Curse

Zahr Dalsk · Aug 22, 2008, 05:17 PM // 17:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

I will beat you with sticks for your comments.

Please beat the Ravene- erm, Hydralisk instead

Quick_Prodigy · Aug 22, 2008, 06:58 PM // 18:58

heh I still have this game on my comp. an for the best unit I would go with commander (gotta love d-gun) to bad it's not a bamf like big bertha.

bamm bamm bamm · Aug 22, 2008, 11:43 PM // 23:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celestial Beaver

on TA: When my parents bought our first ever computer all those years ago we got a free copy of Total Annihilation with it. I was totally addicted for a very long time.

Wow.... me too. My first PC game. I had TA and my buddy down the road had Starcraft. Good times. PCWorld must have ordered an order of magnitude too many copies and were chucking them at everyone who came through the door. They accidentally created a generation of gamers.

Kanyatta · Aug 22, 2008, 11:46 PM // 23:46

Red Alert 2 reporting in:

My personal favorite

Yoshikuni Mahsu · Aug 23, 2008, 12:25 AM // 00:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Oh crap guys, gamespy said something four years ago. A site who's job it is to give superficial reviews on games they barely play, while some of the basic factors of game quality are depth, complexities and skill reward.

It's not exactly a credible source for subjective opinions. Or really, any facts either.

looking for your credible source of top RTS games

Zahr Dalsk · Aug 23, 2008, 02:42 AM // 02:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoshikuni Mahsu

looking for your credible source of top RTS games

It is all a matter of opinion. Different players look for different things in their RTS games. Same with RPGs. Shooters. Everything.

Yoshikuni Mahsu · Aug 23, 2008, 02:58 AM // 02:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

It is all a matter of opinion. Different players look for different things in their RTS games. Same with RPGs. Shooters. Everything.

dont think it was me that started calling things un-credible, so shouldn't that be directed to avarre?

Avarre · Aug 23, 2008, 05:26 AM // 05:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoshikuni Mahsu

looking for your credible source of top RTS games

Competitive E-Sports. How's TA doing?

Yoshikuni Mahsu · Aug 23, 2008, 06:02 AM // 06:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Competitive E-Sports. How's TA doing?

so crazy koreans putting it on TV makes it the best RTS?

theres no doubt TA would win in popularity, and obviously fanbase. The game "starcraft" however is crap compared to the game "total annihilation"

Avarre · Aug 23, 2008, 06:28 AM // 06:28

You really are a pretty die-hard fanboy, huh? Rhetoric without facts is pretty good, but in terms of playerbase, sales, support, and competitiveness, you're not the best RTS ever.

Doesn't mean TA sucks, but clearly anything below THE BEST is an insult to you.

Can't say much about TA's gameplay, but it seems most fans cite that there are a lot of units to make it better. Content quantity isn't the same as depth, though.

Zahr Dalsk · Aug 23, 2008, 08:21 AM // 08:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Competitive E-Sports. How's TA doing?

I hate the "legitimacy through e-sports" fallacy, so I'd like to crush it. Not a very good comparison, because it's 4:20 AM and I decided not to sleep tonight, but here it goes anyways:

The average salary in the NBA is 2.2 million, or something of that order. No matter how much fuss they make about basketball and no matter how much they overpay the players, they'll never make it into anything more than a ball going through a hoop. The same applies to any sport, really.

StarCraft is similar in that regard, except that the only place people give much of a **** about it is Korea. (As opposed to, say, America, where it's well-received but not disproportionately so.)

My end point: slapping "competitive e-sports" on a game doesn't improve the game itself or give it any sort of authority.

Y'can do as much as you like with Korean players and their stuff, make it into a job, playing StarCraft, etc... it doesn't alter the game itself.

By the way, to keep things balanced, I never really heard much about TA before this thread, so I wouldn't say it really has much of a place amongst RTS classics, like, say, Age of Empires 2.

Avarre · Aug 23, 2008, 09:07 AM // 09:07

It doesn't mean the game is better, but it does mean the game is more successful. If you're judging a game all-around, and not just on gameplay value, that's a very big thing to consider. I might think WoW is a terrible game, but if I want to argue that I'd better have a huge point to bring against it to make up for the fact it is extremely successful.

Quote:

StarCraft is similar in that regard, except that the only place people give much of a **** about it is Korea. (As opposed to, say, America, where it's well-received but not disproportionately so.)

I think the weightage on Korea is making you overlook everywhere else. There are still very dedicated players in other parts of the world, enough to hold numerous 3rd party national and international tournaments (with money behind them), as well as driving the demand for English commentary for Korean games.

Furthermore, a game with a solid competitive basic implies the fact that the game is well balanced and rewards skill, which are very important in judging gameplay quality. A game that can survive as an E-Sport for a period (and not just a recent cash-cow game picked up by WCG to be dropped soon after) has these factors.

I don't know enough about TA, as I said, to say it isn't a good game, but the fact that it is so niche in comparison to much larger games seems to breed fanatic fanboyism bordering on religious zeal. True, there are a lot of good games that get overlooked, but nobody has said it isn't 'good'. The only reason this thread got sidetracked is the zomg best game evar crap, but that said, a game as old as TA that still has a playerbase probably isn't a bad game.

