I loved the AoE games, however they two are different themes.. however I can ask.. What makes Starcraft 2 better then Supreme Commander 2? Both are sci-fi.. Both are 3 faction based.. Both have resource gathering.. Both use the same mechanics of unit crafting and addons..Both have online play.. ONLY Supreme commander can be played without the internet..
So again, what makes starcraft 2 better?
What makes Starcraft 2 better? Starcraft 2 sticked to its original formula of Starcraft 1. Supreme Commander 2 changed too much from the original game, alienating the players and earning mediocre reviews.
That didnt' answer the question.. I'm asking for unbiased views.. What are the major differences between the two games, pros and cons.. Can you list them?
Now you are probably going to try and prove me wrong but you're gonna fail.
who's with me, they are going to relaunch starcraft I but they are not gonna relaunch age of empires 2? cmon man the world is not fair
Age of Empires 2 is easily one of the best RTS games out there. SC looks simple by comparison, its smaller scale in almost every way, and oh god the pathing is terrible in SC.
Glad someone appreciates Generals, that game was awesome as hell in LANS.
The GLA were the best faction to just rub it in a friends face when you destroyed them with the bomb trucks and motorcycle terrorists. God that game had so many golden moments in it.
I'd have to say behind CoH, Generals was the best RTS game I've ever played.
Oh back on topic, my only problem with SC2 is the typical start locations. It seriously annoys the hell out of me why can't RTS game designers program randomly created maps from a template.
I believe Age of Mythology did it, why the hell can't a game in 2010 be able to?
I haven't played SC2 yet. But I can tell you AOE2 is one of the best games ever made if you ask me! even after all these years. I still play it, I grow up with this game. At the moment I play 2 games. The first one is LOTRO, for my mmo fix. And the second one is AOE2, I play it on gameranger with a few close friends, Black forest still rules! So AOE2 > every game on the planet?
------------------------------------------------------------------- waiting for ... nothing..
Now you are probably going to try and prove me wrong but you're gonna fail.
who's with me, they are going to relaunch starcraft I but they are not gonna relaunch age of empires 2? cmon man the world is not fair
Depends? Is Ensemble Studios going to finish the whole game then delay it to chop it up so that i can only play as Western Europe and split the rest of the civilizations up for future releases.
P.S.
People who bought Star Craft 2 need to slap themselves. Blizzard Finished the game then delayed it to split it up saying the game was to big..... SO!!! Oh well hope blizzard releases each future xpac for 60bones too so u can further get raped by the crooks at Blizzard. Least SoE has the decency to Lube you up first.
I dislike RTS games that are unchanged since the ole Dune 2.
If I ever managed to play the same boring buiild/harvest/attack formula, that has to be when I'm completely immersed in atmosphere or the setting/story.
I don't like SC story or the atmosphere, it's too generic.
Age of Empires (even first one!) or Dune 2, well, those were classic and are IMHO still the best. I don't need to play any new ones, they can't ever be better.
In conclusion - change the %$#% formula! 15 YEARS HAS PASSED (more or less)
Close Combat 1 appeared: a highly realistic WW2 RTS with no "building phase" but an RTS fully integrated within a tactical combat simulation. Smoke screens, squad sized units within a platoon and one or two tank apperances. All controled by the player's orders in a company structure in real time (and far LESS clicking).
The game stood miles above any other strategical game. For instance in a 100 men assault force, if you lost 20% of your troops, you practically lost the battle due to rooting and uncontrolled fleeing of troops (moral).
CC2 was already less (bigger WC like units that didn't fit anymore into buildings) and CC3 - CC4 were even worse because the excellent AI of the first series couldn't be redone.
Today you can still order CC5 from Matrix games and while it still is not better than that illusive CC1, I would recommend it to anyone if you are looking for a RTS with realistic battles. The composition of the troops takes place before a tactical battle (as in real life) and according to the "known" territory can be adapted. Typical fight lasts 15 minutes: excellent for internet play.
One example: if you would advance your tiny squad of infantry across 50 meters of open terrain without smoke screens, covering firing of .50 MG's and heavy artillery bombardements in front of it : ... you wiped in seconds.
