Face it,if you want Strategy games,get PC!!!!!

Sure Xbox 360 DOES have Command & Conquer 3 out now,and World in Conflict is coming for it in Q4 07,but does360 have:

Starcraft?

Total War?

Age of Empires?

Company of Heroes?

The rest of the Command & Conquer series?

Warcraft 3?

Rise of Nations?

Need i say more,PC has NO competitors when it comes to Strategy games,period.

Well they do have Starcraft for a certain Nintendo console.

ofcourse. My favourite genres are fps's and rts's.

So naturally my gaming platform of choice is pc seen as the console offerings of those genresare laughable in comparison.

One problem man... RTS are a genre where only the new stuff matters mostly... because all the games feed off each other unlike most genres... it develops faster so the new stuff is all that is playable...FlockofSpagheti

I still play starcraft and red alert 2 on a regular basis ...:|

One problem man... RTS are a genre where only the new stuff matters mostly... because all the games feed off each other unlike most genres... it develops faster so the new stuff is all that is playable...FlockofSpagheti

I'm pretty sure everyone has already faced this. I mean who seriously thinks they can get a quality RTS experience on consoles to match the PC? :|Miyomatic

new stuff matters? starcraft is edging twards 10 years old and is still 1 of the most popular pc gamesshadow_hosi

If new stuff didnt matter, would they keep releasing it? :|

ahem... when will hermits realize that the 360 and PC are on the same team?

[QUOTE="shadow_hosi"]new stuff matters? starcraft is edging twards 10 years old and is still 1 of the most popular pc gamesMiyomatic

If new stuff didnt matter, would they keep releasing it? :|

starcraft hasent changed wtf are you talking about? they still sell the same game it was the day it came out, just with all the updates on the disk, the reason it has lived is the map edditor and endless ways to play (no other rts (c'ept wc3) has done that, i cant wait for starcraft 2, the 2nd coming is on the way, prepare your command centers, hives, and additional pylons

ahem... when will hermits realize that the 360 and PC are on the same team?

Natural_Mystic

Read Casey's myth thread, #14.

ahem... when will hermits realize that the 360 and PC are on the same team?

Natural_Mystic

14. The PC is also a MS platform. Hermits and lemmings are brothers. -no, lemmings. hermits are not your brothers. the PC is not a microsoft platform. the xbox is a microsoft platform. microsoft gets nothing from a pc game unless they publish the game. windows is a software program. it's one of many components that make a pc work. microsoft does not make pcs. you will be looked at funny if you act like the 360 losing an exclusive to the pc is not a bad thing. if a 360 game is available on the pc, it's one more incentive not to buy a 360.

The xbox360 is trying to emulate a pc, it's focusing on FPS and RTS genres. Yet the pc does them so much better it's making the xbox look really bad.Gangans

The Wii is trying to imitate the DS and the DS is making it look bad.And the PS3 is trying to imitates the PS2 and the PS2 is making it look bad.I own all three consoles, and I have no reason to prefer the 360, I just do.I love it.If it keeps a steady flow of games like it is right now, it could end up being my all time favorite console.

[QUOTE="Natural_Mystic"]

ahem... when will hermits realize that the 360 and PC are on the same team?

LinKuei_warrior

14. The PC is also a MS platform. Hermits and lemmings are brothers. -no, lemmings. hermits are not your brothers. the PC is not a microsoft platform. the xbox is a microsoft platform. microsoft gets nothing from a pc game unless they publish the game. windows is a software program. it's one of many components that make a pc work. microsoft does not make pcs. you will be looked at funny if you act like the 360 losing an exclusive to the pc is not a bad thing. if a 360 game is available on the pc, it's one more incentive not to buy a 360.

This is just not correct. Both game platforms certainly share DirectX and Microsoft's development tools. Games running on a Linux box for example are NOT running on a Microsoft platfrom and none of the games you go out and buy will run on the box. So who sellsVista again???? How is buyingVista and paying that licensefeenot profit forMicrosoft?Games running on Vista are certainly running on a Microsoft platform. Royalties on each game does not mean the platform architectures, development tools and even the methodology are not essentially the same. Microsoft wants to keep developers on their platforms because that is essential to their future. The DirectX platform is mature and has proven to be scalable and useable for XP, Vista, Xbox, Xbox360 and you can be assured that there will be continued convergence of these technologies and platforms.

