On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
The major difference is that Valve didn't ship a version of DotA that replaced a previously functional game with one that has less features and performs worse (and also didn't try to charge money for that "upgrade"). They had the good sense and humility to realize that they weren't going to have everything perfect right out the door, but they didn't need to take away people's existing games in order to convince people to switch. Icefrog continued to update the original DotA map for a *very long* time (often first, before those changes made their way to DotA2) after Valve's version shipped. That's why people had good will and patience towards Valve: they earned it by showing the community respect and doing what was best for their users.
You seem to be upset that people are reviewing this release for what it is: a forced replacement of a game that *was* previously functional. It's not a brand new game, why should anyone be reviewing it as if it is?
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
Yeah I'll apologise for the drone thing, you just seemed pretty unsympathetic in your initial post so I immediately reacted to that.
It's *because* it's one of the greatest games ever made that this version deserves all the flak it gets. Warcraft III released feature-complete and BNet 1.0's UI was years ahead of its time. Unlike Valve that needed to rebuild their newly acquired IP from scratch, Blizzard has had the original WC3 at their fingertips the entire time. They even committed the same mistake SC2 had by implementing the same chat UI and also decided that removing 3D user portraits was a good idea. Couple that with the amount of bugs this last page has alone, and considering WC3R to be a clear-cut upgrade is a bit insulting to WC3's legacy I feel.
I get it, judging a game objectively is the right thing to do and it's tragic that WC3's name has been forever tainted by this debacle - it has my second highest playtime after WoW - but Blizzard has been making questionable decisions throughout their titles over the last decade. SC2's features, D3 at launch, disgruntled WoW players after every expansion - if not now, then when? It's about as revolting as how Blizzard is perceived to view their customers and even employees. They could've avoided all this with more transparency or simply not released the game in such a obvious sorry state as well. Despite that, they chose to anyway. That's on them; you could say Blizzard didn't care about their game either.
We'll see if the custom games hold any longevity with the new ToS, but I'm definitely concerned. Half the custom maps hosted back then were like "DBZ Naruto anime arena" type stuff, would they police it to the extent of say, YouTube? You'd be wagering 30 dollars on that. Doesn't sound very enticing. The rest of that list are old favourites ported from WC3, not sure how long interest on those will last.
Edit: The post above mine articulates the DotA thing a lot better than I ever could. Nailed it really.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
The major difference is that Valve didn't ship a version of DotA that replaced a previously functional game with one that has less features and performs worse (and also didn't try to charge money for that "upgrade"). They had the good sense and humility to realize that they weren't going to have everything perfect right out the door, but they didn't need to take away people's existing games in order to convince people to switch. Icefrog continued to update the original DotA map for a *very long* time (often first, before those changes made their way to DotA2) after Valve's version shipped. That's why people had good will and patience towards Valve: they earned it by showing the community respect and doing what was best for their users.
You seem to be upset that people are reviewing this release for what it is: a forced replacement of a game that *was* previously functional. It's not a brand new game, why should anyone be reviewing it as if it is?
Reforged is a "forced replacement" of a game that had significant problems. Queues for games larger than 1v1 were incredibly spotty, to the point that you needed to download a third party population heat map and target different queues on different servers (itself a relic that needed to go) at different times to simply find a game. If you couldn't get to your computer when the queues were popping you were shit out of luck. If you did manage to make a game you were at decent odds to be paired with some asshole who teamkilled you as he didn't care about the stats on his 100th smurf and wasn't afraid of the wet noodle support team. Hacking was a similar issue for a similar reason. AT didn't work. Game history hadn't worked for several years. The automated tournaments people are up in arms about losing were hacked and abused to the point that there were accounts with hundreds of wins with no losses. There were components of the game that were fine (1v1, most customs) but let's not pretend it didn't have significant issues. The incredible work of B2W and the strength of Netease papered over the cracks, this game had done amazingly well for a 17 y/o warhorse but it was on the decline and a shot in the arm was necessary.
And to be clear, I'm very much sympathetic to the problems here. The product could and should have been better. Backwards compatibility of replays and an actual hotkey UI were my big items that didn't make it. I still can't tell the difference between a ghoul and a skeleton, the grass on the summer tileset is too bright and I'd like feedback on whether I'm a bronze noob or a silver scrub. But this idea that reforged is broken and/or garbage is one I fundamentally disagree with. The future of WC3 is brighter than it's been in a decade.
