Yeah, what's with the hate on, "It's not the same genre."
One game is going to be more fun for you or not, or the same. It doesn't need to be the same genre to compare how much you like it. I personally like Starcraft 2 more. Halo 3 was the worst of all 3 halos, and then i've never played reach, or halo wars, or w/e else there is.
What is wrong im just asking WHAT DO YOU LIKE MORE? STARCRAFT 2 OR HALO 3
What's wrong, I'm just asking how I'm supposed to compare them? I think Starcraft 2 is a great strategy game, and Halo 3 is a great FPS. As I said, which game I prefer depends on what I want to play.
If I was trying to be rude or complain about the thread, I would've asked you to read the second post in this thread.
These ARE comparable iMogwai. They are both future sci fi games with 3 different races, one being human, one being some sort of infesting race, and one being a technologically advanced race. Each has guns, and is a military like game. I'd say that's comparable.
They are both future sci fi games with 3 different races
If it's the lore we're comparing, then fine, but if this is about which game is more best, then it's very hard to compare them.
Anyway, I was originally just wondering about the choice of games, especially when there are many other strategy games out there, and the OP hadn't even played Halo. Just figured there'd be a crapload of better alternatives out there. I didn't intend to sound like angry or know-it-all-ish until you started whining.
These ARE comparable iMogwai. They are both future sci fi games with 3 different races, one being human, one being some sort of infesting race, and one being a technologically advanced race. Each has guns, and is a military like game. I'd say that's comparable.
One is a real time strategy, the other is a FPS, and since they are different genres, we are comparing genres. I have no preference over real time strategy and FPS, I enjoy both very much.
If it's the lore we're comparing, then fine, but if this is about which game is more best, then it's very hard to compare them.
I actually think that's a little inaccurate. Would you compare a thriller book to a philisophical one?
The lore is incredibly different, galaxy-wide invasion =/= sector wide invasion involving near-proven (in the lore) "Gods".
As for which is better? Starcraft II. Viable for legit competitions (it's televised in Korea and I've seen over 200 professional games - what does that tell you? Yep - I'm biased. :> ), it is more balanced (although the amount of imbalance in Halo is what actually balances it - it makes it wild and fun), it is seriously more skill-requiring (as is almost all RTS's if you ask me) and... well yeah, there ya have it :>
I really didn't like Halo 3. It was boring, Forgettable characters, forge was terrible. The only good part about the game was the comedic relief.
Now Starcraft 2 was an amzing game. I wasn't bored halfway through the campaign, the characters were memorable (not the best characters, but at least I can name more than Sgt. Johnson and Master Chief). Storyline was closer to original than Halo 3's (no storyline is 100% original).
But I'm not going to go and bash the entire Halo franchise. I liked Halo Reach and Halo: Combat Evolved. If those were the games to choose from, it'd be a much harder decision. But I'm going go with Starcraft 2.
I've only played a little bit of each, but Halo didn't hold my attention at all. It lacked anything "special" about it. Starcraft is an incredible strategy game though. I'm thinking of purchasing it soon.
