As a handful of you guys may already know, I recently got Warhawk for Christmas to see what all the fuss was about. Since I'm probably one of the few people to have played Starhawk before Warhawk, I thought you guys might enjoy hearing some of my first impressions
1) It takes a while to stop throwing grenades whenever you try to "fine aim"
2) Warhawks are MUCH better at flying than Starhawks, but mostly because they can hover, making air-to-ground much easier.
3) Leveling is not nearly as fun...
4) Jetpacks can literally fly FOREVER!
5) It takes a while to get used to having to go out and find the vehicle I want, hoping that nobody already took it. I've been spoiled for too long by having whatever I need literally fall from the sky and land in my lap
6) I keep shooting my own team since I'm used to Red always being the bad guys
7) As a result of the Warhawks being so good, grounding is not as fun...
8) Troops have more toys...
9) ...and yet Melee is it's own weapon??
10) Again, WHY is zoom R3 instead of L1?
Hope you all had a good laugh
Has anyone else had a similar experience?
----------------------------------------------------Built to Destroy----------------------------------------------------
Warhawk was better because of the balance and concept.
Starhawk didn't do good because people wanted warhawk 2. When they saw that the much anticipated game abandoned almost EVERYTHING that Warhawk was about, they abandoned ship and the game ended up meeting it's demise. (The developer going out of business because of Starhawk doing poorly)
The reason warhawk was so successful was because there were no other good games at the time.
While there maybe some truth to that comment for a few, Warhawk (even with it's own faults here and there) was a more enjoyable multiplayer experience for me personally than Starhawk.
Mainly for it's pace of gameplay. You had intense moments playing out all over the map but unless your team got themselves trapped in their main base, there was some slower moments that gave you time to sneak around and capture bases and set up strategies.
In Starhawk it is more shoot-shoot-shoot, bomb,bomb,bomb and cripple the other team as fast as you can so they can't defend themselves to get the easiest win.
That can be fun and all, but Starhawk's pacing and narrow style of gameplay gets old really quick if the server is grossly unbalanced.
Warhawk was far from perfect but there was more to do and ways to help your team than just being a good enough pilot, grab all the weapons you can and start flattening the other team's base over and over.
Now with Starhawk when not in a Hawk, it's all about Outpost spam and quickly pinning the other team to their main base. Yes, Warhawk had that same issue but you had to fight your way into the enemy base on foot or by air. Not just spawn in repeatedly.
Again, for me, with Warhawk it was about pacing and some freedom of movement. You had cover and places that made getting around the map with some stealth possible.
LBI took all that away with Starhawk and in my eyes, dumbed it down for a wider audience.
I had hoped "Build and Battle" would have added to the core game's strategy but instead it just made it easier to cripple the other team and keep them busy building everything they need to fight back with.
I don't play Warhawk much anymore because now it's just mostly (or only) pilot on pilot battles. But for many years there was a good balance of both the ground game players and the dogfighters. There were many roles to play and I could help my team without being some ace pilot.
In Starhawk even an average player can get 95% of his kills against ground troops with just Cluster, Flak, Stomp and Torpedo. Never have to fight on foot and still rank up fast and get the most kills with ease.
It's simply kill quick and kill often for the win, and (mostly) nothing else.
I'd say Warhawk had more going for it than that.
This coming from a Warhawk vet that didn't once whine about the changes to the flight mechanics since I could have cared less about that.
I just wanted a deeper, more strategic style of game play than what Starhawk delivered. That, and a bit more of a single player game since everyone involved talk it up for two years.
I think it's unlikely anyone just now getting around to playing Warhawk could understand what it was like playing the game the first few years after it's release.
Simply saying it was loved by so many just because there wasn't much out there at the time is far from correct. Sorry supert but that is not the only reason why Warhawk players loved the game so much. Not even close.
Warhawk was a great game and Starhawk (when it's not crashing) is a great game.
They are just two different games for two different types of players. Some enjoy them both and some like one over the other.
By now we all know each of the game's strengths and weaknesses. Let's leave it at that.
Hawk humper? I hate those....
And it is fun to fly to the top of the flight ceiling and just drop! I do it alot!
In warhawk, you could hit the boost right before you hit the stall limit and end up crashing into the ceiling.