Hold the fuck up. The TFT issue all came after they resumed patching it starting with 1.27. The 1.26 patch was working without issues. Hackers or team killers are not due to a bug with the game but lack from Blizzard which was solved by competitive custom games that were managed by bots.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Apologists like you are why things never get fixed and shit products keep getting made
Honestly the reviews about "Great campaign, shitty multiplayer, so 6/10" are bs. The campaign was already there. They didn't make it again. You're a shitty reviewer if you just refuse to give a game under a 6 or 7 purely on the fact that they literally re-released something that was in a previous game, but charged again for.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Apologists like you are why things never get fixed and shit products keep getting made
Yeah. We definitely need more throwing toys out of the cot at this point.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
The major difference is that Valve didn't ship a version of DotA that replaced a previously functional game with one that has less features and performs worse (and also didn't try to charge money for that "upgrade"). They had the good sense and humility to realize that they weren't going to have everything perfect right out the door, but they didn't need to take away people's existing games in order to convince people to switch. Icefrog continued to update the original DotA map for a *very long* time (often first, before those changes made their way to DotA2) after Valve's version shipped. That's why people had good will and patience towards Valve: they earned it by showing the community respect and doing what was best for their users.
You seem to be upset that people are reviewing this release for what it is: a forced replacement of a game that *was* previously functional. It's not a brand new game, why should anyone be reviewing it as if it is?
Reforged is a "forced replacement" of a game that had significant problems. Queues for games larger than 1v1 were incredibly spotty, to the point that you needed to download a third party population heat map and target different queues on different servers (itself a relic that needed to go) at different times to simply find a game. If you couldn't get to your computer when the queues were popping you were shit out of luck. If you did manage to make a game you were at decent odds to be paired with some asshole who teamkilled you as he didn't care about the stats on his 100th smurf and wasn't afraid of the wet noodle support team. Hacking was a similar issue for a similar reason. AT didn't work. Game history hadn't worked for several years. The automated tournaments people are up in arms about losing were hacked and abused to the point that there were accounts with hundreds of wins with no losses. There were components of the game that were fine (1v1, most customs) but let's not pretend it didn't have significant issues. The incredible work of B2W and the strength of Netease papered over the cracks, this game had done amazingly well for a 17 y/o warhorse but it was on the decline and a shot in the arm was necessary.
And to be clear, I'm very much sympathetic to the problems here. The product could and should have been better. Backwards compatibility of replays and an actual hotkey UI were my big items that didn't make it. I still can't tell the difference between a ghoul and a skeleton, the grass on the summer tileset is too bright and I'd like feedback on whether I'm a bronze noob or a silver scrub. But this idea that reforged is broken and/or garbage is one I fundamentally disagree with. The future of WC3 is brighter than it's been in a decade.
I respect your opinion and that you voice it in the face of everyone who disagrees with you but alas I also disagree.
Lets put it like this, if a bike store circulated flyers and made commercial about an upcoming bike they will sell that has alll the latest snazz. 21 gears, manual break, specially made tires. You pay top dollar for this bike just to find out it has only 1 gear, only backpedal brake (even though he says he will give you manually breaks at alater date if he finds some in his workshop) the wheels are not pumped and a pedal is missing...
Well surely you would argue, this bike is not the worst bike you've seen and I mean it functions, it has both wheels...... Its surely not a 0/10 bike right? Well considering the company sold it as a feature complete bike and with functions that are not there AND for a very high price maybe 0/10 would be deserved. Maybe this company sohuld even be blacklisted and publicly shamed.
In light of my example I mean to illustrate that even though you are saying WC3:R is not "that bad" in light of its prizing, what Blizzard themselves marketed it as and the complanies lies about the product. All these things add to the score.
When you argue WC3:R is an upgrade because it has a population and you can play matchmaking in it that only means it has an increased population of players right now. Having a lot of players is not a game feature, it isn't somehthing Blizzard made to sell to you. When that is something you grasp for when trying to say why the game is worth the money you really look desperate. That TFT had issues doesn't make WC3:R any better of a product, even iof TFT had a lot of bugs and problems reforged would still be shit considering the price, the marketing and the current lack of features.
I get you are defending the actual game of warcraft 3 but that was already there before they made reforged, whatg did reforged really add to make it worth 40 dollars, and no a playerbase is not a valid answer.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Apologists like you are why things never get fixed and shit products keep getting made
Yeah. We definitely need more throwing toys out of the cot at this point.
I mean, would you rather see MORE Star Wars EA Battlefront bullshit? Because if people stay quiet and positive about the horseshit that trickles out of the prolapsed anuses of triple A (queue Jim Sterling pronunction) publishers, its the type of shit we're going to see.
Blizzard used to be held to a VERY high standard, and they proved capable of meeting very high standards, it seems absurd to me to think that we should just let them slink into the greasy depths of mediocrity just 'cause.
