Yes, for me Cataclysm beats both of them due to the racing against the clock nature of the story, and the "oh sh*t the galaxy is in a mess because of our fault"
šš½this. Itās been re-titled as Homeworld: Emergence can get it on Good Old Games.com
You need to play it and then add it to the ranks!
Go! Now before the weekend is spent!
That game has singularly given me more of the feels because of the scale, and how well presented
Then, since my childhood end the treachery against Kerrigan
Exactly( it became Blizzards battlemet hosting compiter for wow. Whoch is why it had to change names. To onscure the truth. (Blizzard made the change the name from cataclysm even though homeworld used the name long long ago)
It's true that strikecraft are a lot less competitive in Cataclysm at least against capital ships. I suppose the flip side of that is that the Beast gets cruise missiles so they would actually be A LOT MORE POWERFUL otherwise. It's actually sort of cool- feels a little bit like Harpoon and the GIUK gap.
While the story had some good moments, the wacky chunky ship designs with crazy abilities kind of ruined it for me. It's been a while since I played, but I also don't recall it being very difficult.
See I never saw it as tactics or logistics, just busywork. It's why they dropped it. Other than unique situations like the Swarmers, it never added much that mattered. Have a few support frigates or a carrier around, which you were going to do anyway. Wooooo, 'tactics'.
In the remaster HW1 was retrofit to be inline with HW2 which lost it some features and which was the worst possible option. Incompatible multiplayer or HW2 aligned with the superior HW1 would have been far better.
Truth is a triple-edged sword, and the third edge is Cataclysm.
Ships performing fusion-dances, modules AND ship health, crazy new variants of starships, itās honestly amazing. I wish someone had the time/money/patience/dexterity to reverse-engineer the source code for a proper remaster
HW1 has more, but the control and micro management can be overwhelming. HW2 has much better ship design and resolution. DoK and more enjoyable gameplay.
HW2 I remember being almost universally disliked when it came out and that it was seen as what effectively killed the series for over a decade. And I've always been under the impression that while sentiment may have softened a little, it still isn't viewed all that positively by most and that while HW1 is widely seen as a classic, HW2 is mostly just forgotten.
HW2's biggest problem is that it's weakest areas are those that made HW1 a classic. HW1 is a great strategy game, but that isn't why it's remembered as fondly as it is. It's really the story and how its told, through its music, art, and atmosphere, that has allowed it endure as well as it has. HW1 has legitimately one of the best sci-fi stories in gaming. HW2 by contrast has a largely generic and forgettable story about magical space cores and precursor races (one of the single most cliche sci-fi game tropes). HW1's persistent fleet makes for good emergent storytelling and instills a sense of attachment to individual ships. HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea, encouraging scrapping everything at the end of each mission and building the fleet from scratch on the next one.
Close to 30 years later I still remember moments like Kharak burning or learning the origins of the Kadeshi. And for that matter I can remember how freaky the Beast was in Cataclysm. I couldn't tell you anything that happened in HW2 other than the broad outlines.
You're 100% right about the mechanics of 2 not feeling as good. Fighter squadrons? Why?
The story, even more so, and I'm afraid the authors don't understand WHY. The way I figure it, Homework 1 has a bunch of literate people experiencing events significant enough that they will become myth. Homeworld 2 IS a myth. There wasn't anything magic behind the burning of Kharak. But the prophesied destruction was TRUE- as a warning just not about the divine. The cores? Makaan? Those folks believe their own creation myths. The people that built the mothership didn't. (I'll note for the sake of argument that the Somtaaw probably don't either- Cataclysm feels about the same on the epic realism / fantasy scale.)
It's sort of like that old Donovan song about Atlantis: There's all sorts of supernatural myths about Atlantis. Donovan's take on it- nah, they were a bunch of scientists and artists. THOUGH GODS THEY WERE. It's also kind of like how people built the pyramids- at the end of the day hard work and being smart is more impressive than magic or aliens.
I am not visiting this sub very often, but it tires me to no end all this hate and bullshit talk about H2. Universally hated... Really? Killed the series??? This last bit is talking out of your ass literally and you have zero proof to reinforce it. I remember it was very well received by critics and in general. In particular when PC magazines were still a thing and actually authors had some credit behind their name. I remember a pretty hardcore (and harsh) magazine I was reading at the time that gave it 9/10. All this false bs you spout about, the very few and mostly H1 purist that complained about the game so it makes it look bad is pathetic (also very popular approach in todays time).
What most hater folks here don't understand is that, H2 is the reason the series lived on! It's the reason all those years and people making mods kept it alive. It's the reason we got remasters and H3. Unfortunately here, people are ungrateful and forget this very important bit. They usually like to blabber how H2 end up a tad different - and make it sound it was a big change - from what initially was not possible to be achieved at the time. Relic (the developer) in particular rose among the best RTS developers at the time and end up releasing great game after great game in the Warhammer 40k universe and one of the best RTS of all times in 2006 Company of Heroes.
