Warcraft 3 reforged is a complete disaster

[ARikozuM]

8 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

the fact that people who bought the original game can't keep playing that version is all too much.

This alone might be a good case to bring for first-sale doctrine. You bought the original game which worked perfectly well, but then Blizzard changed it out [without recourse or declination].

[Delicieuxz]

3 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

This alone might be a good case to bring for first-sale doctrine. You bought the original game which worked perfectly well, but then Blizzard changed it out [without recourse or declination].

It's yet another example of why game ownership must be protected fiercely and every malicious trick publishers pull to obstruct ownership rights over our games must be extinguished in courts.

[RejZoR]

13 hours ago, Jack_of_all_Trades said:

No , but people have been digging out more and more shit, its actually quite marvelous. Like some guy found that attack animations have been reduced from wc3, as in they have removed content, somehow shadows don't work if you don't have reforged too and etc etc.

 

But by far , this is the best : 

 

 

Blizzard's response: "We're sorry". Remember the crybaby apology after the banning fiasco? Blizzard is full of shit and one of most stinking companies in existence. Blizzard used to be a synonym for quality 15-20 years ago. Now it's just a stinking greedy corporation that's "sorry" constantly.

[Dabombinable]

20 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Blizzard's response: "We're sorry". Remember the crybaby apology after the banning fiasco? Blizzard is full of shit and one of most stinking companies in existence. Blizzard used to be a synonym for quality 15-20 years ago. Now it's just a stinking greedy corporation that's "sorry" constantly.

The writing was on the wall as soon as Blizzard partnered with Activision.

[revdv]

3 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Blizzard's response: "We're sorry". Remember the crybaby apology after the banning fiasco? Blizzard is full of shit and one of most stinking companies in existence. Blizzard used to be a synonym for quality 15-20 years ago. Now it's just a stinking greedy corporation that's "sorry" constantly.

Maybe its right for nowadays, but still releasing games better than much more others.

[RejZoR]

33 minutes ago, revdv said:

Maybe its right for nowadays, but still releasing games better than much more others.

Better than who? Bethesda? Blizzard, apart from Overwatch few years ago hasn't released anything. It's all rehashed old stuff and judging by this one, they are garbage even at this. And even Overwatch was sort of designed by pre-Activision people. Blizzard is an absolute dumpsterfire these days. Only things that they are good at are fuckups, laziness and greed.

[corsairian]

I hope they dont do this for diablo 2. It's rare for a remaster/remake to be better than the original.

 

Didnt luke say on wan show that they broke Bnet for Vaniilla Warcraft 3? 

 

 

[Unixsystem]

6 hours ago, RejZoR said:

used to be a synonym for quality 15-20 years ago. 

Blizzard, Bioware, Bethesda. The Three Bs of quality™. 

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, corsairian said:

I hope they dont do this for diablo 2. It's rare for a remaster/remake to be better than the original.

 

Didnt luke say on wan show that they broke Bnet for Vaniilla Warcraft 3? 

 

 

Black Mesa is. The Half-Life remaster by Crowbar Collective. Black Mesa is a proper remaster and probably one of rare in existence that tops the original hands down. The level of details these guys put into literally everything is insane. There basically isn't a single thing left from the original game. And they didn't just redecorate existing level design, they literally built everything from scratch, taking original game's levels as inspiration, not as foundation. This is how remasters should be done. Just playing it again from beginning because they finished Xen now and the feel of old and familiar is just oozing from all directions, but at the same time everything feels fresh and new to a point it feels like a new game. And that's how ALL remasters should feel. And it's really sad that greedy multimillion corporations can't do it properly, but a group of fans in a garage can. I don't even blame them it took so long and changing from freeware to paid and time waiting for Xen levels. They took their time and delivered a sublime experience, exactly as they promised. Unlike Blizzard which pissed and shit all over their game. I've played Warcraft 3 years ago and I have fond memories of it. Would love to re-experience it after so many years as a proper remaster. I guess I can only laugh at them and continue playing Black Mesa instead...

 

I know Valve released Half-Life:Source, but they didn't overpromise things. It's just a quick port to Source Engine. Blizzard did promise bunch of things and delivered basically none of them.

[Delicieuxz]

7 hours ago, Dabombinable said:

The writing was on the wall as soon as Blizzard partnered with Activision.

But if Blizzard hadn't formed a company with ActiVision, would Diablo 3 (a game that started development years before the merger) have come out any differently?

