Jump to content

WC3 OR EBFD?


spad567
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here i took a beautiful screenshot. Tho i couldn't get all the units and Super weapons in it and stuff since my computer isn't nice enough to handle everything on high.

Ha! You're joking about that screenie right?

Like some others have said, we don't all have the newest high tech computer. I don't even know much about computers all i know is that my resolution was set to 1024 x 768 true color. In emp when i was actually taking the screenie it looked 100x better. That's the best screenshot I can take on my computer,and it still looked good.

Now your warcraft3 graphics, well, they are wierded out. Maybe if you were a hippie frying on acid it would look cool other than that it looks likes its drawn in with pencil and colored in with the microsoft paintprogram. Its cartoonish. I do give it props tho on the detail(IE the eyes,noses etc...)

I don't know why we are comparing them anyways... War3 graphics are gonna be more like Zelda or something,while Emperors are gonna be more like battle tanks or something(Better though).

-----------------------------------------------

Now you said for me not to brag about my rush, then you said how you were pretty much the best player on this forum.That was kind of hypocritical,anways though, I don't think you were 'l337' in emp, or atleast not anymore. Yep everyone with any expierience can execute a good decent ordos rush... but not one of the best. I was #1 ordos this month and 2nd ordos like the last 4 months(actually 3rd one of those times).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bah I'm in game, and you won't even w8 15 min.! :'( You could have at least just came back in 15 min. lol.

heh sorry man. it's just that modem sux ass and i just couldn't w8 15 min. i just played a custom game. But i will play you soon though. I will be back :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they are different styled graphics. But technically war3's are more advanced, sharper, more detailed, period. Gob's argument is correct, emperor came out over a year before war3 so it has a reason for worse graphics. Yes they are different STYLED graphics, but that is not BETTER graphics. I don't see how you guys can blindly be arguing this, when it is so blatantly clear. Elite, if your desktop is at 1024x768 as well, then the screenies i took of war3 will be crappier, cuz you're not viewing them in the native resolution. And also I don't know why you guys keep saying "well not everyone has the most recent hardware, etc. etc." Well...I'd hate to burst your bubble, but you don't need a fast computer to view a screenshot :D. If you look at it with a TNT2, it will look almost exactly the same as if you look at it with a new radeon 9000, or geforce 4 ti 4600.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the ground/scenery better and overall the grpahics are sharper. But I think its somewhat unfair to compare as the games didn't come out at the same time.

I don't like the style of the graphics in Warcraft 3 though.

I agree on the point that warcraft 3 ofcourse has an advantage cuz it's 1 year newer and uses more special fx from the graphix cards. Also blizzard has always made big units so they looked detailed. In war2 the footmen were already detailed compared to RA's infantry. Ofcourse you also have to take in count that westwood had to look at the scale since infantry have to be a lot smaller then tanx. (well they did that right in ebfd but not in RA and TS and stuff since the mammoth mk2 looks like a dog compared to the infantry :) ) but even though warcraft3 may have a cartoonish tint it is not cartoonish when you play it. it's not that body's components are much bigger than they should be except that they all look like body builders heheh but blizzard has its reason for that.

And ok true blizzard did use all colors available on the color pallette but it still looks pretty fantasy realistic to me. Blizzard just has a different style than westwood. Even though in starcraft blizzard was way more serious they still made marines with huge shoulder blades and tanks still looked somewhat *strange* :) but hey it's their style and it is what i like.

(for the people who didn't read my story above :) )

CONCLUSION:

If you like war3's graphix style or ebfd's graphix style better than the other that is an opinion but it IS a fact that war3's graphix are more advanced/detailed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WarIII has better more highly detailed graphics. Man, I give you that. :D

But they seem awfully upbeat and light and cartooney for a war. :P Besides, I still see no guns. I mean, the rifleman has a "gun", but it's not, like, you know, an M-16 or AK-47. Not a REAL gun.

I just like the WestWood game feeling better. Guns, nukes, and cannons. Yeah, baby! And it's, you know, darker. More as if there was a war going on. ::)

BTW, how did you get a GeForce2 to go over 1024x768? That's the max. resolution it gives me as a choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it is cartoony, but i like it. I just get bored of really serious games. And the guns i love aswell, but the spells and effects, and stun ability and etc. replace em and give the game a great feel. Spells also add alot of strategy to the game such as negation and stunning an army, etc. things like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UGH, I hate it when people dark swarm their hydras in SC...lol, 3 took out 6 BC's and 12 wraiths...then I killed him with four wraiths, 4 valks, a sci vessel, and a bc. Then he disced, loser... :P Anywho, SC is my favorite 5-year-old RTS. ;) but it has guns. I do agree spells add strategy, as does the Unit cap (to a lesser extent). But the group cap, I still think it's more of an annoyance than anything else. I suppose it does encourage varied units, instead of massing, in a way...seperate unit types go in seperate groups. But, if you wanted, say 20 marines and half a dozen tanks, you couldn't put all the rines in one group. A minor annoyance, but...at least a little higher, say 20?