Games are lucrative, they WILL get made. The question is whether people are going to let publishers make Battlefront II, or if we'll force them to give half a rats ass and at least have them pump out some Jedi: Fallen Order.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
The major difference is that Valve didn't ship a version of DotA that replaced a previously functional game with one that has less features and performs worse (and also didn't try to charge money for that "upgrade"). They had the good sense and humility to realize that they weren't going to have everything perfect right out the door, but they didn't need to take away people's existing games in order to convince people to switch. Icefrog continued to update the original DotA map for a *very long* time (often first, before those changes made their way to DotA2) after Valve's version shipped. That's why people had good will and patience towards Valve: they earned it by showing the community respect and doing what was best for their users.
You seem to be upset that people are reviewing this release for what it is: a forced replacement of a game that *was* previously functional. It's not a brand new game, why should anyone be reviewing it as if it is?
Reforged is a "forced replacement" of a game that had significant problems. Queues for games larger than 1v1 were incredibly spotty, to the point that you needed to download a third party population heat map and target different queues on different servers (itself a relic that needed to go) at different times to simply find a game. If you couldn't get to your computer when the queues were popping you were shit out of luck. If you did manage to make a game you were at decent odds to be paired with some asshole who teamkilled you as he didn't care about the stats on his 100th smurf and wasn't afraid of the wet noodle support team. Hacking was a similar issue for a similar reason. AT didn't work. Game history hadn't worked for several years. The automated tournaments people are up in arms about losing were hacked and abused to the point that there were accounts with hundreds of wins with no losses. There were components of the game that were fine (1v1, most customs) but let's not pretend it didn't have significant issues. The incredible work of B2W and the strength of Netease papered over the cracks, this game had done amazingly well for a 17 y/o warhorse but it was on the decline and a shot in the arm was necessary.
And to be clear, I'm very much sympathetic to the problems here. The product could and should have been better. Backwards compatibility of replays and an actual hotkey UI were my big items that didn't make it. I still can't tell the difference between a ghoul and a skeleton, the grass on the summer tileset is too bright and I'd like feedback on whether I'm a bronze noob or a silver scrub. But this idea that reforged is broken and/or garbage is one I fundamentally disagree with. The future of WC3 is brighter than it's been in a decade.
I respect your opinion and that you voice it in the face of everyone who disagrees with you but alas I also disagree.
Lets put it like this, if a bike store circulated flyers and made commercial about an upcoming bike they will sell that has alll the latest snazz. 21 gears, manual break, specially made tires. You pay top dollar for this bike just to find out it has only 1 gear, only backpedal brake (even though he says he will give you manually breaks at alater date if he finds some in his workshop) the wheels are not pumped and a pedal is missing...
Well surely you would argue, this bike is not the worst bike you've seen and I mean it functions, it has both wheels...... Its surely not a 0/10 bike right? Well considering the company sold it as a feature complete bike and with functions that are not there AND for a very high price maybe 0/10 would be deserved. Maybe this company sohuld even be blacklisted and publicly shamed.
In light of my example I mean to illustrate that even though you are saying WC3:R is not "that bad" in light of its prizing, what Blizzard themselves marketed it as and the complanies lies about the product. All these things add to the score.
When you argue WC3:R is an upgrade because it has a population and you can play matchmaking in it that only means it has an increased population of players right now. Having a lot of players is not a game feature, it isn't somehthing Blizzard made to sell to you. When that is something you grasp for when trying to say why the game is worth the money you really look desperate. That TFT had issues doesn't make WC3:R any better of a product, even iof TFT had a lot of bugs and problems reforged would still be shit considering the price, the marketing and the current lack of features.
I get you are defending the actual game of warcraft 3 but that was already there before they made reforged, whatg did reforged really add to make it worth 40 dollars, and no a playerbase is not a valid answer.
Sorry playerbase is NOT an invalid answer. Competitive multiplayer games don't work without players and HD WC3 has brought people back to the game. That's not negligible and yes the new product gets a plus mark for that (and the outrage gets a minus for driving them away). That said, I'm also talking about the merging of US East and US West, basically bringing WC3 on to modern BNet and off legacy BNet. Again, not a negligible thing.
Your analogy is off. It's like being sold a bike that everyone tells you doesn't work while you're busy riding it. And no, $30 isn't a "very high price" for a game.
Except you are still trying to convince yourself that there was an issue with playerbase. Yes they were not as big as SC2 for example but it was enough. If I wanted to play any mod (1v1, 2v2... etc) I can find players to play with.
If I wanted to play custom games, I can easily find players to join in 3-5 minutes
If I wanted to play tournaments, it was easy to find players but hard to find good matching specially with port forwarding. Playerbase is not an issue so stop using it as a lame excuse.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Apologists like you are why things never get fixed and shit products keep getting made
Yeah. We definitely need more throwing toys out of the cot at this point.