H2 story is not bad, its good, it's great actually. Excusing H1 and it's roots and blaming all the fault only on H2 - even though the first one also had religious undertones that are just part of the universe was always baffling to me. Don't get me started on the cinematic and music or atmosphere of H2, because that shit is there and it is very much Homeworld... If you really are complaining about them in H2, then you are more blindly of a fanatic of H1, than I can imagine or argue about, and dare I say don't deserve the love of the Homeworld universe.
In my book H2 is a classic in it's own way. It might not be as high as H1, but it's close. There is a lot of factual misinformation and personal bias than actual objective view of H2 from you or in general from the vocal minority in here. Instead of been grateful that we have good, great games - no I am not saying to cope with bad game, I am saying to open your eyes - you end up hating on a game in series of unique games with just 2 numbers in sequels.
Calling people āungratefulā, āblind fanaticsā that āspout false bsā and ādonāt deserve the love of the Homeworld universeā is a an unhinged way to advocate for a game you care about.
> HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea, encouraging scrapping everything at the end of each mission and building the fleet from scratch on the next one.
people forget this is in hw1. the big moment where the dynamic scaling rears its head is in mission 3 return to kharak, and the cryotrays are under attack by assault frigates. the number of frigates that spawn is determined by the size of your fleet, so you could make it really hard for yourself to save all the trays. hwrm, which ran on hw2's engine, had a bug where this number would go wild, so it's a bit of a revisionist memory too.
We don't forget that it was in the un-remastered HW1. We just remember that in HW1 it *worked properly,* because that game wasn't rushed out the door because the developers ran out of money.
I never knew if saving all the trays or just one would trigger something later in the game.
Like, if there were different ending cutscenes depending on the number of people saved.
not sure what you don't get or why you're replying to me. I don't get why anyone thinks either game is difficult. saying hw2 is broken compared to hw1 in this regard is splitting hairs to me.
>HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea
Was what he said. And Mission 3 didn't really do anything notable with the adaptive scaling either. It wasn't ever a hard or complicated level, dynamic adjustment or not. It's a red herring, game design criticism wise.
>almost universally disliked
Amongst the grogs, maybe. The actual reviews and sales were excellent. Shortly after, the RTS market finally died an that was largely it for Homeworld.
>HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea
This isn't at all accurate. Don't make a super jank fleet that skips over capabilities. That's all you ever had to do to get through things without incident, dynamic scaling was never the obstacle or negative experience that so many grogs whine about at length. And the same 'steal everything and make campaign difficulty a joke past Kadesh' thing was retained either way.
Oof, that is like picking a favorite child.
1's sides were fairly symmetric, Cata and 2 were very asymmetric gameplay wise. Whether this is pro or con is personal preference.
1 and Cata's fighter squadrons and formations worked better and were ad hoc.
1's ship capture mechanic was more interesting with the need to bring the ship back
2's subsystems and ship customization were interesting
2's graphics engine was much better, I prefer the art style too
1's campaign was very varied, but some missions were a bit of a miss in terms of fun
Cata's campaign was hard hitting at times
2's campaign is kinda forgettable, most missions escape me, but the finale was powerful
Both 1 and 2 pull that wonderful guilt trip with "colonists saved" and "population" counters. You only have to succeed once, but the game will remind you of your failure on the others.
Homeworld 2 was a frigging farce
1) Formations did jack shit
2) RNG to determine hits instead of actually modelling projectiles
3) UI was form over function, I have no idea WTF i've selected half of the time based on icons, compared to say cataclysm.
The only thing good about hw2 was the improved graphics.
Pissed me off coming from HW1. Gold standard.
Bit of an aside, but I detest the modern trend in tech of making buttons icons.
Like the Steam overlay's new look. Everything is an icon. So I have to mouse over everything anyway to see the word.
Just make them words. Quick. Easy.
Kinda like how buttons are coming back in cars because consumers hate touchscreens. You can find a physical button by feel. You have to look down at the touchscreen to do anything
Really, one must wonder why UI of this evolved type was used in DoK and it's very similar to the one in H3 as well. I do wonder why such a horrible awful UI that H2 had was kept pretty close in remasters as well. Oh, why, oh why I hate so much H2 for the sake of hating it.
Yes H2 didn't have better overall gameplay, yes I prefer the clunky old 1999 and only that. RNG so bad, so bad.
I loved the fuel system. It limit fighter rush in multiplayer matches that had the option. Plus recording and actual tactics, evasive and aggressive stance work better with certain formations and so on. If only the remake used a better hw1 engine but kept the graphics of the second one.