1. Could you undersatnd any of that? It' really late here.

2. Was ANY of that on topic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nah, the difference is that outnumbering your enemie is way harder than it was in starcraft for instance. In starcraft i could at times win a 2v1 (me being the one :P) because i could build about as fast as they could together and with a bit better strategy i could make my losses 1:2 so i had an advantage. In war3 it's not hard to get 90 supply and if he upgrades too it's hard to win a 2v1. so beating a n00b is harder in war3 then it is in starcraft, it requires more strategy. (not that starcraft has less strategies but they are less important i think)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

crap i hate 4v4 games. they all hated me :'(. 4 rushes on my base. damn i hate them all. I stayed alive with only 5 buildings 5 peasants and a paladin. And i got control over an allied orc base who ran out of money. I gathered all peons and attacked :P. I won hahah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

crap i hate 4v4 games. they all hated me :'(. 4 rushes on my base. damn i hate them all. I stayed alive with only 5 buildings 5 peasants and a paladin. And i got control over an allied orc base who ran out of money. I gathered all peons and attacked :P. I won hahah

Excuse me...did you just say you attacked with peons?!?!?!?! LMAO I'd like to see that! ;D ...the best unit in the whole game is bloodlusted peons ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well giga they're not realy invisible nor indestructable :). Actually they're pretty vulnerable. well militia is ok but the others are quite vulnerable but peons can enter burrows though to fight back (like bunkers) and other races have different means of fighting back with them workers.

and I too am glad that westwood has chosen for multiple smaller workers to build structures with. I think the construction yard concept was pretty cool in dune2 but i find it a bit weird now because 1 building can create an entire base on the other side of the map :). Don't get me wrong i don't think it's bad but i like multiple small workers or 1 bigger worker that creates buildings better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well giga they're not realy invisible nor indestructable :). Actually they're pretty vulnerable. well militia is ok but the others are quite vulnerable but peons can enter burrows though to fight back (like bunkers) and other races have different means of fighting back with them workers.

and I too am glad that westwood has chosen for multiple smaller workers to build structures with. I think the construction yard concept was pretty cool in dune2 but i find it a bit weird now because 1 building can create an entire base on the other side of the map :). Don't get me wrong i don't think it's bad but i like multiple small workers or 1 bigger worker that creates buildings better.

I think giga was referring to when peons build structures they can not be attacked until the building is either finished or destroyed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's kinda dumb. I like how you can kill constructing SCV's in SC.

but that's like the only building advantage that orc has. Human has speed build. Undead has unsummon, and the ability to leave a building while it is summoning, night elf buildings heal themselves and the wisp also cannot be attacked.

(not how each race also has one building upgrade: human=masonry, orc=spiked barracades, nightelf= natures blessing, undead=huge ass gun on top of citadel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UGH, I hate it when people dark swarm their hydras in SC...lol, 3 took out 6 BC's and 12 wraiths...then I killed him with four wraiths, 4 valks, a sci vessel, and a bc. Then he disced, loser... :P Anywho, SC is my favorite 5-year-old RTS. ;) but it has guns. I do agree spells add strategy, as does the Unit cap (to a lesser extent). But the group cap, I still think it's more of an annoyance than anything else. I suppose it does encourage varied units, instead of massing, in a way...seperate unit types go in seperate groups. But, if you wanted, say 20 marines and half a dozen tanks, you couldn't put all the rines in one group. A minor annoyance, but...at least a little higher, say 20?

1. Could you undersatnd any of that? It' really late here.

2. Was ANY of that on topic?

Are You alking about the game that we played? i only disced cuz i had to leave and the Idiot that hosted tha map [Dukeleto] put it on ffa so that we couldn't ally. Plus you weren't really winning, i mean, you had a bigger army, but i had 6 more bases than you. you were destroying one and you thought you were all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah ok that's true. Orc peons are invulnerable when building a building, BUT a building that is being constructed is quite vulnerable so killing it is not that hard. What is strange is that orcs have an invisible guy who uses a hammer and a saw :). Humans only have invisible guy with saw :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

×
×
  • Create New...