The quote saysMicrosoft gets "nothing" from a PC game unless the publish the game. That is incorrect. For companies to have the "Compatible with Vista Logo" they must pay for that. Have you priced the Team development edition of Visual Studio and Microsofts tools? But what Microsoft really gains is that those PC games are the reason people buy a PC instead of a Macintosh or a Linux box. This very important fact seems to escape rule #14.If the rule were at all true then you could basically buy any OS and run every PC game.

One problem man... RTS are a genre where only the new stuff matters mostly... because all the games feed off each other unlike most genres... it develops faster so the new stuff is all that is playable...FlockofSpagheti

Tell that to all the Koreans still playing Starcraft.

This is just not correct. Both game platforms certainly share DirectX and Microsoft's development tools. Games running on a Linux box for example are NOT running on a Microsoft platfrom and none of the games you go out and buy will run on the box. So who sellsVista again???? How is buyingVista and paying that licensefeenot profit forMicrosoft?Games running on Vista are certainly running on a Microsoft platform. Royalties on each game does not mean the platform architectures, development tools and even the methodology are not essentially the same. Microsoft wants to keep developers on their platforms because that is essential to their future. The DirectX platform is mature and has proven to be scalable and useable for XP, Vista, Xbox, Xbox360 and you can be assured that there will be continued convergence of these technologies and platforms.

The quote saysMicrosoft gets "nothing" from a PC game unless the publish the game. That is incorrect. For companies to have the "Compatible with Vista Logo" they must pay for that. Have you priced the Team development edition of Visual Studio and Microsofts tools? But what Microsoft really gains is that those PC games are the reason people buy a PC instead of a Macintosh or a Linux box. This very important fact seems to escape rule #14.If the rule were at all true then you could basically buy any OS and run every PC game.

DuaneDog

Do people even realize that consoles use OS's too. PS2 used Linux and Dreamcast used Windows CE.

So does that means all Dreamcast and PS2 games are multiplats to Microsoft or Linux?

Also you can't choose your OS with consoles, PC's you can.

ahem... when will hermits realize that the 360 and PC are on the same team?

Natural_Mystic

Will you ever see the Hammer of Casey comming?

Agreed 110%. RTS on consoles is a joke that isn't funny. FPS on consoles can be done well, but not RTS by any means when comparedto the PC.

The quote saysMicrosoft gets "nothing" from a PC game unless the publish the game. That is incorrect. For companies to have the "Compatible with Vista Logo" they must pay for that. Have you priced the Team development edition of Visual Studio and Microsofts tools? But what Microsoft really gains is that those PC games are the reason people buy a PC instead of a Macintosh or a Linux box. This very important fact seems to escape rule #14.If the rule were at all true then you could basically buy any OS and run every PC game.

DuaneDog

That's a marketing decision. You don't need to put the windows logo in your game. If it's for PC people will expect it to work in windows. You can publish your game and not pay MS a dime.

This is just not correct. Both game platforms certainly share DirectX and Microsoft's development tools. Games running on a Linux box for example are NOT running on a Microsoft platfrom and none of the games you go out and buy will run on the box. So who sellsVista again???? How is buyingVista and paying that licensefeenot profit forMicrosoft?Games running on Vista are certainly running on a Microsoft platform. Royalties on each game does not mean the platform architectures, development tools and even the methodology are not essentially the same. Microsoft wants to keep developers on their platforms because that is essential to their future. The DirectX platform is mature and has proven to be scalable and useable for XP, Vista, Xbox, Xbox360 and you can be assured that there will be continued convergence of these technologies and platforms.

The quote saysMicrosoft gets "nothing" from a PC game unless the publish the game. That is incorrect. For companies to have the "Compatible with Vista Logo" they must pay for that. Have you priced the Team development edition of Visual Studio and Microsofts tools? But what Microsoft really gains is that those PC games are the reason people buy a PC instead of a Macintosh or a Linux box. This very important fact seems to escape rule #14.If the rule were at all true then you could basically buy any OS and run every PC game.

DuaneDog

Annnnd your argument dies right... about... here-

PC developers don't pay anything to have their games compatible with Windows. Microsoft can't say, "Hey, your game is compatible with Windows! Give us teh moneyz!!1!" because it's illegal.

Microsoft has no say whatesoever on what videogame content goes onto PCs, and they get no profit when I buy a copy of World of Warcraft, FEAR, or any other game they don't publish.

For gods sake, why the hell would a developer pay Microsoft to advertise that their product can run on Windows!?

Games for Windows is a Microsoft advertising campaign. Microsoft does not, and will never, own PC gaming.