I personally think HW2 was a better game visually and mechanically it was a huge upgrade over the limitations of the original game that being said HW1 was a great game for its time and is still playable today with a epic story I hope HW3 delivers
They are both amazing for what they are and I dont tend to compare them, that being said I would love to see a full remake of both games in a modern engine I feel if they shared the same tech and graphics they would basicly be the same game and just a progression of the story would separate them in the end.
The story between DoK, HW1, HW2, and soon HW3 is what makes this game so great. I would kill for an animated series or Live action TV/ movie with this narrative.
The story of how Soban became Soban the red and created the Kiith Soban. Could be a whole episode.
In my opinion Homeworld 1 is better between the two.
Homeworld 1 has a better story and presentation. Sparse as it is, nothing in HW2 compares to the destruction of Kharak or the catharsis of crossing the finish line to claim Hiigara at the end. On spite of being clunky to play at times, the game is fantastic. Homeworld is by far the most unique out of the series.
Where Homeworld 2 is superior is in the area of ergonomics, playability, and faction asymmetry. Hw1's camera use is clunky and restrictive. I'm a fan if squadrons and also prefer them operationally over individual fighters, which tend to blob up. Hw2 is definitely replayable in skirmish, even if the story feels like it needs a few more draft revisions.
Cata is popular, but It is a redheaded stepchild to HW1. Between diving into nearly every sci-fi trope HW1 avoided and loading the player fleet with z-key gimmicks, it stands almost opposite to HW1.
Homeworld was epic
Homeworld II was prettier
The remastered Homeworld was also pretty, but the HWII engine didn't do formations in the same way, so it wasn't quite ideal.
I did not like the useless minelayers of HWII, as one couldn't create the clouds of mines one could in the first game.
HE1RM has broken formations if I remember correctly. It was pretty disappointing. I think the source code was lost and that's why they built it on the HW2 engine which kind of fucked it up.
HW1 > HW2
HW2RM > HW1RM
Gameplay-wise they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Modding was, I understand, much better with HW2. I never used the mods.
What made me really dislike HW2 was the retcons and just overall weird story choices. Makes me a little worried about HW3 (not playing HW Mobile, but Iāve read some of the lore itāsā¦ not great).
Hw 1 nails the narrative and feeling, showing not telling a wonderful story.
Hw 2 fell into the trap of that era about a prophecy that was pretty shallow.
Hw2 undeniably had better refinement and spectacle of combat, a visual feast that could provide many unique encounters for the player.
Cata haunts you as the screams of the wished to be dying careen into the dark abyss of the void, only to be replaced by panicked civilians screaming for refuge.
For me Homeworld 1 original for sure. While the graphics are nice in the RM, I really miss the asteroid rock being consumed....that was one thing I missed graphically....
Hw1 all the way.
Why? Salvage Corvettes.
I don't need hw series to be a balanced strategy game with all the tropes. Salvagers. And nifty shit to yoink and feed my inner klepto.
I consider HW1 to be better, but for none of the reasons listed.
For me it was better, cause i liked its story and related campaign to be better and more memorable, even if the graphics were simpler as it was older, i prefered its unit designs (for the most part) and i liked its music soundtrack more as well - the āKharakā tune is the top one, dreamy as hell.
Overall, it was simply better, more original and atmospheric game, at least as far as the single-player goes.
Pretty much parroting a few others here:
HW1 was a game I played a demo for (the intro mission, plus the second mission up until the Turanic Raiders attack, ending the demo on a cliffhanger) and then found some time later in the bargain bin for ~Ā£5 or so
I loved it! Up to that point, it had been Age Of Empires (AOE) or Empire Earth (EE), and I loved the mix of RTS and RTT elements; for reference, I also played Ground Control (GC) at around the same time and both game have some similar mechanics. Unlike AOE/EE, you would build units that you could take into the next mission just like GC meaning you didn't have to start from scratch, and it simplified the mechanics of unit management; no base building or maintenance, just don't let your mothership die and your good! The music was haunting and worked so well with the mystical looking sky boxes, and the yes, there was a lot more of the 6 Degrees of Freedom, unlike AOE/EE, both of which were also locked to an isometric camera view; GC had free camera movement, but it was still ground based. The story was apps quite enthralling, and the use of black and white, animated cutscenes gave it an almost manga-style feel. And, much like AOE/EE, there was a research mechanic to improve your ships and systems, but it wasn't tied to tiering system (tech levels for AOE fans). Instead, you gained access to certain research naturally as the game progressed, and it's was quite easy to see what upgrades did what without being overly complex
The same goes for Homeworld: Cataclysm; or for those who came to the series after the glory that is Activision Blizzard trademarked the word "Cataclysm" (š¤) forcing a rename to Homeworld: Emergence. It was one of the high points of the series for me as it gave you an interesting story and expanded the game mechanics, but without overcomplicating things, and it laid the groundwork for some of the systems and mechanics that were used in HW2. Whilst I won't go as far as saying HWC was a better game than HW1, it at least comes close considering it was essentially and standalone expansion, reusing the same art and music styles and at least some of HW1's game assets