I mean, would you rather see MORE Star Wars EA Battlefront bullshit? Because if people stay quiet and positive about the horseshit that trickles out of the prolapsed anuses of triple A (queue Jim Sterling pronunction) publishers, its the type of shit we're going to see.
Blizzard used to be held to a VERY high standard, and they proved capable of meeting very high standards, it seems absurd to me to think that we should just let them slink into the greasy depths of mediocrity just 'cause.
Games are lucrative, they WILL get made. The question is whether people are going to let publishers make Battlefront II, or if we'll force them to give half a rats ass and at least have them pump out some Jedi: Fallen Order.
I don't follow Star Wars games some I'm going to have to pass on that one. I did pay $90 for Destiny 2 only to be progression walled by a $60 DLC a month or two later. I was promised a WoW killer in WHO in 2008 and a spiritual successor to Everquest in Vanguard a short time later. No prizes for guessing how that turned out. Atari crashed the market with overpriced garbage in the 80s and the arcades were pay to win before the term existed. Dodgy developers/publishers have been a problem with gaming since it began.
I get it. Big companies do shitty things and it feels like we have no recourse. It really is not fair. My only point is that this specific example isn't as bad as the community at large appears to be making out because the actual game isn't in that bad shape. It's certainly a functional, working, remastered WC3. Much better than I expected after the beta.
But anyway, I've said my piece at this point so I'll drop it. It sounds like some of the bigger issues are being addressed in the coming week. Let's see how it develops.
Also the current situation is not indicative of how healthy the player base will be, for example, one year from now. If Reforged does not receive TONS of support and updates, it's not unlikely that the WC3 player base will actually be lower than what it would have been without Reforged.
The thought does not leave me that this is just the beginning. Time to start suspecting that they will never fix it. Lessons were learned that day. I'm afraid I'm not going to make it. Remastered still waiting for matchmaking team games etc. Starcraft 2 game was abandoned. HotS is gone. And now Acti-Blzz wants to Reforge my ass. What's next? A post-modern slavery to us?
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
The major difference is that Valve didn't ship a version of DotA that replaced a previously functional game with one that has less features and performs worse (and also didn't try to charge money for that "upgrade"). They had the good sense and humility to realize that they weren't going to have everything perfect right out the door, but they didn't need to take away people's existing games in order to convince people to switch. Icefrog continued to update the original DotA map for a *very long* time (often first, before those changes made their way to DotA2) after Valve's version shipped. That's why people had good will and patience towards Valve: they earned it by showing the community respect and doing what was best for their users.
You seem to be upset that people are reviewing this release for what it is: a forced replacement of a game that *was* previously functional. It's not a brand new game, why should anyone be reviewing it as if it is?
Reforged is a "forced replacement" of a game that had significant problems. Queues for games larger than 1v1 were incredibly spotty, to the point that you needed to download a third party population heat map and target different queues on different servers (itself a relic that needed to go) at different times to simply find a game. If you couldn't get to your computer when the queues were popping you were shit out of luck. If you did manage to make a game you were at decent odds to be paired with some asshole who teamkilled you as he didn't care about the stats on his 100th smurf and wasn't afraid of the wet noodle support team. Hacking was a similar issue for a similar reason. AT didn't work. Game history hadn't worked for several years. The automated tournaments people are up in arms about losing were hacked and abused to the point that there were accounts with hundreds of wins with no losses. There were components of the game that were fine (1v1, most customs) but let's not pretend it didn't have significant issues. The incredible work of B2W and the strength of Netease papered over the cracks, this game had done amazingly well for a 17 y/o warhorse but it was on the decline and a shot in the arm was necessary.
And to be clear, I'm very much sympathetic to the problems here. The product could and should have been better. Backwards compatibility of replays and an actual hotkey UI were my big items that didn't make it. I still can't tell the difference between a ghoul and a skeleton, the grass on the summer tileset is too bright and I'd like feedback on whether I'm a bronze noob or a silver scrub. But this idea that reforged is broken and/or garbage is one I fundamentally disagree with. The future of WC3 is brighter than it's been in a decade.
I respect your opinion and that you voice it in the face of everyone who disagrees with you but alas I also disagree.
Lets put it like this, if a bike store circulated flyers and made commercial about an upcoming bike they will sell that has alll the latest snazz. 21 gears, manual break, specially made tires. You pay top dollar for this bike just to find out it has only 1 gear, only backpedal brake (even though he says he will give you manually breaks at alater date if he finds some in his workshop) the wheels are not pumped and a pedal is missing...
Well surely you would argue, this bike is not the worst bike you've seen and I mean it functions, it has both wheels...... Its surely not a 0/10 bike right? Well considering the company sold it as a feature complete bike and with functions that are not there AND for a very high price maybe 0/10 would be deserved. Maybe this company sohuld even be blacklisted and publicly shamed.