 

The creators of Diablo and founders of Condor (AKA Blizzard North - which was quite different studio than Blizzard) have said that they were constantly fighting with Blizzard over the direction of Diablo 2, with Blizzard not approving of its dark and grim style:

 

"Brevik and the Schaefer brothers all stated that even during the development of Diablo 2, there was a constant battle over its gory, satanic aesthetic between Blizzard North and Blizzard Entertainment, the main branch of the company that was originally founded by Mike Morhaime, Allen Adham, and Frank Pearce. But as Blizzard continued to grow after the success of Diablo, Warcraft, and StarCraft, it became harder for the trio to focus on creative design and avoid corporate bureaucracy."

 

It sounds like Blizzard wanted Diablo 2 to be more like Diablo 3. So, Diablo 2, one of "Blizzard's" all-time most popular and renowned games, and the Diablo IP itself, was not a case of Blizzard's touch, but on the contrary: Diablo 2 was great in-spite of Blizzard, and not because of Blizzard.

 

Diablo 3's visual style resembles WoW, and Chris Metzen had full control over Diablo 3's writing - and like all of Metzen's writing, Diablo 3's was utterly shit, vapid, and pretentious. And while fully being under the direction of Chris Metzen's Blizzard, Diablo 3 turned out an abomination of a game (and not in a way that plays to the game's lore), proving again that Diablo 2 was great in-spite of Blizzard and not because of Blizzard. I think that Diablo 3 is an example of what Chris Metzen's Blizzard is when left to its own devices.

 

 

What did Blizzard make that was great?

 

Warcraft and Warcraft 2, Starcraft, and a lot of people regard Warcraft 3 as great (but not me, personally - the writing ruins it). And then there's WoW, which isn't my thing so I won't make a judgment on it. And some smaller games like Blackthorne and The Lost Vikings are pretty good.

 

Blizzard's mainstream reputation basically comes from one main formula and IP (Warcraft) that bloomed early-on (before Metzen had any control over it), and which was translated into a sci-fi setting for Starcraft, and later its lore was used to create WoW (which many of its fans say turned to shit over time, hence WoW Classic).

 

Metzen became a force in Blizzard while it had lots of upward momentum, and then he rode Blizzard over its perceived apex and took the company into its long descent.

 

I think that the writing was on the wall already in Warcraft 3, with its cheesy and vapid dialog and Metzen being so broke on ideas that he made the horde basically just Native Americans, and not a savage vicious race that was actually a threat (they were tricked into acting that way!). Metzen killed the intensity and integrity of the lore and turned it into mush.

 

So, while ActiVision has more recently taken Blizzard's deterioration into a new phase, I think that Diablo 3, and Diablo 2's development struggles show that Blizzard themselves were not the quality studio that people believed they were. I think that Blizzard's decay started as a product of Chris Metzen's growing influence in the company, even if it took a while for that decay to become apparent across all extents of the company.

[dalekphalm]

6 hours ago, Dabombinable said:

The writing was on the wall as soon as Blizzard partnered with Activision.

I don't think so. The merger took place in 2008.

 

Starcraft 2 was released in 2010. I don't think anyone could claim that SC2 (Wings of Liberty) was a bad game. In fact, it was fucking great - a really excellent continuation of the original SC and BW storyline.

 

And then in 2013, we got Heart of the Swarm, and then in 2015, Legacy of the Void - each of these were also excellent, and concluded the overall story in a compelling and satisfying manner.

 

So yeah, since Activision, they've made some better and some worse games. Maybe they've gone down the toilet lately - I don't know. I don't play Overwatch and I've never really given much of a shit about Warcraft, so I don't know if their newer games are any good.

16 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Black Mesa is. The Half-Life remaster by Crowbar Collective. Black Mesa is a proper remaster and probably one of rare in existence that tops the original hands down. The level of details these guys put into literally everything is insane. There basically isn't a single thing left from the original game. And they didn't just redecorate existing level design, they literally built everything from scratch, taking original game's levels as inspiration, not as foundation. This is how remasters should be done. Just playing it again from beginning because they finished Xen now and the feel of old and familiar is just oozing from all directions, but at the same time everything feels fresh and new to a point it feels like a new game. And that's how ALL remasters should feel. And it's really sad that greedy multimillion corporations can't do it properly, but a group of fans in a garage can. I don't even blame them it took so long and changing from freeware to paid and time waiting for Xen levels. They took their time and delivered a sublime experience, exactly as they promised. Unlike Blizzard which pissed and shit all over their game. I've played Warcraft 3 years ago and I have fond memories of it. Would love to re-experience it after so many years as a proper remaster. I guess I can only laugh at them and continue playing Black Mesa instead...

Black Mesa is kickass. The soundtrack alone blows you away.

 

How were the Xen levels? The devs were clear from day one that they always thought that the original Xen levels were garbage (I don't disagree), and that they wanted to substantially change them for the better.

 

Do you think they succeeded? How different is BM Xen from original Xen?

