EPTRelic is ahead O_o.
You guys want to help to change that? Show em who made the best RTS ever.
Someone asked for a poll, here is one.
Poll: Have you voted?
(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Relic vs Blizzard, lets show'em [Escapist Vote]
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Velr
Switzerland10835 Posts
Relic is ahead O_o. You guys want to help to change that? Show em who made the best RTS ever. Someone asked for a poll, here is one. Poll: Have you voted? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
| ||
|
ZoW
United States3983 Posts
| ||
|
TimeShifter
Singapore235 Posts
| ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
| ||
|
paper
13196 Posts
| ||
|
LeperKahn
Romania1846 Posts
Candrian Yeah I registered just to vote but I've been a regular article reader for ages. For me this isn't a very close run match up. Relic is by far the most innovative of the 2, sure Blizzard may have pushed a few envelopes 10-15 years ago but those were the days when video games were still a relatively young industry and pretty much anything could be called innovation. Nowadays Blizzard just seems to be content with going with the tried and tested formular, occasionally ripping off Games Workshop where they can just about get away with it (Don't flame me there, the jump-pack and dual-pistol wielding Terran unit in SC2 is just far too close to my favourite Warhammer 40k unit and as for Draenei, love them as i do, theyre still horned Tau) Relic, however, continues to innovate to this day Company of Heroes, with its amazing cover system, has revolutionised the whole idea of the RTS genre and put the strategy back into a genre almost completely screwed over by Blizzards horrificly balanced zerg-rushes. Then to Dawn of war which is pretty much Star Craft 2 with all the trimmings and a good 4-5 years advance and if anything was a triumph of simple balance between the 9 completely different races. That's beating Starcraft by a factor of 3 without even trying. You heard the man. Relic beats Starcraft by a factor of 3. (Without even trying!) EDIT: I've continued to read older posts... Wow... | ||
|
uNiGNoRe
Germany1115 Posts
| ||
|
Naib
Hungary4843 Posts
Really, Blizzard nowadays isn't that innovative as it used to be, unlike Relic (well, the success of their innovation could be debated imo, but that's another thing. They're at least trying new stuff). The 2nd part of the 2nd paragraph proves that whoever wrote that is a moron, though. "I CANT HAZ APM PLZ LETS MAKE STRATEGY GAMES COMPLETELY RANDOM DICEROLLZ ABOUT WHO TECHS TO WAT, DAT BE FUN - MY AWSUM STRATEGIC MIND CAN HAZ OWNAGE" Now, really. Moron. | ||
|
Jusciax
Lithuania588 Posts
| ||
|
Naib
Hungary4843 Posts
Homeworld (and HW 2) are very nice games... Maybe Blizzard still. | ||
|
Jusciax
Lithuania588 Posts
On March 27 2009 19:58 Naib wrote: Actually I agree with the first part of that quoted post, LeperKahn. Really, Blizzard nowadays isn't that innovative as it used to be, unlike Relic (well, the success of their innovation could be debated imo, but that's another thing. They're at least trying new stuff). I couldn't give two shits about innovation just for sake of innovation. If its not successful and sucks - it sucks. | ||
|
anTi_
United States499 Posts
| ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10835 Posts
Who needs innovations when the games that have them are just not polished enough to really shine? | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
Take starcraft for instance, considering how balanced it is, its a really innovative game, because there was nothing of the sort until it came a long, and the game literaly was such a boom that it helped SK economy. Warcraft III, for all the hate it gets, it was pretty fucking ground breaking, everyone makes RTS with heroes nowdays, and they were the one to introduce the standarts, on the counterpart, no hero based RTS ever beat Wc3, and I didnt even mention the map editor and Dota. Wow is the most sucessfull computer game ever created, back in the early days many people thought that breaking the 2 million players mark was impossible to a western mmo, and here they are with more than 10 million subscribers. Now theres SC2 coming, Diablo 3, and another Mmo. And while Relic and many other companies can have theyr fanboys pride of theyr innovations, Blizzard as always will take a look at other peoples games, steal the best, leave the worst, and create a game that embodies everything that works fine about that genre for theyr purpose (in SC case esport, in D3 replayability etc...) and will make a game whose strenght is not its amazing innovations, but how well all the implemented concepts they work within the game. Blizzard to me has always been the guys who can get anything game related, and conclusively see if its really necessary in the game or not, and for the most part, these so called innovations might in the long run create situations of balance instability, as we see in many relic games. Id rather have a game that gives me the feeling that playing and improving on it is something that "matters", and non blizzard RTS never came close to giving me that, I realized all other companies got it wrong after playing the latest red alert. As long as Blizzard is the only one capable of delivering quality RTS, theres no point in arguing. You wont beat them on wow or diablo either. | ||
|
Nightmarjoo
United States3360 Posts
Voted blizzard. | ||
|
CubEdIn
Romania5359 Posts
Some guy on that forum wrote: Definitely Relic. In terms of the number of revolutionary and innovative titles, Blizzard and Relic are pretty much the same: Blizzard released three game-changers (Diablo, Starcraft and WoW). Relic has launched 3 as well, with one that kinda-sorta could have been (Homeworld, Dawn of War and Company of Heroes, with Impossible Creatures being the kinda-sorta). That being said, nearly ALL of Blizzard's innovation took place over 10 years ago, whereas Relic continues to push innovation to this day with DoW2 and CoH in recent memory. Moreover, I find Relic's games deeper and more fun than Blizzard's. Starcraft was awesome... in 1997... but they never really advanced the genre after that. WCIII was more of the same, and arguably worse than SC, and SC2 looks like SC with semi-pretty graphics and a few new units. I agree with most of this post. Nothing revolutionized things more than SC did, and that was 10+ years ago. I love sc, and will vote for Blizzard, but I haven't played DoW2. If it's as great as they say then my guess is Relic IS the better game maker. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 27 2009 19:58 Naib wrote: Actually I agree with the first part of that quoted post, LeperKahn. Really, Blizzard nowadays isn't that innovative as it used to be, unlike Relic (well, the success of their innovation could be debated imo, but that's another thing. They're at least trying new stuff). The 2nd part of the 2nd paragraph proves that whoever wrote that is a moron, though. "I CANT HAZ APM PLZ LETS MAKE STRATEGY GAMES COMPLETELY RANDOM DICEROLLZ ABOUT WHO TECHS TO WAT, DAT BE FUN - MY AWSUM STRATEGIC MIND CAN HAZ OWNAGE" Now, really. Moron. Ehhhh.. I don't know. Blizzard just doesn't make that many games.. WC3 *was* innovative - it was pretty much the first RTS with RPG elements, no (ok I'm sure there's gonna be some example of a game that beat them to it but then I might as well bring up Z beating DoW to the whole requisition point deal). Were DoW2 and CoH really huge innovations on the DoW model? Oh and as I posted on the escapist forums - Battle.net alone is enough of a reason to vote Blizzard. Seriously, trying to play other RTS games that lack Bnet is frustrating >_< DoW2 and Windows Live.. It worked alright but it doesn't even have a bloody chat lobby!!! IN 2009! Srsly. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
| ||
| ||