In light of my example I mean to illustrate that even though you are saying WC3:R is not "that bad" in light of its prizing, what Blizzard themselves marketed it as and the complanies lies about the product. All these things add to the score.
When you argue WC3:R is an upgrade because it has a population and you can play matchmaking in it that only means it has an increased population of players right now. Having a lot of players is not a game feature, it isn't somehthing Blizzard made to sell to you. When that is something you grasp for when trying to say why the game is worth the money you really look desperate. That TFT had issues doesn't make WC3:R any better of a product, even iof TFT had a lot of bugs and problems reforged would still be shit considering the price, the marketing and the current lack of features.
I get you are defending the actual game of warcraft 3 but that was already there before they made reforged, whatg did reforged really add to make it worth 40 dollars, and no a playerbase is not a valid answer.
Sorry playerbase is NOT an invalid answer. Competitive multiplayer games don't work without players and HD WC3 has brought people back to the game. That's not negligible and yes the new product gets a plus mark for that (and the outrage gets a minus for driving them away). That said, I'm also talking about the merging of US East and US West, basically bringing WC3 on to modern BNet and off legacy BNet. Again, not a negligible thing.
Your analogy is off. It's like being sold a bike that everyone tells you doesn't work while you're busy riding it. And no, $30 isn't a "very high price" for a game.
yeah, his analogy is off, because this new bike doesn't take away your old bike and doesn't remove your old bike clothes(custom games). Wooo, what an upgrade!!!!
On February 04 2020 18:49 dalecooper wrote: The thought does not leave me that this is just the beginning. Time to start suspecting that they will never fix it. Lessons were learned that day. I'm afraid I'm not going to make it. Remastered still waiting for matchmaking team games etc. Starcraft 2 game was abandoned. HotS is gone. And now Acti-Blzz wants to Reforge my ass. What's next? A post-modern slavery to us?
It's sad how the mighty have fallen... The RTS landscape is a desolate wasteland now.
Command & Conquer - dead Red Alert - dead StarCraft - dead WarCraft - dead Dawn of War - dead Company of Heroes - dead
What's next? They'll make a Dark Colony, Dark Reign and Earth 2140 remakes as quick cash grabs only to grind them into dust?
Seriously, the last good RTS I've seen was Deserts of Kharak, but its playerbase is miniscule since they messed up the multiplayer in the beginning and later was too late.
On February 04 2020 08:09 Amarok wrote: The game isn't perfect but my god is the backlash an enormous overreaction. Just in the past few pages I've read:
The game doesn't work in multiplayer. False. Some people are having issues (apparently) but the standard multiplayer melee mode works absolutely fine. I've played 30 odd games of various sizes and haven't had a single issue post day 1. There are a few problematic bugs (most notably the starting position bug) but that part of the game is extremely enjoyable. You can find games of any size, from anywhere, at any moment and get a very good ping. That simply wasn't the case pre Reforged and it's a massive positive. They just patched MMR. False. MMR was there the whole time. Matchups were unbalanced because the system was being calibrated and there was an influx of new players mixing with veterans. Lack of ladder is a different issue. Pathing has changed. Completely false. The game plays exactly like WC3. It just looks different. Graphics are worse. I get that there's questions of taste wrapped up in this one but come one. Most of the game looks fantastic. It's HD War3. It's absolutely miles ahead of the classic game visually, though again the lighting and terrain could be improved.
Yes the game should have had ladder and clans on release (though WC3 classic's ladder was a very 2003 iteration), yes there are some readability issues (exacerbated by people who spent 17 years looking at very specific visuals) and I'm really not a fan of the attempts by ATVB to own custom content but the idea that this is a 0 out of 10 game is insane.
Whoever said WC3:R is a scapegoat for dissatisfaction at Blizzard (and broader industry marketing practices) is completely spot on. I don't think I've ever seen a community reaction this unwarranted in severity in my life. The amount of lies, emotional claptrap and broader industry commentary you have to wade through to actually get to information about the game should make it obvious that we're not dealing with sober analysis here.
Why shouldn't a game that still falsely advertises its features like improved cutscenes, that also broke the original game that had nothing wrong with it, not warrant a 0 out of 10? Apparently lies bother you, but not Blizzard's?
You have a DotA icon, what if Valve released DotA:Reforged and the same situation happened? That you'd log on your DotA 2 account and found out it was upgraded without your consent and you lost all your precious skins? That'd be equivalent to what's happening now.
I mean, there are still numerous issues with the game by your own admission, wouldn't that be considered a downgrade from the original? Imagine owning/playing Warcraft 3 for 17 years and getting this. Don't be a drone, man. Put yourself in their shoes, their outrage towards an inferior and unfinished product is completely justified.