So why were the CC's not another AoE or SC ? Too historical, not gamish enough. I remember NOT picking up WC2 and WC3 because of the superior quality of the CC series.
SC2 was relevant to me because of the production quality and extreme good story telling. But its SF theme and gamish elements makes it pale against CC1 and Sid Meirs Gettysburg from an historical point of view.
I love going to Xfire and watching LIVE video feeds.. I have to chuckle when I watch some of the SC2 feeds.. They all bloody look the same.. Each battle takes about 10 minutes.. It's the same strategy of zerg workers, build a 10 man unit ( if that ) with upgrades and zerg enemy faster then he zergs you.. LOL I've even watched one gent, and listen to him as well, showing people how to min/max your faction to win 99% of the time.... YEAH..
Game isn't even a week old and people are already min / maxing, and getting bored with it.. But then you do have enough players that like wining that way over and over and over, because it's what excites them.. Sorta like beating up a 10 yr old in football and thinking it's fun.. /shrug I don't see SC2 as the diety RTS game of the decade, as many proclaim but oh well.. I'm waiting for Blizzard to remarket the "pet rock" at $59.95 and read all the AAA+ reviews.. LOL
SC2 is better than Supreme Commander 2 for the following reasons.
SC2 didnt change its gaming mechanics too much unlike Supreme commander 2.
SC2 epic units such as the Carrier stayed powerfull Supreme commander turned most games to a rush for the now average Experimentals whch were once very hard to produce and so powerfull that you felt it if you lost one.
SC2 has some very nice between mission bits that helped build a world that fitted in the lore and the single player campain was fun. Supreme Commander basically re-wrote most of the story and the single player was not even worth playing.
SC2 has a very good online system it even has a sort of multiplayer tutorial to help new players develop gaming stratagies in a noobie only area. Supreme commander in comparison is very basic looking and it can be very hard to form a decent game.
SC2 i have yet to experience fellow players drop out of a game due to disconnecting unlike Supreme Commander 2 where it happens a lot especially in the Lobby.
The music in SC2 is fantastic.
The system of having a tech tree with an either or choice is good as each choice is non changable. In Supreme Commander 2 You are able to build anything ingame so the choice is less difacult.
SC2 Has Mercenaries which are usefull if you need elite units fast.
SC2 has Tech upgrades for all units in the armoury but each costs credits and are gained out of game.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
I know there are a ton of Blizzard haters around here, so I'm sure many will not agree with me... but I personally think SC2 is FAR FAR better than Age of Empires. I like AOE too, but I am thoroughly enjoying SC2.
I know there are a ton of Blizzard haters around here, so I'm sure many will not agree with me... but I personally think SC2 is FAR FAR better than Age of Empires. I like AOE too, but I am thoroughly enjoying SC2.
I agree completely here. While AoE 2 and even AoE were ahead of the original Starcraft, the refinement and balance of SC2 can not be beaten by either.
I played the SC2 beta for a long time, but honestly it is just too much the same. I am pretty bored of the same old formula. I am sure the single player campaign is pretty awesome, but i'm not buying into 180$ worth of single player campaigns. I also agree AoE2 was amazing.
I find Age Of Mythology to be the best of Age Of Series. Took elements of AoE2, only made it better with more unique options and didn't go overboard with it like AoE2 with all that deck card BS. Great graphics, great Gods and Civs, just pure fun and strategy. Titans expansion is even better than original.
I love strategy games, I at least claim to know what makes a good strategy game. SC2 is not good strategy game, SC2 is good twitchy, fast-paced tactics game. AoE2 has bit of this too, but strategy side of things are much, much better. I don't think anyone can say, that SC2 is better strategy game. There's better strategy games than AoE2, of course, but for me it hits the sweet spot between strategy & kingdom building and realtime twitchyness. AoE2 is also potentially more challening game. SC2 is decent fun game, the gameplay is probably more enjoyable for most people, and I don't have any grudges against Blizzard, but comparing it with AoE2, Rise of Nations, Sins of Solar Empire, Total Annihilation and the kind is kinda silly.
