As much as I love Gamespot, their reviews are horrible. I mean they gave C&C 3 a 9? WTF? And they gave dawn of war 8.8, what's up with that? Dawn of war was a revolutionary game. C&C 3 is a complete crap that brought nothing to the RTS genre. So Gamespot thinks C&C 3 is a better game DOW? That's lame. Gamespot gave COH a 9, same score as C&C 3. That's not right. People liked C&C 3 because it has C&C name on it. If you take out the name C&C in C&C3:tiberium wars, and just called it Tiberium wars. It wouldn't get a 9, it's would get a score something like a 7 or something close to that. And Starcraft got 9.1, only .1 below C&C 3, there is something wrong with Gamespot scoring system. gogators4life

Finally someelse who agrees that C&C3 is crap and that it only got a 9 because it was a C&C game :)

PC gaming was just starting during that time and like new game systems the first games released were almost always highly rated

http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?type=top_rated&platform=5&sort=score&page_type=games&dlx_type=all&date_filter=all&sortdir=asc

Its the same thing for the PC,GC,GBA, etc.

In all fairness, DoW is a pretty mediocre game. Sure, it might be fun for the first week, but it gets boring rather quickly. The playable races are hardly different from each other - every race uses the same tactic - flush your opponent with a huge army, the only difference is that you use different units. The balance is pretty poor, the battles are really slow, the campaigin isuninteresting (especially in Dark Crusade).

Starcraft wins, hands down.

i_saw_a_mudcrab

SC has had 9 years of time to balance the 3 races that they have which they stole from WH 40k and every race is the same? Well that alone shows that you either suck at WH 40k or that you've never played it.