Warcraft III: Reforged - now with lowest user metacritic score of all time

[Average Manatee]

How would they even do WC4 with the lore being lobotomized by WoW? Alternative timeline?

Time skip, let the event of WoW turn to myth, and reset to a low-key fantasy.

That would endanger the WoW-bucks if it suddenly became irrelevant.

The idea reminds me of Guild Wars 2. Not a good thing.

 

[Maculo]

I thought the SC2 campaign had a lot of gimmicks, like it was designed for people who hate RTS gameplay. The train mission is a great example, the one where you command a mecharobot too. In contrast, WC3's were always designed with the usual gameplay in mind first and gimmicks second. The story and aesthetic being extremely shit in SC2 doesn't help. I admit I haven't played LotV because I neither have the desire nor own the expansion, after the butchering of Kerrigan and the lameness that was the Zerg campaign I kinda lost interest.

How would they even do WC4 with the lore being lobotomized by WoW? Alternative timeline?

Alternate timeline is a good idea. Current WoW's lore doesn't support a multi-factional conflict, so it's not clear which the playable races can be. WC3's campaigns worked because they relied on the natural conflict that arose from the different races' goals and motivations. Having commanders/heroes taking the helm helped having a personal perspective.

I disagree. On the contrary, I would argue those gimmicks were for people familiar with RTS games and wanting additional challenge or obstacles. SC2 and, to a lesser extent, WC3 tried to break the mold and introduce unique mission mechanics. In prior games/installments, Blizzard overly relied on each mission introducing just one new unit and barely needing the unit to complete that level (some exceptions). Furthermore, it is not as if you would ever rely or use those units in the future (e.g., boats and battleships from WC2, Battleships & Ghosts from SC1). There were some exceptions, such as the hero levels, but ultimately few units introduced in the campaign could compete against WC2 Mage, Paladin, or Ogre Magi. Similarly, Valkrie in SC:BW were bugged from the start if I remember correctly.

Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 still relied on the formula, but they tried to break it up. A good example is Culling of Strathholme, Twilight of the Gods, and Symphony of Frost and Flame. Those had gimmicks, but I would not say those missions were designed for people that hated RTS games.

Another point I would bring up is Dawn of War 3. Dawn of War 3 used the old RTS campaign formula in many ways. Each mission introduced a new unit and/or hero, and then you proceeded to build your base, mass an army, and win. While WC3 and SC2 arguably had gimmicks, those gimmicks at least provided something new and broke up the monotony. DoW3 did not even bother and it showed. Hell, I recall Age of Empires having more campaign mechanics than Dawn of War 3.

 

[Morgoth]

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/blizzard-has-no-plans-for-warcraft-4-yet/1100-6463033/

Blizzard Has No Plans For Warcraft 4 (Yet)
Don't rule it out yet, though.

Blizzard senior producer Pete Stilwell has revealed that there are currently no plans to develop Warcraft IV. However, a sequel to Blizzard's acclaimed real-time strategy series is possible, and the BlizzCon 2018 announcement of Warcraft III: Reforged proves the developer hasn't completely abandoned the series.

"I mean, I wouldn't rule anything out, but we don't have any plans around [Warcraft IV] at this point. Getting [Warcraft III: Reforged] right, I think, is our priority first and foremost," Stilwell told GameSpot in an interview.

 

[Average Manatee]

"I mean, I don't want our stock price to drop another 10%"

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Just have a bunch of races from Azeroth get dumped somewhere outside in the Twisting Nether for some reason.
Like, colonization. We going to colonize this shit, because reasons.

Then have some very smart guys snort some good shit and think up some new, weird races and critters and magic and monsters and shit.

Have the old and the new guys, like, fight each other now.

 

[J1M]

I don't like SC2's mission philosophy. Nearly all of the missions have a sense of urgency baked into them that ruins the strategy element. Additionally, they have triggers and timers designed at a very similar cadence throughout the campaign, which leads to missions having identical pacing.

It is also pathetic that none of the enemy forces in the campaign make use of the new units.