Edit: Don't forget the resentment building towards Blizzard over the years. This didn't occur in a vacuum; Diablo: Immortal and the "tough Hearthstone esports moment" weren't well-received either. Expect more blow-ups if Blizzard continues to disappoint their fans. I wouldn't call WC3R a mere scapegoat though, it's bad through its own merits.
Cut it out with that drone bullshit. You know how much harder it is to defend the game at this point? Reforged is an overall upgrade to WC3 in my experience and the community reaction is insane. That's my opinion and I'm voicing it. Piling on or staying quiet would be the easy way out. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a shill.
It's funny you mention DotA. The situation was pretty similar. Less than half the hero roster was ported from DotA1 and there were numerous bugs on release. I don't remember the release patch having any sort of ladder either (though I may be wrong about that, it's been a while) and there certainly wasn't clan support or anything like that. It would have been easy to build a narrative that the game was a downgrade from WC3 DotA but that didn't happen. Valve had plenty of goodwill for the project at the time (something Blizzard does not have for a variety of reasons, some well deserved) and the community was broadly excited to have HD DotA. In other words the major difference is perception, not the relative quality of the two products in comparison to their predecessors.
As to the rest, the shortcomings of Reforged do bother me and I was pretty clear about that. My issue is with the scale and ferocity of the community reaction. This is still one of the greatest games ever made and there's a degree of glee with which some are proclaiming it a corpse which I find revolting.
The major difference is that Valve didn't ship a version of DotA that replaced a previously functional game with one that has less features and performs worse (and also didn't try to charge money for that "upgrade"). They had the good sense and humility to realize that they weren't going to have everything perfect right out the door, but they didn't need to take away people's existing games in order to convince people to switch. Icefrog continued to update the original DotA map for a *very long* time (often first, before those changes made their way to DotA2) after Valve's version shipped. That's why people had good will and patience towards Valve: they earned it by showing the community respect and doing what was best for their users.
You seem to be upset that people are reviewing this release for what it is: a forced replacement of a game that *was* previously functional. It's not a brand new game, why should anyone be reviewing it as if it is?
Reforged is a "forced replacement" of a game that had significant problems. Queues for games larger than 1v1 were incredibly spotty, to the point that you needed to download a third party population heat map and target different queues on different servers (itself a relic that needed to go) at different times to simply find a game. If you couldn't get to your computer when the queues were popping you were shit out of luck. If you did manage to make a game you were at decent odds to be paired with some asshole who teamkilled you as he didn't care about the stats on his 100th smurf and wasn't afraid of the wet noodle support team. Hacking was a similar issue for a similar reason. AT didn't work. Game history hadn't worked for several years. The automated tournaments people are up in arms about losing were hacked and abused to the point that there were accounts with hundreds of wins with no losses. There were components of the game that were fine (1v1, most customs) but let's not pretend it didn't have significant issues. The incredible work of B2W and the strength of Netease papered over the cracks, this game had done amazingly well for a 17 y/o warhorse but it was on the decline and a shot in the arm was necessary.
And to be clear, I'm very much sympathetic to the problems here. The product could and should have been better. Backwards compatibility of replays and an actual hotkey UI were my big items that didn't make it. I still can't tell the difference between a ghoul and a skeleton, the grass on the summer tileset is too bright and I'd like feedback on whether I'm a bronze noob or a silver scrub. But this idea that reforged is broken and/or garbage is one I fundamentally disagree with. The future of WC3 is brighter than it's been in a decade.
I respect your opinion and that you voice it in the face of everyone who disagrees with you but alas I also disagree.
Lets put it like this, if a bike store circulated flyers and made commercial about an upcoming bike they will sell that has alll the latest snazz. 21 gears, manual break, specially made tires. You pay top dollar for this bike just to find out it has only 1 gear, only backpedal brake (even though he says he will give you manually breaks at alater date if he finds some in his workshop) the wheels are not pumped and a pedal is missing...
Well surely you would argue, this bike is not the worst bike you've seen and I mean it functions, it has both wheels...... Its surely not a 0/10 bike right? Well considering the company sold it as a feature complete bike and with functions that are not there AND for a very high price maybe 0/10 would be deserved. Maybe this company sohuld even be blacklisted and publicly shamed.
In light of my example I mean to illustrate that even though you are saying WC3:R is not "that bad" in light of its prizing, what Blizzard themselves marketed it as and the complanies lies about the product. All these things add to the score.
When you argue WC3:R is an upgrade because it has a population and you can play matchmaking in it that only means it has an increased population of players right now. Having a lot of players is not a game feature, it isn't somehthing Blizzard made to sell to you. When that is something you grasp for when trying to say why the game is worth the money you really look desperate. That TFT had issues doesn't make WC3:R any better of a product, even iof TFT had a lot of bugs and problems reforged would still be shit considering the price, the marketing and the current lack of features.
