Was really looking forward to this game until I heard they contracted out the work to another studio which sent up red flags for me. For those that like the game that is great. The game however does not remotely look as good as the trailers of a year ago or more. I think jim sums up my thoughts on this. Ive also read that they broke the original WC3 so you can only play the new reforged version online, hope that isnt true.
Yeah, I heard a LOT of fans were upset with the outcome, but as someone who only has a passing interest in Warcraft-related stuff, it doesn't look all bad to me. That being said... it is still $30. I don't see myself picking this up unless we are all super on-fire to play this. And honestly, there are better RTS games out there that we already play or are already waiting for release (Iron Harvest). I feel bad for the Blizzard fans out there; their favorite company has been taken over by corporate interests and many don't even realize it. All the core founders have already left to retire or work on new projects: https://www.pcgamer.com/blizzard-has-completely-changed-say-diablos-original-creators/
Whoa whoa whoa now, let's not get too crazy here. I mean, I've seen some great RTS since WC3 but I can't say I've seen any that actually surpassed it. I'm excited as any to get my hands on Iron Harvest but I'm not expecting it to break that threshold either, I'll be quite pleasantly surprised if it does. That said, Blizzard seems to be going on a trend of attempting to break everything that was from the original company so that they can turn around and repackage it to sell later. They may just be stupid and broke WC3 original because they didn't think people would want it after upgrading (I mean, how dumb can you be, right?) but if they turn around and try to sell a legacy version they gonna cut their own throats.
Don't get me wrong. WC3 was an amazing game for its time and certainly a modern classic. The franchise is highly popular and successful; there is no denying that. But there are better RTS games that objectively incorporate more "strategy & tactics" than Warcraft. I have played a shit ton of RTS' competitively; I know what I'm talking about. Sure, Starcraft (which plays extremely similarly, btw) has a huge e-sports scene, and I won't tell people they are wrong for enjoying it (or Warcraft for that matter). However, from a "tactical complexity" perspective, Warcraft is pretty boring compared to some alternatives out there. To be fair, C&C is another super popular RTS game from yesteryear that has been surpassed by better RTS games out there in terms of tactical complexity. That's what I meant by "better". Regarding Iron Harvest, I realize the game is not out yet and so we cannot say definitively if it will be good, but something to keep in mind: Key word in that is "action"; referring to a common term in competitive Starcraft circles: Actions/Minute (APM). Case in point, a lot of the skill in these RTS games like C&C and the "-Crafts" comes from hand-eye coordination, build order memory, and micromanagement ability; with APM being a much bigger advantage than an actual firm grasp in tactics & strategy. If you want to debate about this more, let's not do it here though.
No I wasn't trying to debate anything, simply being myself ^.^ All's I'm saying is that there hasn't really been any that topped the bar set by WC3, sure they may be better in some places or others, and certainly -newer- has some relevance, but none of them have really raised the playing field. SC is little more than a sci-fi clone of WC honestly, it's got some differences inherent to the setting, but the framework and design are ultimately similar. I like SC, and C&C, and some other noteworthy RTS. I've never been much of a fan of 'fast paced RTS' and actually dislike playing against other players because of that tendency. But that's neither here nor there, no game will ever survive unmolested it's encounter with professional players
What "bar" are you talking about? I was pretty specific about what I was talking about. This is not something that is legitimately debatable. Yes, there are millions of fans, but they are objectively wrong if they want to argue Warcraft is a tactically complex game. Again, this does not make them bad games, but it's not what makes them "great RTS'". I will concede that Warcraft is a great RTS, but not for "being an RTS". There are many other factors at play.
I like the original game and i like the reforged edition. I have not followed the development at all. I was excited about the announcement of it and then i forgot about it until it was like 12 hours remaining for its release. My expectations was nothing more then upgraded graphics and i got that, so i'm happy. Tactical complexity is an interesting topic but also quite subjective. Even when WC3 was originally released, there were more tacticaly complex games available but people just thought that WC3 brought the right amount of tactical complexity. We should also remember that the RTS genre is fairly wide. Just compare WC3 with something like Steel Division. WC3 have defined it's type of RTS and nothing better have been made within that type.
All opinions are subjective, but some are more subjective than others. I've probably logged over 2,000 hours in RTS competitive games. I know the difference; I think I already alluded to that. This is a subject I'm very confident on, but to each his own. There's very good reasons why I quit playing C&C and Star/Warcraft long ago in favor of CoH and DoW (that doesn't mean I'm opposed to returning to them, though). I'm a bit confused as to why you guys have such strong opinions about the topic and yet I can't remember the last time you joined us for a strategy night. You are always welcome to join us.
Magnus, I'm not attempting to debate anything, and I'm not talking about the tactical nature of the game. By it's very nature RTS is a tactical game, it goes without mention, and some are better and others are worse at being tactically complex. Warcraft is not very tactically complex, by intent from what I can tell, it's intended to be relatively simple and intuitive allowing a broad range of people the opportunity to play with at least some modicum of success. The bar I'm referring to, is the very core of the RTS. Currently, regardless of detail and complexity, most RTS follow the same basic formula. In order to raise that bar, a game would have to engineer something unique that would significantly change the nature of that formula. Now I'm not saying none of the RTS available have unique characteristics, or that it isn't possible that some might have managed what I'm describing, I've hardly played them all. I just haven't heard about any that would qualify in that regard. Really the last one I remember having any kind of characteristic that might qualify in that regard was MC2, because it deviated from the standard 'gather, build, expand' mechanic. It also kinda died there, so... yeah. Also, just so we're clear, I didn't make the initial comment to spark some kind of debate as to whether or why WC3 is a great RTS, it was simply intended as the expected fanboy snark reply. I think maybe that may have gotten misconstrued at some point XD All's I mean, is WC3 set the bar for RTS and far as I've seen thus far, while there's ostensibly better and more streamlined RTS out there, noone's gone and raised that bar. That's what I mean. Simple answer. I work Thursdays. More complex answer, I simply haven't had hardly any time for more than simple gameplay lately. Aside from work I have other things I either need to do, or want to, that don't allow for a lot of 'idle' free time. One of the many reasons I've taken up mobile gaming, because I can take the damn thing with me. Maybe they'll improve cloud gaming to the point where it's usable on a mobile device, but currently, that's where I'm at. You're welcome to join me in Epic 7 if you like XD.
The history, influence, and popularity of the Warcraft is beyond dispute. I completely agree. I played the crap out of every Warcraft game (yes, even the first one and all the StarCrafts). And my initial post was not meant as a slight against Warcraft... and everyone is entitled to their opinion... but I stand by what I said. And my responses after explained why. I think I've said everything that need be said.
Hell I started playing Warcraft with the freeware disk version. I still remember getting to the 'final' mission and being like 'doo dee doo wtf I only just got three farms up and they're already swarming mah town!??!??'
