you want. In NTW the same, maybe also worse.
SC2 also has a very well done ladder. Ladder for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 and also 4v4. A lot of leagues. The MP its near to be perfect. Blizzard worrks on MP from years, CA...well CA I think never works on MP thats why Blizzards sells billions of copies in just few weeks.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

But is it really wise to charge money every month to play a game online? I'm not going to buy WOW, the expasions, then spend more money to play it, if I'm only going to play it a few times a week.

[AMP]

It's also a matter of taste of which you prefer. A lot of people like the starcraft,warcraft, and command and conquer style of play. I always liked more RTS games which had a unique twist of their own to them like populous, shogun, homeworld, total annihilation, and world in conflict. As long as they had a workable mp I played it cause I enjoyed the gameplay... it's a matter of taste. I had people that I've played with try and get me to hop on the band wagon and play starcarft or warcraft, but I wasn't into it as much as I was the other RTS games I was playing at the time. I played the warcraft series up to warcraft3, but it was more of an inbetween game to play until I found something I really liked.

Blizzard has a boat load of money and man power so of course they are gonna have a better MP... The TWs MP hasn't really changed much since STW days because it was all going for SP where an AI will never give a human player a real challenge without a buff to it. :O

[Tempiic]

Apples and Oranges I say.

Though with the growing progress in genetic engineering, we may be able to compare them easily soon.

Still, the balance for blizzard's RTS has been quite good as far as I can tell. Other than that, it is not really my kind of game. I like to control units instead of single thingies. And I really really like TW's major selling point of pick an army and fight with it, rather than also having to worry about economic growth. I don't feel like being a fast-click account-manager. ;) Nor do I care much for their WC lore, eventhough I did enjoy WC1, it went a bit too cartoonish for me after that. WC3 did had a real nice 'league' system at first glance, but I spend too little time to really look into it in more detail. And yes, Blizzard is way way bigger, and its own publisher too right?

AI never challenges a human player I think, unless its a nice game of chess I suppose.