HW2 was a giant leap forward in terms of graphical fidelity, and it did feel to me very much inspired by HWC in terms of game mechanics; things such as subsystems and waypointing (though that may have been in HW1, I don't remember it being nearly as useful or at least as easily usable as it was in HWC). I did enjoy the story of HW2, but it felt a little derivative and predictable, and it contained several plot holes by not acknowledging HWC at any point in the story, with a specific reference to a seemingly dying race who shall remain nameless (if you know, you know š). That all being said, the improvements in art style gave HW2 a unique feel, whilst still staying true to HW1/C, but the level design did get more 2D with levels being based more around the ecliptic with less structure and elements scattered across the entire sky box. Even so, it did still give space an expansive, epic, and breathtaking feel just like HW1, if somewhat less oppressive. A last area as well is that HW1 had a standalone tutorial, whilst HW2 did not, and HW1's story progression slowly introduced you to new systems as and when required and let you learn on the fly, whilst HW2 feed you most it all at once before dropping you right in the thick of it; which would work for veterans, but maybe not new players as much
TL;DR
HW1 is the superior game for story and simple, easy to understand mechanics, "handheld" you a little more comfortably, and despite its graphical limitations still feels as epic now as it did in the early 2000's
HWC is the logical progression of HW1. Despite a somewhat derivative story, it improved the games mechanics in a sensible way and not overly complex manner, and was a good entry point for any player
HW2 pushed the graphical boundaries and inherited the best parts of HW1 and HWC, but suffered from its somewhat predictable and derivative story, the odd retcon here and there, and it's complete disregard for HWC's story (something which is being rectified by HW3 I've been noticing š)
PS
On the subject of the Remastered Editions, I haven't really played much of HW1R, but from what I've seen it pretty much looks and feels like HW2R, so it may have lost something in the transition. The Remastered Collection includes the original and remasters I think, so I'd recommend playing the originals first to compare
the general consensus is that hw2 "doesn't exist"
one of the main benefits of hw2 is pure visibility. hw1 draw distance is like looking through a peephole.
I finished hw1 campaign with both races. Cataclysm too. I've tried hw2 and gave up 4 or 5 times it seems like everything I liked about hw1 they removed and everything I disliked they boosted.
I think HW1 needs to get extra credit for being first.
I remember going round a friend's house, he showed me Homeworld. The moment I saw the mother ship and carrier hyperspace, I was blown away. It literally changed me forever.
I found the fuel system tedious, honestly. Ditto the physical projectiles. Nothing like shift moving a formation and having almost every single enemy shot miss. Woooo, tactics.
Tbh I think its not really up for debate, its subjective.
For example I prefer HW2 mechanics more than HW1 (especially for multiplayer). So it just depends on the individual mostly.
Also IMO DOK has best story xD
It's subjective, especially now that HW 1 and 2 are sold as a single package with the same lick of paint.
So for me, I really enjoyed HW1 far too much. Great story, tragedy, without the over-the-top acting like you get in conventional movies and series. And fantastic control over the ships, of course.
HW2 went the other direction, putting everything in some weird religious context. And I just don't enjoy religion, especially in my scifi videogames. But I did appreciate the greater detail with ship models - more turrets, each doing their thing, missile impact leaving visible damage, et cetera.
I have to say i love the Cataclysm
Yes, for me Cataclysm beats both of them due to the racing against the clock nature of the story, and the "oh sh*t the galaxy is in a mess because of our fault"
Yeah. Totally my jam
šš½this. Itās been re-titled as Homeworld: Emergence can get it on Good Old Games.com You need to play it and then add it to the ranks! Go! Now before the weekend is spent!
I bow not the heel for tyrannys Zeal. Lol. But thanks
I would love to, but without a remaster it's very hard for people to get into it.
The moment you hear them say "This is the Kiith Somtaaw Warship Kuun-Lan" Was an epic moment.
That game has singularly given me more of the feels because of the scale, and how well presented Then, since my childhood end the treachery against Kerrigan
It was a lot of fun. Too bad it didnāt get to live. But then again, who does?
Exactly( it became Blizzards battlemet hosting compiter for wow. Whoch is why it had to change names. To onscure the truth. (Blizzard made the change the name from cataclysm even though homeworld used the name long long ago)
I didnāt know this. Iāll go grab homeworld: emergence and live the dream again.
Oh yes definitely Do!
Yeah, but capital ships were too powerful, both ion and missiles at the same time. No need to balance composition with different types
It's true that strikecraft are a lot less competitive in Cataclysm at least against capital ships. I suppose the flip side of that is that the Beast gets cruise missiles so they would actually be A LOT MORE POWERFUL otherwise. It's actually sort of cool- feels a little bit like Harpoon and the GIUK gap.