RedNova88 · Aug 23, 2008, 09:18 AM // 09:18

IMO Starcraft was just rock paper scissors with graphical appeal. I had fun with it, but I lost interest due to simplicity.

And TA was the best RTS back then in my opinion, now the best RTS is Supreme Commander, if you're computer has the stones for it that is.

All those times building nothing but Brawlers on TA to see them sway to and fro while unloading on your enemies. So much fun!

Just a side note here. They can call SC a sport if they want... That doesn't make it one, they also call rock paper scissors a sport now, and have had $50k "championship" matches that were even on freaking ESPN.

Keep in mind I'm not saying SC is bad, I had loads of fun playing with my friends, but it came down to rushing whoever before they rushed you, which somehow keeps people playing these days. But to every man his own, if that's what you enjoy, then fine.

If you've never heard of TA you are probably too young to understand how freakin' awesome it was.

Avarre · Aug 23, 2008, 09:31 AM // 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNova88

Keep in mind I'm not saying SC is bad, I had loads of fun playing with my friends, but it came down to rushing whoever before they rushed you, which somehow keeps people playing these days.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps you don't know how to play?

The reason I'm not making comments about TA's gameplay is because I know my opinions would be uninformed, after all.

RedNova88 · Aug 23, 2008, 09:33 AM // 09:33

How does that even make sense? (the first thing you said)

On a seperate note, if you don't know much about the game, why is it safe to assume SC is magically better just because people treat it as a sport in some areas? Some of the best games in life have been completely underrated. I probably came off wrong when I said that about SC, I probably should have said I enjoy more complexity in my games, and that I got tired of SC. The opposite is true for me when it comes to TA, I never got bored of it, ever, and I'm sure SC has people that feel that way too.

Avarre · Aug 23, 2008, 09:43 AM // 09:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNova88

How does that even make sense? (the first thing you said)

From your post, it looks like your judgment of SC gameplay is largely due to not knowing how to play the game, so I am asking you if that's occurred to you. I'm not going to go into detail (I can if you want, but this isn't a SC gameplay discussion).

Quote:

On a seperate note, if you don't know much about the game, why is it safe to assume SC is magically better just because people treat it as a sport in some areas? Some of the best games in life have been completely underrated. I probably came off wrong when I said that about SC, I probably should have said I enjoy more complexity in my games, and that I got tired of SC. The opposite is true for me when it comes to TA, I never got bored of it, ever, and I'm sure SC has people that feel that way too.

Already explained. Judging game success as a factor. Assessing reason for longevity as success.

RedNova88 · Aug 23, 2008, 09:52 AM // 09:52

The only reason I asked, was because when I played SC online all I had to do was mass up whatever I could and rush my enemy before they could do the same, continue to hold pressure on them until they gave in or pushed me back. That's just how I assumed things worked in SC.

Anyway I'll stay on topic now. I just got sidetracked because of previous posters flaming anything that isn't the most popular. I guess I did the same, I suppose everyone is a fanboi when it comes to classic games.

To anyone curious about TA, I suggest just getting a demo for Supreme Commander, it's made by the same people that made TA and holds a lot of the same qualities.

Yoshikuni Mahsu · Aug 23, 2008, 12:42 PM // 12:42

I noticed a mistake in my post, and as theres half a page of argueing past it, and its too big a mistake to just edit in. I said TA has a better fanbase, I meant starcraft does indeed have a far better fanbase and is more popular, however TA as a game is better than starcraft as a game.

Also you comment on the gameplay based on what you hear people saying about it? I find it way too ironic that the two people who dislike TA the most in this thread have not played it, I dont think we have to go any further here.

Yoshikuni Mahsu · Aug 23, 2008, 12:58 PM // 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNova88

The only reason I asked, was because when I played SC online all I had to do was mass up whatever I could and rush my enemy before they could do the same, continue to hold pressure on them until they gave in or pushed me back. That's just how I assumed things worked in SC.

Anyway I'll stay on topic now. I just got sidetracked because of previous posters flaming anything that isn't the most popular. I guess I did the same, I suppose everyone is a fanboi when it comes to classic games.

To anyone curious about TA, I suggest just getting a demo for Supreme Commander, it's made by the same people that made TA and holds a lot of the same qualities.

I watched a lot of previews for supreme commander, looks like TA with bigger battles, better graphics, and more detail. My computer however would choke and die on it.

But you brought up a point about TA not being popular to the "young kids". It was made in 1997, starcraft was made about a year or two after I believe. I would guess that starcraft got the massive playerbase it did thanks to battle.net or whatever super duper online features it had (feel free to correct me here, did they even have battle.net in 1998-1999?), which allowed it to stay popular till' current day, while TA didnt have much online multiplayer support back then...

Anyway to those who havent played it atleast give it a shot before shooting holes in it: http://tiny.cc/QtPD9

I couple hours to download (torrents are slow) and a matter of seconds to install. Easy to setup that torrent, if you dont know how PM me or I'll post a guide here.

P.S. who changed "offishal" to "official"? it was meant to be that way.

AidinSwiftarrow · Aug 23, 2008, 05:28 PM // 17:28

I just like BFME:2 and the expansion Rise of the Witch King.

I love Lord of the Rings. Also, the new LotR game coming out is going to be a beast.