16 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I know Valve released Half-Life:Source, but they didn't overpromise things. It's just a quick port to Source Engine. Blizzard did promise bunch of things and delivered basically none of them.

HL:Source was literally just an engine port - they didn't change any assets at all, so realistically the only visual improvement is stuff like particle effects and water, which are baked into the engine and don't need to be redone.

 

And that was okay, since that's what they said they would do.

 

It was unfortunate that they never followed HL:Source up with a proper full HD Remaster though - but as you say, we eventually got that with Black Mesa, so in the end it worked out for the best.

[Sauron]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Starcraft 2 was released in 2010. I don't think anyone could claim that SC2 (Wings of Liberty) was a bad game. In fact, it was fucking great - a really excellent continuation of the original SC and BW storyline.

 

And then in 2013, we got Heart of the Swarm, and then in 2015, Legacy of the Void - each of these were also excellent, and concluded the overall story in a compelling and satisfying manner.

SC2 had been in development for a long time before the merge happened. It was also a different time with different standards for what the publishers (and the public) considered acceptable. I think the original release of Diablo 3 was a lot more reflective of what AB has since become - a game crippled for the sake of egregious monetization. It's always two steps forward (if you can call this "forward") and one step back when people finally had enough, rinse and repeat.

 

I don't know if Activision is the (only) problem though - even before SC2 Blizz had been cheerfully collecting insane and unwarranted amounts of cash from WoW players through box price, subscription fees and expansions. SC2 seems to have been the exception to what had already become the rule. Warcraft 3 (the original release) may have marked the end of the time when Blizzard was worthy of being considered a "good" publisher. They've been almost exclusively riding on nostalgia and good will from their customers since then.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

SC2 had been in development for a long time before the merge happened. It was also a different time with different standards for what the publishers (and the public) considered acceptable. I think the original release of Diablo 3 was a lot more reflective of what AB has since become - a game crippled for the sake of egregious monetization. It's always two steps forward (if you can call this "forward") and one step back when people finally had enough, rinse and repeat.

 

I don't know if Activision is the (only) problem though - even before SC2 Blizz had been cheerfully collecting insane and unwarranted amounts of cash from WoW players through box price, subscription fees and expansions. SC2 seems to have been the exception to what had already become the rule. Warcraft 3 (the original release) may have marked the end of the time when Blizzard was worthy of being considered a "good" publisher. They've been almost exclusively riding on nostalgia and good will from their customers since then.

What you've said may well be the case.

 

Now, if they put out a new Starcraft game... they would part with my money very easily.

[Sauron]

Just now, dalekphalm said:

Now, if they put out a new Starcraft game... they would part with my money very easily.

Unfortunately that's very unlikely, at least in the near future - and I'm afraid that if they actually did it it would end up as an indecent cash grab.

[RejZoR]

@dalekphalm

Unfortunately I'm not yet at the Xen segment. I've just completed the Dam part.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

Unfortunately that's very unlikely, at least in the near future - and I'm afraid that if they actually did it it would end up as an indecent cash grab.

Perhaps. I'd even be okay with new campaigns (Nova style, and larger full stories like WoL, etc) within the existing SC2 client.

 

Though a new SC3 using more advanced graphics, etc, would still be cool.

Just now, RejZoR said:

@dalekphalm

Unfortunately I'm not yet at the Xen segment. I've just completed the Dam part.

If you remember to, please post about it after you get there. I own BM, so I might just have to reinstall it and do a new playthrough.

[Giganthrax]

The entire hate storm surrounding Reforged is shocking to me. 

 

The game is literally the same type of remaster as StarCraft: Remastered, ie. new graphics and game updated for newer systems, and that's it. It's precisely what was advertised from the start.

 

And then the game comes out and there's suddenly this incredible shitstorm over things that are either completely irrelevant (battle.net news, animated portraits in battle.net, lol) or blatantly false (no new cutscenes when there are numerous new and improved cutscenes, no animated campaign backgrounds even though these backgrounds are in the game, etc.). People even complain about the lack of RoC balance, even though that was a 17 year old game that nobody played. 

 

Even legit complaints such as no ladder and no tournaments at launch is something that has always been in Blizzard RTS, including in StarCraft 2, original WarCraft 3, etc. These ladders/tournaments were always added later.

 

I hate conspiracy theories as much as the next guy, but I can't help but wonder if the out-of-whack hatred Reforged is getting isn't maybe motivated by the whole China thing rather than any fault with the game itself. 

[Lurick]

1 minute ago, Giganthrax said:

-snip-

Please explain how unfinished and missing assets and bugs galore are "as advertised"

[Giganthrax]

Just now, Lurick said:

Please explain how unfinished and missing assets and bugs galore are "as advertised"

What unfinished and missing assets? What bugs? 