Really, the only good SC2 missions are those that approximate a multiplayer experience or execute a gimmick well. ie. DOTA, tower defense, train heist

I know that people like the feeling of agency customizing their units, but it leads to some unfortunate design consequences that could be the subject of another thread.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

It's going to be great.

 

[RRRrrr]

I really dislike the art direction and the cinematics look like some cheap anime. I cannot help but hate what they are doing to the game. I feel like Starcraft HD was more faithful to the original than this. Also, footmen look abysmal.

Looking at it, it does not feel like Warcraft 3. It feels more like a WoW-inspired fan mod for Starcraft 2. And looks strangely similar to DotA 2. Just horrible.

 

[BING XI LAO]

Not even looking at this, fuck remasters and fuck white people

 

[Terpsichore]

Can't wait for the trash that is dota to kill this just like it killed the original game.

 

[Olinser]

I thought the SC2 campaign had a lot of gimmicks, like it was designed for people who hate RTS gameplay. The train mission is a great example, the one where you command a mecharobot too. In contrast, WC3's were always designed with the usual gameplay in mind first and gimmicks second. The story and aesthetic being extremely shit in SC2 doesn't help. I admit I haven't played LotV because I neither have the desire nor own the expansion, after the butchering of Kerrigan and the lameness that was the Zerg campaign I kinda lost interest.

How would they even do WC4 with the lore being lobotomized by WoW? Alternative timeline?

Alternate timeline is a good idea. Current WoW's lore doesn't support a multi-factional conflict, so it's not clear which the playable races can be. WC3's campaigns worked because they relied on the natural conflict that arose from the different races' goals and motivations. Commanders/heroes taking the helm helped having a personal perspective.

It can still support it you just couldn't have the traditional 'orc' and 'human' races, they've have to be Horde and Alliance.

If they were to make WC4 instead of having 'races', they'd have Horde, Alliance, Undead and maybe Burning Legion or Dragons as the factions. I mean they already do that in WC3, the 'Orcs' are actually the Orcs, Tauren and Trolls, and the 'Humans' are actually the humans, dwarves and gnomes.

 

[thesheeep]

I don't like SC2's mission philosophy. Nearly all of the missions have a sense of urgency baked into them that ruins the strategy element. Additionally, they have triggers and timers designed at a very similar cadence throughout the campaign, which leads to missions having identical pacing.

It is also pathetic that none of the enemy forces in the campaign make use of the new units.

Really, the only good SC2 missions are those that approximate a multiplayer experience or execute a gimmick well. ie. DOTA, tower defense, train heist

I know that people like the feeling of agency customizing their units, but it leads to some unfortunate design consequences that could be the subject of another thread.

That's not totally wrong, but the campaign gameplay (not the story, lol) is still better than that of almost all other RTS games of the last 10 years. At least the missions were different, some RTS missions, some hero missions, some gimmick stuff.
And customization is IMO one of the most important aspects in the singleplayer experience of RTS games, and woefully neglected by most.

Customization in multiplayer is problematic, but in singleplayer it really opens up the gameplay, as it offers at least some kind of player agency and some nonsensical perfect balance considerations simply do not play a role.

 

[Maculo]

I don't like SC2's mission philosophy. Nearly all of the missions have a sense of urgency baked into them that ruins the strategy element. Additionally, they have triggers and timers designed at a very similar cadence throughout the campaign, which leads to missions having identical pacing.

It is also pathetic that none of the enemy forces in the campaign make use of the new units.

Really, the only good SC2 missions are those that approximate a multiplayer experience or execute a gimmick well. ie. DOTA, tower defense, train heist

I know that people like the feeling of agency customizing their units, but it leads to some unfortunate design consequences that could be the subject of another thread.

