Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Even then, not sure how one goes around measuring which is ~better~ and which is ~worse~.
Anyway, the point of my post was purely informational, I feel would be buyers should have as much info. as possible (and there was already a similar post on the World War Zero side, probably by someone that feels like yourself :-)
Generally I prefer the original over any port/redux/remake/etc. mainly because I favour good solid game play over supposedly improved graphics (sounds like we have that in common). But as I said; I can't say yet as I haven't played either of these two yet.
I plan to play through World War Zero to see the differences myself.
So are those deleted cutscenes just from Iron Storm or did the PC version of World War Zero remove some cutscenes from the PS2 version?
I can't be of help (yet), but ZER0_K% seems to have played both and is quite knowledgeable on the subject.