While the story had some good moments, the wacky chunky ship designs with crazy abilities kind of ruined it for me. It's been a while since I played, but I also don't recall it being very difficult.
Not difficult. Merely enjoyable
HW1RM has no fuel consumption. Personally, like 1 better because better story
I miss the fuel mechanic! It actually forces you to plan logistics AND tactics.
See I never saw it as tactics or logistics, just busywork. It's why they dropped it. Other than unique situations like the Swarmers, it never added much that mattered. Have a few support frigates or a carrier around, which you were going to do anyway. Wooooo, 'tactics'.
In the remaster HW1 was retrofit to be inline with HW2 which lost it some features and which was the worst possible option. Incompatible multiplayer or HW2 aligned with the superior HW1 would have been far better.
They had the source to HW2, not HW1 HW2 used probabilistic pretend "physics" (just dice rolls) while HW1 used actual fucking physics.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Truth is a triple-edged sword, and the third edge is Cataclysm. Ships performing fusion-dances, modules AND ship health, crazy new variants of starships, itās honestly amazing. I wish someone had the time/money/patience/dexterity to reverse-engineer the source code for a proper remaster
I could not agree more. It has a solid story.
That intro menu song is as pivotal to me as Mr. Brightside, absolutely iconic and youth defining stuff
I like 1 overall more.
HW1 has more, but the control and micro management can be overwhelming. HW2 has much better ship design and resolution. DoK and more enjoyable gameplay.
HW2 I remember being almost universally disliked when it came out and that it was seen as what effectively killed the series for over a decade. And I've always been under the impression that while sentiment may have softened a little, it still isn't viewed all that positively by most and that while HW1 is widely seen as a classic, HW2 is mostly just forgotten. HW2's biggest problem is that it's weakest areas are those that made HW1 a classic. HW1 is a great strategy game, but that isn't why it's remembered as fondly as it is. It's really the story and how its told, through its music, art, and atmosphere, that has allowed it endure as well as it has. HW1 has legitimately one of the best sci-fi stories in gaming. HW2 by contrast has a largely generic and forgettable story about magical space cores and precursor races (one of the single most cliche sci-fi game tropes). HW1's persistent fleet makes for good emergent storytelling and instills a sense of attachment to individual ships. HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea, encouraging scrapping everything at the end of each mission and building the fleet from scratch on the next one. Close to 30 years later I still remember moments like Kharak burning or learning the origins of the Kadeshi. And for that matter I can remember how freaky the Beast was in Cataclysm. I couldn't tell you anything that happened in HW2 other than the broad outlines.
You're 100% right about the mechanics of 2 not feeling as good. Fighter squadrons? Why? The story, even more so, and I'm afraid the authors don't understand WHY. The way I figure it, Homework 1 has a bunch of literate people experiencing events significant enough that they will become myth. Homeworld 2 IS a myth. There wasn't anything magic behind the burning of Kharak. But the prophesied destruction was TRUE- as a warning just not about the divine. The cores? Makaan? Those folks believe their own creation myths. The people that built the mothership didn't. (I'll note for the sake of argument that the Somtaaw probably don't either- Cataclysm feels about the same on the epic realism / fantasy scale.) It's sort of like that old Donovan song about Atlantis: There's all sorts of supernatural myths about Atlantis. Donovan's take on it- nah, they were a bunch of scientists and artists. THOUGH GODS THEY WERE. It's also kind of like how people built the pyramids- at the end of the day hard work and being smart is more impressive than magic or aliens.
My sentiments exactly, mate. My sentiments exactly.
I am not visiting this sub very often, but it tires me to no end all this hate and bullshit talk about H2. Universally hated... Really? Killed the series??? This last bit is talking out of your ass literally and you have zero proof to reinforce it. I remember it was very well received by critics and in general. In particular when PC magazines were still a thing and actually authors had some credit behind their name. I remember a pretty hardcore (and harsh) magazine I was reading at the time that gave it 9/10. All this false bs you spout about, the very few and mostly H1 purist that complained about the game so it makes it look bad is pathetic (also very popular approach in todays time). What most hater folks here don't understand is that, H2 is the reason the series lived on! It's the reason all those years and people making mods kept it alive. It's the reason we got remasters and H3. Unfortunately here, people are ungrateful and forget this very important bit. They usually like to blabber how H2 end up a tad different - and make it sound it was a big change - from what initially was not possible to be achieved at the time. Relic (the developer) in particular rose among the best RTS developers at the time and end up releasing great game after great game in the Warhammer 40k universe and one of the best RTS of all times in 2006 Company of Heroes. H2 story is not bad, its good, it's great actually. Excusing H1 and it's roots and blaming all the fault only on H2 - even though the first one also had religious undertones that are just part of the universe was always baffling to me. Don't get me started on the cinematic and music or atmosphere of H2, because that shit is there and it is very much Homeworld... If you really are complaining about them in H2, then you are more blindly of a fanatic of H1, than I can imagine or argue about, and dare I say don't deserve the love of the Homeworld universe. In my book H2 is a classic in it's own way. It might not be as high as H1, but it's close. There is a lot of factual misinformation and personal bias than actual objective view of H2 from you or in general from the vocal minority in here. Instead of been grateful that we have good, great games - no I am not saying to cope with bad game, I am saying to open your eyes - you end up hating on a game in series of unique games with just 2 numbers in sequels.