 

I've been playing the game for days now, am halfway through the campaign, and also played multiplayer. The only bugs I encountered was that in the 1st kelthuzad mission in the human campaign there was an area on the map where fps dropped to 30 for some reason, and that the knight portrait doesn't have facial animations.

 

All of my friends who are playing the game are also not encountering any problems worth mentioning. 

 

All I see online is people complaining endlessly about stuff that doesn't pollute the gameplay at all (animated bnet portraits, not every cinematic being fully remastered etc.). 

[Giganthrax]

On 1/29/2020 at 11:42 PM, Tech Enthusiast said:

Meanwhile, I am having a blast and zero issues with the game.

Did not check out the MP part, but honestly never got interested in that anyways. (Hell, I don't even remember it having MP originally,...)

 

Did not run into any graphical bugs, performance issues, crashes or letdowns. It is just basically the old game with slightly shinier pictures, sounds and videos.

Got all I expected to get tbh.

 

Not quite sure what people expected it to be. A new game? They would have called it Warcraft IV then.

Exactly. I even heard some reviewers complaining that the game didn't change mechanics such as how many units can be selected at one time, etc., even though doing that was never in the works. 

 

I'm guessing a lot of the backlash comes from people who were expecting WarCraft 4, or who were simply disappointed that a remaster of an old game can't give them the same feeling they had when they first played the said game when it came out. 

[alex75871]

3 hours ago, Giganthrax said:

What unfinished and missing assets? What bugs? 

 

I've been playing the game for days now, am halfway through the campaign, and also played multiplayer. The only bugs I encountered was that in the 1st kelthuzad mission in the human campaign there was an area on the map where fps dropped to 30 for some reason, and that the knight portrait doesn't have facial animations.

 

All of my friends who are playing the game are also not encountering any problems worth mentioning. 

 

All I see online is people complaining endlessly about stuff that doesn't pollute the gameplay at all (animated bnet portraits, not every cinematic being fully remastered etc.). 

The game is working well for some and not so well for others. I have an i7 8700k OC 5 GHz paired with a NVIDIA 1080 and I frequently get FPS drops. I have to restart my game after every campaign mission otherwise I get auto-defeated once the map loads. There are many more issues I have experienced but they are relatively minor in comparison to these two. Other users with different hardware are experiencing much worse. The game is unplayable for some despite their rigs meeting or exceeding the recommended hardware specifications. I will NOT be requesting a refund because I am enjoying the game and I am confident Blizzard will fix the game with upcoming patches.

[dalekphalm]

36 minutes ago, alex75871 said:

The game is working well for some and not so well for others. I have an i7 8700k OC 5 GHz paired with a NVIDIA 1080 and I frequently get FPS drops. I have to restart my game after every campaign mission otherwise I get auto-defeated once the map loads. There are many more issues I have experienced but they are relatively minor in comparison to these two. Other users with different hardware are experiencing much worse. The game is unplayable for some despite their rigs meeting or exceeding the recommended hardware specifications. I will NOT be requesting a refund because I am enjoying the game and I am confident Blizzard will fix the game with upcoming patches.

Have you reported the bugs you're experiencing? The FPS drops, and in particular, the "auto defeat" issue?

[alex75871]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

Have you reported the bugs you're experiencing? The FPS drops, and in particular, the "auto defeat" issue?

Yes and many others have also reported the same issue.

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, alex75871 said:

Yes and many others have also reported the same issue.

Good - I find it incredibly annoying when people complain about bugs but don't bother to inform the devs about said bugs.

 

If they've been reported, I would trust that fixes are on the way. They released a zero day patch on the 28th along with the release of the game. They'll almost certainly release a new patch within a few days or a week.

 

To anyone else who has encountered bugs: Ensure you've reported them! Devs can't fix what they don't know is broken.

[Giganthrax]

1 hour ago, alex75871 said:

The game is working well for some and not so well for others. I have an i7 8700k OC 5 GHz paired with a NVIDIA 1080 and I frequently get FPS drops. I have to restart my game after every campaign mission otherwise I get auto-defeated once the map loads. There are many more issues I have experienced but they are relatively minor in comparison to these two. Other users with different hardware are experiencing much worse. The game is unplayable for some despite their rigs meeting or exceeding the recommended hardware specifications. I will NOT be requesting a refund because I am enjoying the game and I am confident Blizzard will fix the game with upcoming patches.

That's truly unfortunate, but I'm sure it'll be fixed in upcoming patches.

 

However, even with bugs like this, it's still ludicrous that the game is getting this amount of hate, or a 0.5/10 user metascore. RDR2 was basically unplayable as well on PC launch, and it didn't get anywhere this amount of hate.