🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 01:42:17 -0000, "Ineedmoney"
<mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:qbednZQvcP6V-FCiRVn-sw@comcast.com...

>> Actually ... yes, I can. Didn't feel any more an add-on than WCIV felt
>> like an add-on to WCIII. That is to say, not really at all.
>
>No I felt WcIV was a definite sequel. It had a much larger scope in terms of
>the much larger movie sequences and obvious budget increase the way the game
>play was structured. WC4 provided a much better illusion of being able to
>determine your destiny than Wc3 had for me. Wc4 certainly felt like a
>sequel.
>
>If Wc4 had removed all video. No CGI. Didnt try and create ingame movies
>with character interaction.9I dont want to just hear their voices) If they
>failed to innovate any, or hardly any (I cant think of anything stunning)
>new gameplay features... just stuff like that... I would have thought it
>looked like an addon.

   WC4 wasn't any more innovative than WC3 though.  They made it in
record time, just like SO, and lots of the innovative stuff never made
it.  It's pretty much the same core game as the one before it, just
another campaign, just like Secret Ops.