QUOTE(Cheesenium @ Apr 4 2008, 09:22 AM)
Yeah,they never fail us but the current balancing(as far as i know) is crap while gameplay and the technology seems so far away from RA3 or DoW2.
I dont have much time to play a lot of games now and i dont want to waste my time on a game that is a 3D remake of a 10 year old game.SC2 has almost no changes in it's mechanics,other than the awesome cliff jumping and a few others.Other than that,it's the same.
At least,EA made some significant changes to RA3 that makes it feels like a worthy sequel to RA2 by making naval to be a bigger part of a game since you can build buildings on sea and basic units can move on land and sea.That feels like a step forward from C&C3.
DoW2,i have nothing to say because Relic is known for all the drastic ideas and each of their new game is plays different from the last like the difference in gameplay between DoW and CoH.
Well... it's all about balance and advance. If you want new stuff, expect the game balance to be teetered away. If you keep the game old school, you had your balance, well, as long as the successor is built upon "balance" predecessor. We all know SC is the most balance RTS till date, so should Blizzard keep the SC system in tact, it should be a balance game. Look at Relic, I like Relic's products, each of new title bring surprise, but the game balance is totally broken, look at DoW, how broken is it (race balance) and it's near to impossible to balance out a 9 races RTS game. And I believe this happened in C&C3 as well.
So you want new stuff, then better dont whine if the game balance goes broken. Same goes if you want a balance game, dont expect the gameplay to have a 360 degrees changes.
This post has been edited by TheNameX: Apr 4 2008, 09:51 AM