World in Conflict = Amazing

[roguerower]

I had heard the hype and the praise for this game but up until now I hadn't played it or seen it played. Then I saw it and was amazed. While the graphics weren't the best (damn good though) the storyline was great and the units meshed well. You can tell after the town get's nuked that the Colonel takes it as a personal failure and pushes hard to try and prevent it from again. The voice acting was there, the strategy was there. 9.5/10.

 

[TehMac]

My only beef is that it's not an RTS: there's no strategy, at best, it's all tactical.

 

[EvilComputer92]

It's more of a Real Time Tactics game but that doesn't mean it's not excellent

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: TehMac
My only beef is that it's not an RTS: there's no strategy, at best, it's all tactical.

Even Massive Entertainment describes the game as Real Time Tactics.... which is kind of a sub-genre or all-together different genre than RTS.

Mind you, I still think there is plenty of strategy mixed in, but its definitely a tactical game.

+

 

[Ultralight]

So what are the essentiial differences between RTS and Real Time Tactics?

 

[CottonRabbit]

Originally posted by: Ultralight
So what are the essentiial differences between RTS and Real Time Tactics?

There's no economy or macro in WiC.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: TehMac
My only beef is that it's not an RTS: there's no strategy, at best, it's all tactical.

Even Massive Entertainment describes the game as Real Time Tactics.... which is kind of a sub-genre or all-together different genre than RTS.

Mind you, I still think there is plenty of strategy mixed in, but its definitely a tactical game.

+

Eh, I don't know. I guess it depends on your team, but taking around 3 choppers for a loop is hardly fun for me. I don't know.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Originally posted by: Ultralight
So what are the essentiial differences between RTS and Real Time Tactics?

No base building, just unit management. Often lots of micro.

 

[Genx87]

I sadly lost my disc. Ill get the expansion when it arrives this fall.

 

[nanobreath]

I throughly enjoyed the single player campaign...except it was so short.

Then I didn't really care for the multiplayer because all the maps are set up for teams rather than 1v1. Its more akin to FPS multiplayer than anykind of RTS multiplayer.

It was an innovative, fun game. Just not on my game of the year list.

 

[Raduque]

World in Conflict looks amazing. What RTS/RTT games has better graphics than WiC?

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Raduque
World in Conflict looks amazing. What RTS/RTT games has better graphics than WiC?

Company of Heroes.

 

[EvilComputer92]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Raduque
World in Conflict looks amazing. What RTS/RTT games has better graphics than WiC?

Company of Heroes.

Not really. WIC's explosions and effects are far more advanced than CoH. Have you played WiC on full settings?

 

[Magusigne]

If this game is your thing then it is really quite a nice game.

I found it boring just because A) I'm not into tactically based games and B) Somewhat of a steeper learning curve before the game gets "fun"

But I will say that it is definately worth a try..You'll either love it or hate it.

 

[SPARTAN VI]

Originally posted by: EvilComputer92

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Raduque
World in Conflict looks amazing. What RTS/RTT games has better graphics than WiC?

Company of Heroes.

Not really. WIC's explosions and effects are far more advanced than CoH. Have you played WiC on full settings?

Just explosions though, I have both and CoH is just better in every way (except explosions, I guess). Getting me to play WiC after having CoH is like pulling teeth.

 

[chizow]

WiC destroys COH graphics, its not even close. I'm running both at max, DX10 for COH and High for WiC and its a full generational difference in terms of graphics. The biggest difference is with model scaling, as COH looks OK at high-res zoomed out but gets really ugly really fast once you start zooming in.

They're both fun games, I really liked WiC though because it was signficantly different and went away from the previous tech/economy games of the past. Even COH I'd say is strategy-lite in the sense that there's not nearly as much teching and economy as something like SupCom or the older favorites like SC/WC3 etc.

 

[themisfit610]

WiC was fun for about a week. Then it was insanely boring.

No eco, no macro, nothing... tiny unit caps - utterly lame if you ask me. Can't believe I bought it...

Hey - at least the nuke was pretty...

~MiSfit

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: themisfit610
WiC was fun for about a week. Then it was insanely boring.

No eco, no macro, nothing... tiny unit caps - utterly lame if you ask me. Can't believe I bought it...