I get you are defending the actual game of warcraft 3 but that was already there before they made reforged, whatg did reforged really add to make it worth 40 dollars, and no a playerbase is not a valid answer.
Sorry playerbase is NOT an invalid answer. Competitive multiplayer games don't work without players and HD WC3 has brought people back to the game. That's not negligible and yes the new product gets a plus mark for that (and the outrage gets a minus for driving them away). That said, I'm also talking about the merging of US East and US West, basically bringing WC3 on to modern BNet and off legacy BNet. Again, not a negligible thing.
Your analogy is off. It's like being sold a bike that everyone tells you doesn't work while you're busy riding it. And no, $30 isn't a "very high price" for a game.
So if Blizzard would say they are rereleasing starcraft 2 changing nothing and saying, pay for this because since we are re releasing it more people will buy and playerbase will be bigger. Definitely worth money for us to sell you the same game again since there probably will be more players! Would you think that sounded like a good idea?
No? Well that is because it is not a feature that Blizzard can sell to us, the playerbase is not controlled by Blizzard and therefore it is not a product or a feature that they can sell to us.
My anology is perfect, you might ride that shitty expensive bicycle, that doesn't mean the it deserves more than 2/10 taking in regard how it was marketed and its price. If you already owned wc3 TFT what reforged offer atm is not worth 30 dollars. If it was optional and it cost 5-10 dollars then sure, its decent but that still does not excuse their lies and deceit. I don't understand you, why do you like lying and deceiving companies?
On February 03 2020 17:10 M3t4PhYzX wrote: Bli$$ard is not Blizzard from the 90s/00s anymore anyways.. wasnt for a long time but for certain it is not the same now..
I mean.. are there even any people from the old Blizzard left? I don't think so..
What a fucking mess.. Such a damn shame, really.. How to destroy a game - a masterclass by Activision-Bli$$ard.
While I am not disagreeing about Acti-ard being a bad Company nowadays driven by renevue instead of by the strive for making good games wc3 is mainly being destroyed by its fans.
Its like any remake, of movies or games, its impossible to live up to the imaginations and standards of the hardcore fans but the future of the game and the genre is defined by the reaction of the customers. If Wc3 would at least make some splash there is the possibility most of these faults could be patched and improved, if the game dies and everyone hates it that will simply be the end.
The news going around now blocks new players from entering the rts genre and makes it less likely wc3 will get the Resources it needs to be improved and also less likely there will be a new rts made by Blizzard. This by extension also lowers the value of the starcraft 2 scene as well.
As I said, I don't disagree, its all shit but I would have prefered if it wouldn't stay shit...
Always the same god damned argument. Preventing new blood from entering RTS. I just wanted my game to work as it intended to given that I did not buy reforged nor cared for it, why am stuck in this cluster fuck?
If you are unable to keep promises, don't make them in the first place. WC3 survived on its own without the need for new players with its sustainable loyal fanbase. I'm not denying there was a decline, but game did indeed survived. Right now with reforged as a constant player of WC3, I'm unable to play the game because: - There is no ladder [current match making is a joke] - I lost contact to my friends who were in the classic friend list not in the BNET app - tons of bugs in the current release - downgrading of the classic graphics just like what happened with SCR SD graphics which were worse than the 1.16.1
If the game remains in this state, it will die for real in couple of months.
How the heck this is fanbase fault that they are destroying the game?
You are right, not saying anything against aguments like yours and the general disgust at the low quality of the release. What I am turning against is reactions like what is happening at metacritic, what is being talked about right now is what a bad game Wc3 Re is, not what a great game it ruined. What saddens me the most is the way warcraft 3 is being talked about right now, a fact that is indeed hurting warcraft 3 long term more than the faults you raise (in your list). I guess the forced game upgrade is an issue as serious as the reactions but besides that horrible decision I still Think the way the outrage is being done does a lot of damage,
To answer your argument about whether metacritic review bombing is bad for the game itself or not. I send you this:
Basically, it is our only way to make sure our voice is heard. If that did not happen and the Australian refund dude, we would not have gotten the automatic refund process for reforged that we have currently.
Uh, no. Corporations care only about their business, if you want to be heard DO NOT SPEND THE MONEY. If everyone is outraged about the last Pokemon game and they sell 18 million copies, guess who doesn't care about review bombing, boycotting or angry fans? NOBODY. Because they just sold 18 million copies.
On February 04 2020 18:49 dalecooper wrote: The thought does not leave me that this is just the beginning. Time to start suspecting that they will never fix it. Lessons were learned that day. I'm afraid I'm not going to make it. Remastered still waiting for matchmaking team games etc. Starcraft 2 game was abandoned. HotS is gone. And now Acti-Blzz wants to Reforge my ass. What's next? A post-modern slavery to us?
