19th May 2007, 9:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 19th May 2007, 10:06 PM by Dark Jaguar.)
Well I'll start by saying that if you are going to argue it's not hard enough and then say the very solution to your complaint, a "hard mode", doesn't count, well that's not entirely reasonable is it? Of course hard mode "counts". The real question is this. Do you think hard mode is as hard as Starcraft or is "hard mode" still too easy for you?
I personally never got bored with either campaign. I know a number of the story elements were sorta done in Starcraft, but really I think it was the presentation. From art to acting, I just thought WC3 was pretty much perfect. Starcraft is great, and for the most part (save a lot of those Terran heads... looked like yams more often than not) it looks great. Some parts just didn't sit well with me though. I guess it didn't sound as epic as it could have, I dunno. Anyway I prefer WC3. In fairness I say the same about WC2. The presentation of WC3 really outdoes that as well, and all of them outdo the first game. Keep in mind I've been more or less keeping up with these series from the start. Lost Vikings is awesome no matter how you slice it though. No stinker lines here or there, no yam heads, and no "aside" FMVs that just have some weird stuff that has no bearing on anything going on, like hillbillies hitting a zerg for some bad joke. Same can be said of WC3. I just love that game.
DMiller, I myself started RTS with Dune 2. Worms eh? Yeah, I got a message from you about that. I'm not sure I want to buy the same game twice... The demo doesn't really seem to indicate much added above the PC version.
You know what they need to remake with online play? Tank Wars. Even Mr. Stupid agrees!
Mr. Stupid: *self destructs*
DJ: Ha! A class act, and ladies, he's single!
I personally never got bored with either campaign. I know a number of the story elements were sorta done in Starcraft, but really I think it was the presentation. From art to acting, I just thought WC3 was pretty much perfect. Starcraft is great, and for the most part (save a lot of those Terran heads... looked like yams more often than not) it looks great. Some parts just didn't sit well with me though. I guess it didn't sound as epic as it could have, I dunno. Anyway I prefer WC3. In fairness I say the same about WC2. The presentation of WC3 really outdoes that as well, and all of them outdo the first game. Keep in mind I've been more or less keeping up with these series from the start. Lost Vikings is awesome no matter how you slice it though. No stinker lines here or there, no yam heads, and no "aside" FMVs that just have some weird stuff that has no bearing on anything going on, like hillbillies hitting a zerg for some bad joke. Same can be said of WC3. I just love that game.
DMiller, I myself started RTS with Dune 2. Worms eh? Yeah, I got a message from you about that. I'm not sure I want to buy the same game twice... The demo doesn't really seem to indicate much added above the PC version.
You know what they need to remake with online play? Tank Wars. Even Mr. Stupid agrees!
Mr. Stupid: *self destructs*
DJ: Ha! A class act, and ladies, he's single!
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)