Jump to content

WC3 OR EBFD?

spad567

By spad567
in Gaming

 Share

Recommended Posts

DjCiD

DjCiD

Posted
Posted

my vote goes here! none other than EmpBFD. A game that came out before its time.... WC3 is just cathcing up :P ;D and from the sound of it there still not doing a good job at it.....

Emp BFD is the better game, BUT if you like having your games supported then its a let down cause we all know where WW stands on that issue (stands?! more like swings... swinging from the gallows :P) ;D

DjCiD

DjCiD

Posted
Posted

Wc3 has been in production since 1995.

why were the working on wc3 after just releasing wc? did they plan on skipping the nuber 2 or something? hell #2 didnt come out till when '96? so did they change their minds mid way thru 95 and decide to do a #2?

but anyway, so they were working on wc3 since 95.... well WW announceed EmpBFD in 2000 and a year later it was done... and its still better than wc3 :P ;D

DukeLeto

DukeLeto

Posted
Posted

Chanting: "Emporer! Emporer! Emporer!"

Better graphics (Smaller, but less cartoony. And just, well, sharper.)

Guns are better than swords!

No group cap.

Not as many bugs to bgin with. ;D

Started late, relesed on time, War III: Started too early, released horrendously late.

Westwood, occasionally listens to people. here is you average WestWood thing:

Us: Can we mod Emporer?

WestWood: Sure, why not!

and Blizzard:

Fans: We want StarCraft II!

Blizzard: Thank you for your input!

Newspaper, next day: Blizzard announces World of WarCraft.

Etc...

Razorox

Razorox

Posted
Posted

Chanting: "Emporer! Emporer! Emporer!"

Better graphics (Smaller, but less cartoony. And just, well, sharper.)

Guns are better than swords!

No group cap.

Not as many bugs to bgin with. ;D

Started late, relesed on time, War III: Started too early, released horrendously late.

Westwood, occasionally listens to people. here is you average WestWood thing:

Us: Can we mod Emporer?

WestWood: Sure, why not!

and Blizzard:

Fans: We want StarCraft II!

Blizzard: Thank you for your input!

Newspaper, next day: Blizzard announces World of WarCraft.

Etc...

"Guns are better than swords" <--- oviously matter of opinion. And there's no way on gods green earth WC3 had more bugs than emperor to begin with. The reason you think this is because Blizzard fixes all the little things, while WW just goes after the big problems, which makes it seem that there is more problems with WC3. WC3 is WAY more compatible, 10x more stable (has never crashed, or even did anything it wasn't supposed to EVER) And as much as you'd hate to admit it, WC3 has way better graphics than emperor. Sure, emperors aren't bad, but WC3 has MUCH better detail (especially when you zoom in) And there isn't suddenly an end to the world at the edge of the map ( ;D) the sound effects are way cooler (the swords clashing, and dragons breathing fire ;)) And about the group cap...it is a FEATURE not a bug.

Razorox

Razorox

Posted
Posted

I am currently playing EBFD and want to know which yall think is better: EBFD OR WC3?

lol spad, this is an EMPEROR forum, which game do you think most people are gonna say is better? ( ::)) If you want to know the truth go to ANY large review magazine or site (www.ign.com or PCGamer mag) then you'll get some informed views on what the truth is.

Oh and BTW WC3 kicks the sh|t out of emperor in (almost) every way. :O

Razorox

Razorox

Posted
Posted

Oh and BTW WC3 kicks the sh|t out of emperor in (almost) every way. :O

And uh hows that?

lol...why don't you read my other post...and here's some more reasons

1) WC3 has more detail in the graphics, and the zoom in feature actually looks good

2) WC3 is more inovative, and unique

3) WC3 has 4 races instead of 3 (more choice)

4) WC3 is more stable, and more compatible (has NEVER crashed)

5) WC3 has better sound effects during battles (just listen to the sword fights ;D)

6) battle.net is more stable than WOL (b.net has only d/c me twice in 3 weeks [109 games played]) WOL would have d/c about 6-10 times in that many games.

7) battle.net always has lots of people to play with, and qm actually works...EVERY TIME

8) Blizzard actually patches the problems with their games.

9) In WC3 the world doesn't suddenly end at the edge of the map ;D

10) The unit cap makes the game focus more on strategy than on massing/turtling.

11) Group cap makes you micromanage and use maneouvering skills, while in emperor you just select your guys, click on his guys

12) WC3 has features that help prevent rushing 30 seconds into the game, which in turn leads to more variation in Build Orders

13) In WC3 you don't just mass the most powerful units (in emperor, after the 5 min mark, all you have to do is mass minos/NIAB/gunship/kobra etc.)

14) In WC3 you're not staring at sand every single game.

15) In order to win a WC3 game, you must actually leave your base (you get rewarded by gaining xp from creeps, and must expand etc.), instead of barricading yourself inside, and w8ing for 600 minos to build.

Don't get me wrong, emperor is a great game. But WarCraft 3 is just so much better that it's in a league of its own.

Gigaettin

Gigaettin

Posted
Posted

) WC3 has more detail in the graphics, and the zoom in feature actually looks good

^ I think ur playin a diff game WC3 graphics suck while Emps are way better

2) WC3 is more inovative, and unique

^ unique? bullshit, its just like the other warcraft games, im not sayin that Emp is orginal but neither is WC3

3) WC3 has 4 races instead of 3 (more choice)

^ yeah accept all the units are basically the same with diff graphics and diff names

4) WC3 is more stable, and more compatible (has NEVER crashed)

^It has crashed for me

5) WC3 has better sound effects during battles (just listen to the sword fights )

^Im sorry but the sound effects suck man, they are dreary and give a headache along with the graphics

6) battle.net is more stable than WOL (b.net has only d/c me twice in 3 weeks [109 games played]) WOL would have d/c about 6-10 times in that many games.