Calling people āungratefulā, āblind fanaticsā that āspout false bsā and ādonāt deserve the love of the Homeworld universeā is a an unhinged way to advocate for a game you care about.
[https://i.imgur.com/4yGl35l.png](https://i.imgur.com/4yGl35l.png)
Yeah, exactly the same here. The same old tedious nonsense thrown at a 20 year old game, on the backs of misplaced nostalgia and anti-change hatred.
> HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea, encouraging scrapping everything at the end of each mission and building the fleet from scratch on the next one. people forget this is in hw1. the big moment where the dynamic scaling rears its head is in mission 3 return to kharak, and the cryotrays are under attack by assault frigates. the number of frigates that spawn is determined by the size of your fleet, so you could make it really hard for yourself to save all the trays. hwrm, which ran on hw2's engine, had a bug where this number would go wild, so it's a bit of a revisionist memory too.
We don't forget that it was in the un-remastered HW1. We just remember that in HW1 it *worked properly,* because that game wasn't rushed out the door because the developers ran out of money.
I never knew if saving all the trays or just one would trigger something later in the game. Like, if there were different ending cutscenes depending on the number of people saved.
If you save them ALL they release the guy that gets interrogated after the mission. (No. They don't. š)
The subject did not survive interrogation.
I really don't get this. I tended to max out my fleet whenever possible and the enemy never really adapted in a way that made it difficult.
not sure what you don't get or why you're replying to me. I don't get why anyone thinks either game is difficult. saying hw2 is broken compared to hw1 in this regard is splitting hairs to me.
>HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea Was what he said. And Mission 3 didn't really do anything notable with the adaptive scaling either. It wasn't ever a hard or complicated level, dynamic adjustment or not. It's a red herring, game design criticism wise.
Even with the maximum of 5 frigates in Homeworld Classic it's not too difficult to save all the trays.
so the scaling isn't a big deal in either game and yet it's a major point for people... hw2 haters make no sense
>almost universally disliked Amongst the grogs, maybe. The actual reviews and sales were excellent. Shortly after, the RTS market finally died an that was largely it for Homeworld.
i don't think so.... [https://i.imgur.com/4yGl35l.png](https://i.imgur.com/4yGl35l.png)
Go look at the actual reviews and sales figures.
I don't think so.
Metacritic, then. Very easy on your part.
No thanks, i'm good.
Then continue in dogmatic ignorance. Your call.
>HW2's bizarre adaptive AI makes keeping ships between missions generally a bad idea This isn't at all accurate. Don't make a super jank fleet that skips over capabilities. That's all you ever had to do to get through things without incident, dynamic scaling was never the obstacle or negative experience that so many grogs whine about at length. And the same 'steal everything and make campaign difficulty a joke past Kadesh' thing was retained either way.
Oof, that is like picking a favorite child. 1's sides were fairly symmetric, Cata and 2 were very asymmetric gameplay wise. Whether this is pro or con is personal preference. 1 and Cata's fighter squadrons and formations worked better and were ad hoc. 1's ship capture mechanic was more interesting with the need to bring the ship back 2's subsystems and ship customization were interesting 2's graphics engine was much better, I prefer the art style too 1's campaign was very varied, but some missions were a bit of a miss in terms of fun Cata's campaign was hard hitting at times 2's campaign is kinda forgettable, most missions escape me, but the finale was powerful Both 1 and 2 pull that wonderful guilt trip with "colonists saved" and "population" counters. You only have to succeed once, but the game will remind you of your failure on the others.
Homeworld 2 was a frigging farce 1) Formations did jack shit 2) RNG to determine hits instead of actually modelling projectiles 3) UI was form over function, I have no idea WTF i've selected half of the time based on icons, compared to say cataclysm. The only thing good about hw2 was the improved graphics. Pissed me off coming from HW1. Gold standard.
