Uh, first of all, the second video you linked was gameplay of only the original AOEIII.  Both the expansions improved the gameplay of all the classes dramatically.

Second of all, part of the reason I like Company of Heroes and AOEIII more than a game like StarCraft is because the game isn't just focused on Micromanagement and CLICK CLICK CLICK and OMG I dropped your mineral line for 10 seconds and killed your pace and therefore you lost gg!  There are other ways to play the game instead of cutthroat micromanagement and rock/paper/scissors - supplies are everything.  In Company of Heroes, resources are definitely a major part of the game.  But even someone who is losing can use tactics and good command of Tanks/Snipers/cover to come back.  In Age of Empires III (and even II), someone who is losing can use good command of units and exploration (or any other number of tactics) to flank their opponent and overrun their supplies to buy time to make up the difference and/or cover their own base long enough to upgrade to a new age/get better troops.  I nSAtarCraft, its pretty much, you have the pace, or you lose.

^ Different RTS games have different values depending on the style of the player I guess. I enjoy all kinds of RTS games, both the strategic and the technical (in lack of better words). But there is just something about starcraft. It's so ridiculously good at being a technical RTS that it's immortal not even WC3 that was released much later surpassed it.

Your thinking of taking AoE1/2/3 and using the same concept on the 360, like I said you need to rethink the way you can control rts games because Natal has ways of controlling your games that weren't possible before. And I stand by what I said, AoE is really simple to controle and yes back then that was traditional, but RTS games are still being made that way and compaired to others in the genre they are simple RTS games.

The simple structure of AoE can easily be controlled with Natal, using both hands to move units and scroll around the map. Putting 1 finger up to select army 1 and putting up 2 fingers (peace sign) to controle army 2, etc. I think it could be a very fun and fats way to take controle over the battlefield. AoE is the perfect franchise for this, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a huge fan that doesnt own a gaming PC.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here as I think that control scheme sounds terrible. Part of that is because I'm highly sceptical of Natal in general (especially for the accuracy you seem to be talking about), the other part is because it just sounds terrible imo! They do need to do something a bit more orginal, but they can do that on PC. IMO, if its not on PC, it just won't work.

I definitely agree that WCIII wasn't as good as StarCraft.  Though I think that WCIII was trying to do something different.  But seeing as how it was utilizing a very common formula that StarCraft basically perfected, it was plagued with being deemed a quazi-sequel to StarCraft and was never going to meet anyones expectations, either to beat the most popular RTS up to that time or to surpass the most popular Blizzard game ever.

Which I feel is going to be the same fate for StarCraft II.