I see what you mean with respect to pacing. Still, I think that sense of urgency is what allows players to improve and be able to notice. For example, the multiple Terran missions in which you had to venture out of the base to save stranded marines or tanks, which in turn you could use to better defend or complete the level faster. In particular, the mission where you have to fly over a ruined city to collect data before Kerrigan does, or the Char mission where you need to make final push to save Warfield (spelling?). Although a potential counter point is the NE TFT mission Balancing the Scales. You had to race with Malfurion and Tyrande to rescue Maeiv. Once you save Maeiv, you can relax and build a force to take Illidan's base. In contrast, I can see where SC2's missions pushed an urgent objective and never let up.

 

[luj1]

Sick improvement

 

[Nathir]

I actually don't really like the new visuals. The old game was highly stylized, this one is much better as far as polygons go, but it just doesn't have the same style. Like for example Arthas looks very pretty and ''anime'' in a way. The jawlines aren't as big, and everyone seems to be leaner, when they were bulkier before. Orcs also look more humanized. The biggest thing is the lightning though. Everything looks so shiny an polished instead of dark and gritty. But they are not atrocious or anything like that.

Oh well, still kinda excited about this. One of the best games ever tbh.

 

[Farewell into the night]

It's reforged so it means that it wont be the same game. I'm happy about this project, because it will give us new comunity made maps and can spawn (quite OK) Warcraft 1 & 2 remasters and new Warcraft 3 expansions /Warcraft 4 in the future.

 

[Average Manatee]

Yeah, not a huge fan of the graphics update either. Looks like the battlefield will be harder to read, which is something original WC3 absolutely got right. The stuff at 1:30 onwards has too much visual distraction. Like SC2 but worse IMO, because there's more detail and WC3 is more about individual unit micro and colorful spells everywhere compared to SC2 (which, while detailed, is still pretty easy to read at a glance).

It's reforged so it means that it wont be the same game. I'm happy about this project, because it will give us new comunity made maps and can spawn (quite OK) Warcraft 1 & 2 remasters and new Warcraft 3 expansions /Warcraft 4 in the future.

Well, it has to be the same game if you can play MP between WC3 and WC3:R

 

[Lacrymas]

The grunt model's skin is shiny like he's drenched in oil, come on...

 

[Olinser]

The grunt model's skin is shiny like he's drenched in oil, come on...

 

[Beastro]

At release W3 was one of the best looking games and it was party why it was so popular.

An issue was the weird art direction and how it was imitated by WoW.

It may have looked good for its time, but it had weird fucking shit in it, like the mouths of many heads as they spoke. Some looked like their jaw was trying to break free of their skull and run away on its own.

 

[Malamert]

Read this and despair.
https://www.gameinformer.com/index....s-updating-warcraft-iiis-fiction-for-reforged

 

[Farewell into the night]

Well, it has to be the same game if you can play MP between WC3 and WC3:R

I meant game as a whole, not just as a multiplayer. That would make no sense to me.

 

[Average Manatee]

Well, it has to be the same game if you can play MP between WC3 and WC3:R

I meant game as a whole, not just as a multiplayer. That would make no sense to me.

Well, everything in the game has to play exactly the same and all maps have to be 100% compatible. Theoretically (and probably) you can copy paste the "new" campaign maps from WC3:R back to WC3, since they all have to be created with the same WC3 editor.

 

[Lacrymas]

I think Arthas is more interesting because his fatal flaw was that he felt like he needed to do everything in his power to protect his people. I wondered what made him like that.

Classic case of not understanding anything about a character or why they do whatever it is they do.

 

[Lacrymas]

Like an exceptionally bad pick for Paladin, I remember thinking that back when it first came back. "You are past redemption!" Is the least Paladin thing you could say.

Exactly. He was extremely prejudiced from the moment he was introduced and he kept getting worse. The desire to protect his people was a front for his anger and his being absolutely sure he was always right. He did the things he did because he wanted to. This was exacerbated by actually being a powerful paladin and a good tactician, his victories gave him the certainty in himself. It was shocking how his character didn't change much when he turned into a death knight, he now had an excuse to not care at all anymore about his past life. He says he feels no pity or remorse for damning everyone he has ever cared for, but that was true before this, he just didn't admit it to himself.