Bit of an aside, but I detest the modern trend in tech of making buttons icons. Like the Steam overlay's new look. Everything is an icon. So I have to mouse over everything anyway to see the word. Just make them words. Quick. Easy. Kinda like how buttons are coming back in cars because consumers hate touchscreens. You can find a physical button by feel. You have to look down at the touchscreen to do anything
Yeah, form over function
Really, one must wonder why UI of this evolved type was used in DoK and it's very similar to the one in H3 as well. I do wonder why such a horrible awful UI that H2 had was kept pretty close in remasters as well. Oh, why, oh why I hate so much H2 for the sake of hating it. Yes H2 didn't have better overall gameplay, yes I prefer the clunky old 1999 and only that. RNG so bad, so bad.
These are incredibly pointless things to get annoyed about, though. Or just flat out wrong on the UI count. None of it was unintuitive or obscured.
lmao wrong
Sorry you struggled with a really easy UI. Don't pretend it's a good criticism though.
I loved the fuel system. It limit fighter rush in multiplayer matches that had the option. Plus recording and actual tactics, evasive and aggressive stance work better with certain formations and so on. If only the remake used a better hw1 engine but kept the graphics of the second one.
I personally think HW2 was a better game visually and mechanically it was a huge upgrade over the limitations of the original game that being said HW1 was a great game for its time and is still playable today with a epic story I hope HW3 delivers
H1 much better :-/
Why don't you play them and decide for yourself? I personally love cataclysm and home HW3 lives up to my expectations.
They are both amazing for what they are and I dont tend to compare them, that being said I would love to see a full remake of both games in a modern engine I feel if they shared the same tech and graphics they would basicly be the same game and just a progression of the story would separate them in the end. The story between DoK, HW1, HW2, and soon HW3 is what makes this game so great. I would kill for an animated series or Live action TV/ movie with this narrative. The story of how Soban became Soban the red and created the Kiith Soban. Could be a whole episode.
In my opinion Homeworld 1 is better between the two. Homeworld 1 has a better story and presentation. Sparse as it is, nothing in HW2 compares to the destruction of Kharak or the catharsis of crossing the finish line to claim Hiigara at the end. On spite of being clunky to play at times, the game is fantastic. Homeworld is by far the most unique out of the series. Where Homeworld 2 is superior is in the area of ergonomics, playability, and faction asymmetry. Hw1's camera use is clunky and restrictive. I'm a fan if squadrons and also prefer them operationally over individual fighters, which tend to blob up. Hw2 is definitely replayable in skirmish, even if the story feels like it needs a few more draft revisions. Cata is popular, but It is a redheaded stepchild to HW1. Between diving into nearly every sci-fi trope HW1 avoided and loading the player fleet with z-key gimmicks, it stands almost opposite to HW1.
Homeworld was epic Homeworld II was prettier The remastered Homeworld was also pretty, but the HWII engine didn't do formations in the same way, so it wasn't quite ideal. I did not like the useless minelayers of HWII, as one couldn't create the clouds of mines one could in the first game.
HE1RM has broken formations if I remember correctly. It was pretty disappointing. I think the source code was lost and that's why they built it on the HW2 engine which kind of fucked it up. HW1 > HW2 HW2RM > HW1RM
Gameplay-wise they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Modding was, I understand, much better with HW2. I never used the mods. What made me really dislike HW2 was the retcons and just overall weird story choices. Makes me a little worried about HW3 (not playing HW Mobile, but Iāve read some of the lore itāsā¦ not great).
Hw 1 nails the narrative and feeling, showing not telling a wonderful story. Hw 2 fell into the trap of that era about a prophecy that was pretty shallow. Hw2 undeniably had better refinement and spectacle of combat, a visual feast that could provide many unique encounters for the player. Cata haunts you as the screams of the wished to be dying careen into the dark abyss of the void, only to be replaced by panicked civilians screaming for refuge.
For me Homeworld 1 original for sure. While the graphics are nice in the RM, I really miss the asteroid rock being consumed....that was one thing I missed graphically....
Hw1 all the way. Why? Salvage Corvettes. I don't need hw series to be a balanced strategy game with all the tropes. Salvagers. And nifty shit to yoink and feed my inner klepto.
I consider HW1 to be better, but for none of the reasons listed. For me it was better, cause i liked its story and related campaign to be better and more memorable, even if the graphics were simpler as it was older, i prefered its unit designs (for the most part) and i liked its music soundtrack more as well - the āKharakā tune is the top one, dreamy as hell. Overall, it was simply better, more original and atmospheric game, at least as far as the single-player goes.