Comments
LIES!!!
QFT
plus Alpha Centauri was better than Starcraft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier's_Alpha_Centauri
Played: MCO - EQ/EQ2 - WoW - VG - WAR - AoC - LoTRO - DDO - GW/GW2 - Eve - Rift - FE - TSW - TSO - WS - ESO - AA - BD
Playing: Sims 3 & 4, Diablo3 and PoE
Waiting on: Lost Ark
Who's going to make a Cyberpunk MMO?
Hey, here's another thought - both games suck!
/thread
Currently Playing Path of Exile
That didnt' answer the question.. I'm asking for unbiased views.. What are the major differences between the two games, pros and cons.. Can you list them?
This... AOE was the first, won all the awards, and is the best. Say otherwise, get a brain, play all of AOE, and beat it. Tell me how it all ends.
Age of Empires 2 is easily one of the best RTS games out there. SC looks simple by comparison, its smaller scale in almost every way, and oh god the pathing is terrible in SC.
Glad someone appreciates Generals, that game was awesome as hell in LANS.
The GLA were the best faction to just rub it in a friends face when you destroyed them with the bomb trucks and motorcycle terrorists. God that game had so many golden moments in it.
I'd have to say behind CoH, Generals was the best RTS game I've ever played.
Oh back on topic, my only problem with SC2 is the typical start locations. It seriously annoys the hell out of me why can't RTS game designers program randomly created maps from a template.
I believe Age of Mythology did it, why the hell can't a game in 2010 be able to?
that takes the cake for the worst comment I read as of yet today.
I haven't played SC2 yet. But I can tell you AOE2 is one of the best games ever made if you ask me! even after all these years. I still play it, I grow up with this game. At the moment I play 2 games. The first one is LOTRO, for my mmo fix. And the second one is AOE2, I play it on gameranger with a few close friends, Black forest still rules! So AOE2 > every game on the planet?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
waiting for ... nothing..
Depends? Is Ensemble Studios going to finish the whole game then delay it to chop it up so that i can only play as Western Europe and split the rest of the civilizations up for future releases.
P.S.
People who bought Star Craft 2 need to slap themselves. Blizzard Finished the game then delayed it to split it up saying the game was to big..... SO!!! Oh well hope blizzard releases each future xpac for 60bones too so u can further get raped by the crooks at Blizzard. Least SoE has the decency to Lube you up first.
I dislike RTS games that are unchanged since the ole Dune 2.
If I ever managed to play the same boring buiild/harvest/attack formula, that has to be when I'm completely immersed in atmosphere or the setting/story.
I don't like SC story or the atmosphere, it's too generic.
Age of Empires (even first one!) or Dune 2, well, those were classic and are IMHO still the best. I don't need to play any new ones, they can't ever be better.
In conclusion - change the %$#% formula! 15 YEARS HAS PASSED (more or less)
NEW IDEAS that can refresh the STALE state of MMORPGs
The problem is ... that 13 years ago the formula already changed in a revolutionary way:
Press score at the time: 9.5 ! http://pc.ign.com/objects/003/003213.html
Close Combat 1 appeared: a highly realistic WW2 RTS with no "building phase" but an RTS fully integrated within a tactical combat simulation. Smoke screens, squad sized units within a platoon and one or two tank apperances. All controled by the player's orders in a company structure in real time (and far LESS clicking).
The game stood miles above any other strategical game. For instance in a 100 men assault force, if you lost 20% of your troops, you practically lost the battle due to rooting and uncontrolled fleeing of troops (moral).
CC2 was already less (bigger WC like units that didn't fit anymore into buildings) and CC3 - CC4 were even worse because the excellent AI of the first series couldn't be redone.
Today you can still order CC5 from Matrix games and while it still is not better than that illusive CC1, I would recommend it to anyone if you are looking for a RTS with realistic battles. The composition of the troops takes place before a tactical battle (as in real life) and according to the "known" territory can be adapted. Typical fight lasts 15 minutes: excellent for internet play.
One example: if you would advance your tiny squad of infantry across 50 meters of open terrain without smoke screens, covering firing of .50 MG's and heavy artillery bombardements in front of it : ... you wiped in seconds.