^i'll give u that one

7) battle.net always has lots of people to play with, and qm actually works...EVERY TIME

^ and again

8) Blizzard actually patches the problems with their games.

Theyve only had a few patches as of yet, and emp has had as many, so this proves nothing, true theyve patched other games, doesnt mean they'll do it with WC3

9) In WC3 the world doesn't suddenly end at the edge of the map

^and this is good why?

10) The unit cap makes the game focus more on strategy than on massing/turtling.

^what are u on, it just makes it annoying, and ppl still mass anyway, get loadsa fighters for the front and spellcasters for the back, o no so orignal!!

11) Group cap makes you micromanage and use maneouvering skills, while in emperor you just select your guys, click on his guys

^ive never once just clicked on my guys then his in emp, why wud u do that? u'd die straight away...

12) WC3 has features that help prevent rushing 30 seconds into the game, which in turn leads to more variation in Build Orders

By the time someone has attacked uve fallen asleep.....

13) In WC3 you don't just mass the most powerful units (in emperor, after the 5 min mark, all you have to do is mass minos/NIAB/gunship/kobra etc.)

I always mixed 'n' matched never all one unit, u say u dont just mass the most powerful units, although u say mass, exactly thats what i said u mass diff units in WC3, its still massing...

14) In WC3 you're not staring at sand every single game.

I^Yeah ur staring at the piss poor graphics

15) In order to win a WC3 game, you must actually leave your base (you get rewarded by gaining xp from creeps, and must expand etc.), instead of barricading yourself inside, and w8ing for 600 minos to build.

^u expand woohoo, u expand ur army in emp taking more ground as u go, WC3 isnt exactly orginal, there are other games such as Empire earth where u expand... and 600 minos, jesus embellishing a bit?

O and one for emp, in emp u have so many different strategies to choose from to defend and attack while in WC3 u dont...

DukeLeto

DukeLeto

Posted
Posted

Go giga! You rock!

He makes many good points. The only feature remotely better about WarII is Battle.net. And you can't really rotate godd*mn WarIII! that stupid 180

xvayne

xvayne

Posted
Posted

Emperor hands down. better graphics, game play, unit ideas, start. However ww killed emp, and blizzard could release a piece of shit in a box and sell it, simply because there support is out standing. They have been supporting sc for 10 years or so, thats the only thing keeps them ahead of ww. Too bad ww doesnt realize this.

Seal89999

Seal89999

Posted
Posted

) WC3 has more detail in the graphics, and the zoom in feature actually looks good

^ I think ur playin a diff game WC3 graphics suck while Emps are way better

2) WC3 is more inovative, and unique

^ unique? bullshit, its just like the other warcraft games, im not sayin that Emp is orginal but neither is WC3

3) WC3 has 4 races instead of 3 (more choice)

^ yeah accept all the units are basically the same with diff graphics and diff names

4) WC3 is more stable, and more compatible (has NEVER crashed)

^It has crashed for me

5) WC3 has better sound effects during battles (just listen to the sword fights )

^Im sorry but the sound effects suck man, they are dreary and give a headache along with the graphics

6) battle.net is more stable than WOL (b.net has only d/c me twice in 3 weeks [109 games played]) WOL would have d/c about 6-10 times in that many games.

^i'll give u that one

7) battle.net always has lots of people to play with, and qm actually works...EVERY TIME

^ and again

8) Blizzard actually patches the problems with their games.

Theyve only had a few patches as of yet, and emp has had as many, so this proves nothing, true theyve patched other games, doesnt mean they'll do it with WC3

9) In WC3 the world doesn't suddenly end at the edge of the map

^and this is good why?

10) The unit cap makes the game focus more on strategy than on massing/turtling.

^what are u on, it just makes it annoying, and ppl still mass anyway, get loadsa fighters for the front and spellcasters for the back, o no so orignal!!

11) Group cap makes you micromanage and use maneouvering skills, while in emperor you just select your guys, click on his guys

^ive never once just clicked on my guys then his in emp, why wud u do that? u'd die straight away...

12) WC3 has features that help prevent rushing 30 seconds into the game, which in turn leads to more variation in Build Orders

By the time someone has attacked uve fallen asleep.....

13) In WC3 you don't just mass the most powerful units (in emperor, after the 5 min mark, all you have to do is mass minos/NIAB/gunship/kobra etc.)

I always mixed 'n' matched never all one unit, u say u dont just mass the most powerful units, although u say mass, exactly thats what i said u mass diff units in WC3, its still massing...

14) In WC3 you're not staring at sand every single game.

I^Yeah ur staring at the piss poor graphics

15) In order to win a WC3 game, you must actually leave your base (you get rewarded by gaining xp from creeps, and must expand etc.), instead of barricading yourself inside, and w8ing for 600 minos to build.

^u expand woohoo, u expand ur army in emp taking more ground as u go, WC3 isnt exactly orginal, there are other games such as Empire earth where u expand... and 600 minos, jesus embellishing a bit?

O and one for emp, in emp u have so many different strategies to choose from to defend and attack while in WC3 u dont...

YEAH go giga!! Man you rock. Everything you said I agree with. Like duke said you make some points. Hell you said it all. And that is all there is to say. Emp graphics are alot better that wc3. The unit cap is stupid, and well its all in your post. Good job man lol

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.