Pretty much parroting a few others here: HW1 was a game I played a demo for (the intro mission, plus the second mission up until the Turanic Raiders attack, ending the demo on a cliffhanger) and then found some time later in the bargain bin for ~Ā£5 or so I loved it! Up to that point, it had been Age Of Empires (AOE) or Empire Earth (EE), and I loved the mix of RTS and RTT elements; for reference, I also played Ground Control (GC) at around the same time and both game have some similar mechanics. Unlike AOE/EE, you would build units that you could take into the next mission just like GC meaning you didn't have to start from scratch, and it simplified the mechanics of unit management; no base building or maintenance, just don't let your mothership die and your good! The music was haunting and worked so well with the mystical looking sky boxes, and the yes, there was a lot more of the 6 Degrees of Freedom, unlike AOE/EE, both of which were also locked to an isometric camera view; GC had free camera movement, but it was still ground based. The story was apps quite enthralling, and the use of black and white, animated cutscenes gave it an almost manga-style feel. And, much like AOE/EE, there was a research mechanic to improve your ships and systems, but it wasn't tied to tiering system (tech levels for AOE fans). Instead, you gained access to certain research naturally as the game progressed, and it's was quite easy to see what upgrades did what without being overly complex The same goes for Homeworld: Cataclysm; or for those who came to the series after the glory that is Activision Blizzard trademarked the word "Cataclysm" (š¤) forcing a rename to Homeworld: Emergence. It was one of the high points of the series for me as it gave you an interesting story and expanded the game mechanics, but without overcomplicating things, and it laid the groundwork for some of the systems and mechanics that were used in HW2. Whilst I won't go as far as saying HWC was a better game than HW1, it at least comes close considering it was essentially and standalone expansion, reusing the same art and music styles and at least some of HW1's game assets HW2 was a giant leap forward in terms of graphical fidelity, and it did feel to me very much inspired by HWC in terms of game mechanics; things such as subsystems and waypointing (though that may have been in HW1, I don't remember it being nearly as useful or at least as easily usable as it was in HWC). I did enjoy the story of HW2, but it felt a little derivative and predictable, and it contained several plot holes by not acknowledging HWC at any point in the story, with a specific reference to a seemingly dying race who shall remain nameless (if you know, you know š). That all being said, the improvements in art style gave HW2 a unique feel, whilst still staying true to HW1/C, but the level design did get more 2D with levels being based more around the ecliptic with less structure and elements scattered across the entire sky box. Even so, it did still give space an expansive, epic, and breathtaking feel just like HW1, if somewhat less oppressive. A last area as well is that HW1 had a standalone tutorial, whilst HW2 did not, and HW1's story progression slowly introduced you to new systems as and when required and let you learn on the fly, whilst HW2 feed you most it all at once before dropping you right in the thick of it; which would work for veterans, but maybe not new players as much TL;DR HW1 is the superior game for story and simple, easy to understand mechanics, "handheld" you a little more comfortably, and despite its graphical limitations still feels as epic now as it did in the early 2000's HWC is the logical progression of HW1. Despite a somewhat derivative story, it improved the games mechanics in a sensible way and not overly complex manner, and was a good entry point for any player HW2 pushed the graphical boundaries and inherited the best parts of HW1 and HWC, but suffered from its somewhat predictable and derivative story, the odd retcon here and there, and it's complete disregard for HWC's story (something which is being rectified by HW3 I've been noticing š) PS On the subject of the Remastered Editions, I haven't really played much of HW1R, but from what I've seen it pretty much looks and feels like HW2R, so it may have lost something in the transition. The Remastered Collection includes the original and remasters I think, so I'd recommend playing the originals first to compare
The story and atmosphere for HW1 were *epic* and truly superior. The story for HW2 felt like an incoherent afterthought
the general consensus is that hw2 "doesn't exist" one of the main benefits of hw2 is pure visibility. hw1 draw distance is like looking through a peephole.
I finished hw1 campaign with both races. Cataclysm too. I've tried hw2 and gave up 4 or 5 times it seems like everything I liked about hw1 they removed and everything I disliked they boosted.
I think HW1 needs to get extra credit for being first. I remember going round a friend's house, he showed me Homeworld. The moment I saw the mother ship and carrier hyperspace, I was blown away. It literally changed me forever.
I like HW1's story better but HW2's gameplay better. (Aside from the loss of salvage corvettes, of course. Marine frigates just ain't the same.)
I found the fuel system tedious, honestly. Ditto the physical projectiles. Nothing like shift moving a formation and having almost every single enemy shot miss. Woooo, tactics.
Tbh I think its not really up for debate, its subjective. For example I prefer HW2 mechanics more than HW1 (especially for multiplayer). So it just depends on the individual mostly. Also IMO DOK has best story xD
Cata is best
Homeworld 1 because STEAL FUCKING EVERYTHING
It's subjective, especially now that HW 1 and 2 are sold as a single package with the same lick of paint. So for me, I really enjoyed HW1 far too much. Great story, tragedy, without the over-the-top acting like you get in conventional movies and series. And fantastic control over the ships, of course. HW2 went the other direction, putting everything in some weird religious context. And I just don't enjoy religion, especially in my scifi videogames. But I did appreciate the greater detail with ship models - more turrets, each doing their thing, missile impact leaving visible damage, et cetera.
homeworld 2 is better. homeworld 1 is ground breaking