So why were the CC's not another AoE or SC ? Too historical, not gamish enough. I remember NOT picking up WC2 and WC3 because of the superior quality of the CC series.
SC2 was relevant to me because of the production quality and extreme good story telling. But its SF theme and gamish elements makes it pale against CC1 and Sid Meirs Gettysburg from an historical point of view.
I love going to Xfire and watching LIVE video feeds.. I have to chuckle when I watch some of the SC2 feeds.. They all bloody look the same.. Each battle takes about 10 minutes.. It's the same strategy of zerg workers, build a 10 man unit ( if that ) with upgrades and zerg enemy faster then he zergs you.. LOL I've even watched one gent, and listen to him as well, showing people how to min/max your faction to win 99% of the time.... YEAH..
Game isn't even a week old and people are already min / maxing, and getting bored with it.. But then you do have enough players that like wining that way over and over and over, because it's what excites them.. Sorta like beating up a 10 yr old in football and thinking it's fun.. /shrug I don't see SC2 as the diety RTS game of the decade, as many proclaim but oh well.. I'm waiting for Blizzard to remarket the "pet rock" at $59.95 and read all the AAA+ reviews.. LOL
SC2 is better than Supreme Commander 2 for the following reasons.
SC2 didnt change its gaming mechanics too much unlike Supreme commander 2.
SC2 epic units such as the Carrier stayed powerfull Supreme commander turned most games to a rush for the now average Experimentals whch were once very hard to produce and so powerfull that you felt it if you lost one.
SC2 has some very nice between mission bits that helped build a world that fitted in the lore and the single player campain was fun. Supreme Commander basically re-wrote most of the story and the single player was not even worth playing.
SC2 has a very good online system it even has a sort of multiplayer tutorial to help new players develop gaming stratagies in a noobie only area. Supreme commander in comparison is very basic looking and it can be very hard to form a decent game.
SC2 i have yet to experience fellow players drop out of a game due to disconnecting unlike Supreme Commander 2 where it happens a lot especially in the Lobby.
The music in SC2 is fantastic.
The system of having a tech tree with an either or choice is good as each choice is non changable. In Supreme Commander 2 You are able to build anything ingame so the choice is less difacult.
SC2 Has Mercenaries which are usefull if you need elite units fast.
SC2 has Tech upgrades for all units in the armoury but each costs credits and are gained out of game.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
I know there are a ton of Blizzard haters around here, so I'm sure many will not agree with me... but I personally think SC2 is FAR FAR better than Age of Empires. I like AOE too, but I am thoroughly enjoying SC2.
I've been playing the hell out of SC2 and love it...but to me, the best RTS ever was Rise of Nations.
I agree completely here. While AoE 2 and even AoE were ahead of the original Starcraft, the refinement and balance of SC2 can not be beaten by either.
I played the SC2 beta for a long time, but honestly it is just too much the same. I am pretty bored of the same old formula. I am sure the single player campaign is pretty awesome, but i'm not buying into 180$ worth of single player campaigns. I also agree AoE2 was amazing.
I find Age Of Mythology to be the best of Age Of Series. Took elements of AoE2, only made it better with more unique options and didn't go overboard with it like AoE2 with all that deck card BS. Great graphics, great Gods and Civs, just pure fun and strategy. Titans expansion is even better than original.
Please Zeus, let there be an AoM2 someday!
I love strategy games, I at least claim to know what makes a good strategy game. SC2 is not good strategy game, SC2 is good twitchy, fast-paced tactics game. AoE2 has bit of this too, but strategy side of things are much, much better. I don't think anyone can say, that SC2 is better strategy game. There's better strategy games than AoE2, of course, but for me it hits the sweet spot between strategy & kingdom building and realtime twitchyness. AoE2 is also potentially more challening game. SC2 is decent fun game, the gameplay is probably more enjoyable for most people, and I don't have any grudges against Blizzard, but comparing it with AoE2, Rise of Nations, Sins of Solar Empire, Total Annihilation and the kind is kinda silly.