Jump to content

WC3 OR EBFD?

spad567

By spad567
in Gaming

 Share

Recommended Posts

Razorox

Razorox

Posted
Posted

Umm no Razor, U started this dont shift blame to someone else....

Sorry about that, looking back on the original page, it turns out that none other than that damn leeto started this. ( ::))

Razorox

Razorox

Posted
Posted

Razorox, perhaps you have the problem. Emporer does have better graphics. Not LARGER, just SHARPER.

I may be easier to rush in Emporer, but that was not the point. People STILL RUSH in WarIII.

The group cap does make it hard, compared to WestWood games. Which, I might add, have better pathfinding to start with.

Oh. pehaps I never survived all the godd*mn rushing to get to those units. ::) No, seriously...OK, that STILL makes the unit cap 45. Which is assuming you have no workiers. That's lower than AOE1, "you ignorant fool".

It DOES LAG onliine. I never said worse than WOL, I said it DOES LAG. Which it does. Nine out of ten games, it does. Maybe that's because we aren't rich and don't have a DSL modem. Whatever. Don't push it in other people's faces that there is no lag just because you and your spoiled-rich friends have DSL. If you have a little 56k, THERE IS LAG! >:( >:( >:(

(Sorry. Let's just say you strayed onto a very upsetting topic, there, eg. basically how rich you are. Stay away from that on the Gobalopper FED2k forums, K? 8) People are not "ignorant idiots" just because they can't afford a DSL modem. >:()

1.) Yah, emperor has better graphics because it requires less system resources than WC3, and has less polygons...yah, ok duke, whatever you want to think. ::)

2.) So your point is that WC3 sucks because of rushers, but although rushing is even more popular in emperor, emperor is still good. LMAO. Fool.

3.) Did you fail english or something? FFS, duke I called you an ignorant fool because you had no clue there were units that only required 2 food spots, not because of some unit cap. Christ! >:(

4.) You said "battle.net IS NO BETTER THAN WOL." And battle.net is 10X better than WOL. It's so obvious that you have no idea what the hell you are talking about duke. Maybe it's just your connection that's not stable, but don't go blaming it on battle.net. 99 out of 100 games it does not lag, if it does so badly for you it is definitely your connection. Oh and BTW I don't have DSL, and all my friends have 56k, so "think before you post, damn it" My post had absolutely NOTHING to do with how rich I am. As a matter of fact, according to you, your computer is better than mine, so why don't you STFU, until you learn how to do something other than spew bull shit out of your mouth.

Razorox

Razorox

Posted
Posted

well you've gotta admit the graphics blow the socks off those shitty warcraft three cartoon figures

o look even Razor thought WC3 grahpics suck :D:P

HAHA, funny, do you mind pointing me to the post where I made that comment? Oh wait...you just changed the quote (sarcasm intended) ;D nice try though ;)

Gigaettin

Gigaettin

Posted
Posted

umm no thats a quote from a different thread, but u did say that, u cant just change the quote thing as u can see u said that on May 27, and Razor u may not have DSL but u have cable!

DukeLeto

DukeLeto

Posted
Posted

I'm backing out. I'm gonna enjoy looking at this thread in the Dungeon though.

One last note: When did I say "bnet is no better than WOL"? I never said that. If I did, I didn't mean overall. I mean that there IS LAG ON BNET, so you oughta shut up, having a cable modem and all. And you complain about people changing you quotes, when they didn't. THINK BEFORE YOU POST!

Desert_Eagle25

Desert_Eagle25

Posted
Posted

He was talking about War2 or War1 most likely. And HOW THE FUCK are the graphics SHARPER ?! They are most definitely not. There isnt even detail to the textures, all u see are a few blury lines and some colors, while in War3, the paladin, you can see the markings on his cape, his beard, the different colors in his beard (brown and grey), his tome, the writings on his tome, the markings on his hammer ,and all the fine lines, not the mention the detail in muscular areas. And also there are such details in the game such as mauntains, cliffs, high-ground, low-ground, up-hill, and downhill, wich can change the tide of the battle, even u were on the offensive side. And the lagging, thats not Bnet my friend, thats either your processor, or someone in the game. Personally i've only lagged 4 times in a ladder game, but that was because there were 56kers in the game (i dont even call them people ne more).

DukeLeto

DukeLeto

Posted
Posted

Turn your godd*mn detail up in Emporer. ::)

And there are graphical bugs in WarIII that look, well, bad. Catapult wheels floating in the air, etc.

ethan

ethan

Posted
Posted

Excuse me, but thats an *opinion* not a fact. Now stop acting like u know every goddamn thing plz.

Sorri if i'm being aggressive, but i'm tired of ppl putting down an extremely good game because they either suck at it, dont know how to play it, or are too hard headed to adapt to a new playing style.

actually, i don't have $54.99 to spend.... and i dont like the back of the box previews.

DjCiD

DjCiD

Posted
Posted

man i knew most of the posters were young compares to some of us old foggies but amn... still watching seaseme street?! ;D

DukeLeto

DukeLeto

Posted
Posted

This has degraded into a flame war.

And the Back-of-the-box previews may be beta, but the graphics REALLY ARE that bad. Note: My video card don't support resolutions higher than 1024x768. This could be part of it, but Emporer's graphics look better at said resolution.

Desert_Eagle25

Desert_Eagle25

Posted
Posted

It's 5:14 where i am, and i honestly will post a screenshot in the LOWEST settings and then would like to see u say that they are actually bad. I'll have my optomitrist nice and waiting for you, he's been dying to check your eyes. :)

Terror

Terror

Posted
Posted

ugh, what's the point of this flaming anyway. Statistically war3 graphix are way more detailed. They exist of at least 4 times the amount of polygons as in emperor, probably more. But anyway when it comes to sharpness this is stupid to argue about. Sharpness is the resolution you set it in. No matter what engine it is, it is always just as sharp. I for instance play it in 1600x1200x32 so that is my sharpness for both e:bfd and war3. Nothing can change that. It's just that obstacles in war3 have more polygons and more anymations (animation is often also included in the graphix section)

DjCiD

DjCiD

Posted
Posted

And Djcid, how old would you be then? Do people stand up for you in the bus when it's crowded ;D?

Bus? A Bus?! Ha! Well in my day I used to walk.... {ENTER OLD FOGGIE STORY HERE} and it was covered in snow! Uphill! Both ways!! ;D

nope not that old... yet... but sometimes i feel that damn old ;D

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.