Hey - at least the nuke was pretty...

~MiSfit

Yes, I never even finished the first mission. I don't know why, although I like RTS games, this one was totally uninteresting. Company of Heroes though, is just incredible.

 

[Seeruk]

I hate this shift away from true RTS's.

I love base building. The great MP RTS's are those with base building, early versions of C&C got this right. The games would consist of 10 minutes of players building, not knowing how much time they had before the enemy arrived, having to make tough choices about units and hope they were the right ones, all the time trying to scout out the enemy's plans without giving to much away about yourself..... and then boom all hell breaks loose and you both find out who made the best decisions. If you lose those 30 planes you had spent all that time building it MATTERED because there may not be the resources/time to build more. In these new RTS-For-Dummies games there is nothing that matters, awwww shoot I lost my unit, never mind it will get replaced for free in a few minutes etc etc

Battlezone 1&2, was freaking awesome too It takes more than shiny gfx and pretty lights to impress me, WiC was bland in both SP and MP for me. 3/10

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: Seeruk
I hate this shift away from true RTS's.

I love base building. The great MP RTS's are those with base building, early versions of C&C got this right. The games would consist of 10 minutes of players building, not knowing how much time they had before the enemy arrived, having to make tough choices about units and hope they were the right ones, all the time trying to scout out the enemy's plans without giving to much away about yourself..... and then boom all hell breaks loose and you both find out who made the best decisions. If you lose those 30 planes you had spent all that time building it MATTERED because there may not be the resources/time to build more. In these new RTS-For-Dummies games there is nothing that matters, awwww shoot I lost my unit, never mind it will get replaced for free in a few minutes etc etc

Battlezone 1&2, was freaking awesome too It takes more than shiny gfx and pretty lights to impress me, WiC was bland in both SP and MP for me. 3/10

im not sure what this shift is you are talking about.

WiC is one game that is kind of a nice change of pace but i fail to see this shift that implies the entire RTS community is moving this way.

secondly, i really dont know why others of us cant have options besides the style of RTS you like. i think thats kind of mean of you. are you a meanie?

i loved AOE: Conquerors it was such a great game but you know, i didnt always have the time to get into very long epic battles, as amazing as they were. WiC is a perfect change of pace, you can enjoy two 20 minute sick battles if you like and then go. and for some people just getting to the battles is a good option to have.

if you want an economy influenced RTS there are plenty of options as well.

i have CoH and WIC and WIC is definitely 1 step ahead in graphics, and not just in explosions. but holy cow the heat wave effect, all the explosions, fuel air bomb and the arty strikes are INSANE!

im running everythign maxed out in dx9 with 4xaa and its gorgeous.

 

[Coldkilla]

I think WiC its the Counterstrike of RTS... I hate them both.

 

[Elcs]

Slightly OT question.

I want to pick up both CoH and COHF. Are there any bundles I can pick up? For example, Titan Quest had TQ and TQ:IT in one package that was cheaper than buying both separately. I would like the "DX10" version if there is such a distinction (confused on a search).

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: Elcs
Slightly OT question.

I want to pick up both CoH and COHF. Are there any bundles I can pick up? For example, Titan Quest had TQ and TQ:IT in one package that was cheaper than buying both separately. I would like the "DX10" version if there is such a distinction (confused on a search).

Youll need Vista for DX10 once you have patched the game upto date, you can buy CoH and Opposing forces together......infact youll get it cheap as chips now i got both for £9.99 from Game.

 

[Liet]

Last night I noticed Steam was offering the CoH bundle for $29.99. I was about to buy it but I already get attached to my guys in RTS games... being a WW2 history buff it'd be too depressing to lose a platoon.

 

[natebigdawg]

I am a fan of both WIC and CoH and at the moment I am playing Opposing Fronts on hardest through the campaign and it is a blast.

Although I think that WIC has the better graphics overall, CoH is much more realistic in-game with infantry motions and tanks in general. It probably helps a bit that you are zoomed in much closer that you typically are with WIC but the infantry in WIC look much stiffer and less life-like. I hope that they can improve on that because zooming up close with all details maxed the models look great. Why cant they add some emotion to them like they did with the cutscenes?

Either way, I look forward to the Soviet campaign coming with expansion soon. I am sure that it will be very engaging.