Better gameplay: Starcraft II or EUIV?
- Thread starter lucaluca
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
While comparing the two games are at best a pointless endeavour I'd say EU4 shines in singleplayer and SC2 shines in multiplayer, both in terms of how a normal player can watch a match and how you can semi-competitively play yourself. EU4 multiplayer is alright and can be really funny at times but it takes so very long to play it which means any kind of eSport-ness, while the base game is certainly competitive and fun enough, is impossible.
Grossest overstatement I have read in a long time. The SC2 campaign is pretty much just dumb. Characters are dumb, dull and have unrealistic viewpoints and reactions. The story is dumb, especially compared to SC1. What did you actually manage to achieve in WoL? Saving Kerrigan who almost immediately turns back to her old zerg self in HotS? Great accomplishment, at least you sort of get to see Raynor's guys have some kind of victory over the Dominion in HotS (thanks to the Zerg) and I guess that captain guy that was with Raynor gets to lead the Terrans now or whatever, nothing was said for sure though if I didn't completely forget something.
I should stop before it becomes a massive rant but really. Did you even play the campaign?
Grossest overstatement I have read in a long time. The SC2 campaign is pretty much just dumb. Characters are dumb, dull and have unrealistic viewpoints and reactions. The story is dumb, especially compared to SC1. What did you actually manage to achieve in WoL? Saving Kerrigan who almost immediately turns back to her old zerg self in HotS? Great accomplishment, at least you sort of get to see Raynor's guys have some kind of victory over the Dominion in HotS (thanks to the Zerg) and I guess that captain guy that was with Raynor gets to lead the Terrans now or whatever, nothing was said for sure though if I didn't completely forget something.
I should stop before it becomes a massive rant but really. Did you even play the campaign?
Different strokes, really.
I never really cared for the WH40k knock off that was Starcraft (I did play it, but got bored with it quickly and went off to play other RTS; AoE II, C&C Red Alert 2 etc etc) so I haven't actually played, nor desire to play, SCII though.
I never really cared for the WH40k knock off that was Starcraft (I did play it, but got bored with it quickly and went off to play other RTS; AoE II, C&C Red Alert 2 etc etc) so I haven't actually played, nor desire to play, SCII though.
Lol yes I did both, they were pretty clear both, trying to eliminate the Dominion... how can that be dumb? What was dumb is all the backstabbing and senselessness of Brood Wars.
Starcraft 2 is a fast paced quickly finished RTS. It's has 'matches'. If you like competition and speed, go for this.
EU4 is slow, not really 'fun' but very engaging, and takes weeks to finish a game in a multiplayer environment. If you want to meet people and carry on diplomacy not just in one game, but in many, then EU4 is the way to go.
Personally, I think they are both good games. But this would be like trying to compare either of them to civ. They are all good, just not in nearly the same way.
EU4 is slow, not really 'fun' but very engaging, and takes weeks to finish a game in a multiplayer environment. If you want to meet people and carry on diplomacy not just in one game, but in many, then EU4 is the way to go.
Personally, I think they are both good games. But this would be like trying to compare either of them to civ. They are all good, just not in nearly the same way.
I didn't play the sc2 campaign as i don't like how things are going, so i can't speak for it, but as a whole i feel that starcraft 2 is much deeper than eu4.
In eu4 you can do nearly anything and go till the end of the game without problem, your actions do not feel important, you conquer a province, you make armies, you trade, you do anything, but you have to give yourself your own goals, you have to set your own rules to find it fun and interesting after the first 50 hours (and being able to do that, i find the game extremely enjoyable).
Sc2 on the opposite is a game where you have to use any means to win the game, every action is important, you have to make important choices if you want to win. I can't explain it very well i'm sorry, my english is so bad i can't find the words to describe it.
I think that both are so different that it is pointless to compare their qualities or try to find the best one. Don't choose between one of them, play both if you like both.
In eu4 you can do nearly anything and go till the end of the game without problem, your actions do not feel important, you conquer a province, you make armies, you trade, you do anything, but you have to give yourself your own goals, you have to set your own rules to find it fun and interesting after the first 50 hours (and being able to do that, i find the game extremely enjoyable).
Sc2 on the opposite is a game where you have to use any means to win the game, every action is important, you have to make important choices if you want to win. I can't explain it very well i'm sorry, my english is so bad i can't find the words to describe it.
I think that both are so different that it is pointless to compare their qualities or try to find the best one. Don't choose between one of them, play both if you like both.
Looks to me like you are comparing a non-competitive EU4 experience (single player or co-op, where the relatively weak AI means that a lot of mistakes are forgiven) with the competitive SC2 experience. EU4 certainly can be played competitively though, and if you do there are a lot of important and difficult choices to make.
I really don't feel that way at all about SC1. You have very clear cut motives for most characters, even if they are only revealed later. I'm not sure what senseless backstabbing and other plots that you think are dumb, elaborate if you can please.
For the record I'm not saying SC2 campaign was super BAD, it certainly wasn't. I just expected something different and not so dumbed down. It feels somewhat like a movie like you say, a pretty average and somewhat bland one, but they could have done something other than a movie when they are completely in charge of their own game.
Going by that definition of "deep", D&D is the deepest game ever invented. So while you call SC2 simple and boring, think what roleplayers think about paradox players.
If you're talking about complexity then there's no question which game is more complex. EU4 is a difficult game to learn, but easy to master once you've learned all the tricks. It has many possible decision trees, but when most of those decisions are useless, what does it matter? I mean what the hell is there to EU4 gameplay anyway? Wars boil down to who has the best tech and biggest army, there's virtually nothing to do in peacetime, and diplomacy in MP depends entirely on your reputation among the group you play in. If you have a good rep as a skilled player, you are way more likely to make and keep alliances together, whereas if you're new, people will backstab you at the drop of a hat.
SC2 is a game that's extremely easy to learn but almost impossible to master. You need a minimum amount of dexterity to be able to compete, but once you meet the minimum requirements, what determines the winner is strategy. There's two misconceptions about RTS games. The first is that they are all about strategy, when most of them are all about tactics and have very little or no strategy. The second is that once you realize the first statement is true, you dismiss all RTS games as having no strategy. The second is statement is just as false as the first one. You wouldn't know about the strategic concepts in SC2 unless you followed it competitively, but things like build orders, timing attacks, map control, economy, and mind games all fall under strategy.
The only paradox game that even has some form of these concepts is HOI3 because it was built to be an actual war game. In HOI3 you can beat a superior army with an inferior one. The fact that you can never do that in MP EU4 without a lucky dice roll proves that there is less complexity.