It's sad how the mighty have fallen... The RTS landscape is a desolate wasteland now.
Command & Conquer - dead Red Alert - dead StarCraft - dead WarCraft - dead
What's next? They'll make a Dark Colony, Dark Reign and Earth 2140 remakes as quick cash grabs only to grind them into dust?
Seriously, the last good RTS I've seen was Deserts of Kharak, but its playerbase is miniscule since they messed up the multiplayer in the beginning and later was too late.
Age of Empires? Total War? Anno is an RTS game too BTW
Settlers have a planned release after a decade of silence. Warhammer 40k has an adaptation of their mobile game in the making(not sure hwo much it is an RTS as I avoid WH but they say it is an RTS release)
Total wasteland. Nothing alive, no sir.
Edit> I get what type of games you miss and what you want to see. But that's just a section of the RTS genre and game portfolio.
Age of Empires 2: DE was a resounding success from what I've seen. Praise all around, only some people are miffed that they already paid for HD edition and now have to pay again for DE.
Total War I wouldn't call RTS but the series is doing much better than in the last few years. Warhammer 2 is consistently the best game they ever put out and it keeps getting FLC and DLCs. The Three Kingdoms release was a very tense moment because the previous historical titles were complete ass - Rome 2 launched unoptimized and unplayable for a large majority of players, Atilla what should've been Rome 2's X-pack was shipped as standalone for some reason, and then the Thrones of Brittania happened, which many felt was a quick cash grab and actually took more steps back than forward in the history of the series. Then comes Three Kingdoms and it was very well recieved. They put A LOT of work into it, and it shows. So many improvements to the diplomatic and trade sides of the game.
I just wish someone competent would get the Warhammer 40K licence again. I wouldn't even fucking criticise a remake of the original Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War game, or a 4th installment. But as I said, I don't think there's anyone competent left in the RTS-making business.
These types of games just aren't profitable to make when you can earn big bucks showing DLCs every few months down players' throats a la Paradox, Creative Assembly etc. OR with in-game monitization like FIFA or DOTA or LoL or Fortnite etc.
I still have hope for Age of Empires 4 after seeing AoE2:DE and I heard that the guys that made Company of Heroes also have something they're working on currently?
On February 04 2020 22:32 Latham wrote: Age of Empires 2: DE was a resounding success from what I've seen. Praise all around, only some people are miffed that they already paid for HD edition and now have to pay again for DE.
Total War I wouldn't call RTS but the series is doing much better than in the last few years. Warhammer 2 is consistently the best game they ever put out and it keeps getting FLC and DLCs. The Three Kingdoms release was a very tense moment because the previous historical titles were complete ass - Rome 2 launched unoptimized and unplayable for a large majority of players, Atilla what should've been Rome 2's X-pack was shipped as standalone for some reason, and then the Thrones of Brittania happened, which many felt was a quick cash grab and actually took more steps back than forward in the history of the series. Then comes Three Kingdoms and it was very well recieved. They put A LOT of work into it, and it shows. So many improvements to the diplomatic and trade sides of the game.
I just wish someone competent would get the Warhammer 40K licence again. I wouldn't even fucking criticise a remake of the original Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War game, or a 4th installment. But as I said, I don't think there's anyone competent left in the RTS-making business.
These types of games just aren't profitable to make when you can earn big bucks showing DLCs every few months down players' throats a la Paradox, Creative Assembly etc. OR with in-game monitization like FIFA or DOTA or LoL or Fortnite etc.
I still have hope for Age of Empires 4 after seeing AoE2:DE and I heard that the guys that made Company of Heroes also have something they're working on currently?
I’ve never played AoE for, whatever reasons. Think I was too engrossed in other RTS games in my youth. The Definitive Edition seems a perfect way for someone like my to experience the full AoE game having missed out. Quite excited to give it a shot. From what I’ve read that sounds how a modernisation of a classic should be done.
I think the problem RTS has is it’s not easily monetisible as you say, but I don’t think it has to be as relatively niche as it is now.
Starcraft 2 did rather well, and it wasn’t just returning players from the original. However in that same rough era, before loot boxes and monetisation really catching on, other franchises with recognition and legacy were allowed to tank. EA and CnC being a real prime example.
It’s like the big publishers made bad RTS games and then used that as evidence nobody likes RTS games anymore.
They’re awkwardly placed for the indie market to plug the gap, especially for games that are competitive in nature. I’m not sure why, I’d assume it’s harder to make an RTS that’s balanced and interesting for small indie teams.
Indies have made some of my favourite games of the last decade but they tend to be in certain genres like platforms.
EPT
