Guest DarthMaulUK Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Having had the chance to play Warcraft 3 for some time. I have drawn the only conclusion - what a wasted chance. 3 years in the making and it falls short in so many areas. The new '3-d' mode is nothing new, and movement is limited to the normal forwards,backwards, left, right but you can only turn the 'camera' left or right - thats it! 90 pop limit, VERY fussy to select a single unit, also giving orders can be a missed affair. You think something is being built - and it isnt. Also, one of the real pains is that only the human race can assign more than 1 worker to build a structure. Everyone else has to use a single worker. In Galactic Battlegrounds, you can assign workers straight from your command centre to help build, can't do this in Warcraft 3. However, experience points can be gained for heroes, which is good and there's some nice touches to how you can control a large army. The one thing I like is that you don't need to spend time on micro farming ( a thing I really hate in SWGB). So, no doubt all the gaming magazines will celebrating the arrival of Warcraft 3 - but read through these reviews. This is not a good game in terms of improvements and advancements from the so called 'masters' of RTS gaming. Wait for it on budget. DMUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treacherous Mercenary Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Hmm.. Maybe I'll wait some more as most of those issues should be addressed such as the unit limit which should be 200 like SC . Sounds like the game is pretty much the same as SC with improvements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Wow. That's a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I'm not suprised. I havn't heard a big buzz about the game and since it came out in March, I was pretty sure it didn't meet expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Huh? It came out in March? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Late march I think, but yeah...maybe April...or maybe I'm remembering an old release date and it was delayed...I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherack Nhar Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 *rejoices* I knew it all along, guys! And you just wouldn't believe me! And look who is right now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Gee.. Warcraft III isn't out yet.. It just went gold, not that I'm accusing you of lying or anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 That's sad, but oh well, never came on my list anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natopo Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I was expecting this:D And everyone at school said this was gonna rock, ya right! 90 pop limit?! UGH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Actually, those "Faults" That DMUK mentioned sound like my perfect RTS game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natopo Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 [Yoda Voice]Mmmm... Good this is not. Stupid you are[/Yoda Voice] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I could care less about weither or not I could tilt the camera. And I don't care bout the 90 pop limit anyway.. I'm never one to build an army over 36 anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Originally posted by Clefo I could care less about weither or not I could tilt the camera. And I don't care bout the 90 pop limit anyway.. I'm never one to build an army over 36 anyway I'll remember that when (and if) I ever play GB with you again:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natopo Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 Me too! With an army of 36, you wouldn't stand a chance against me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DarthMaulUK Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I came across the game on a 'download' site. In the UK, there is always alot of 'hype' with PC magazines over rating games (Warcraft 3 being one of them), so rather than waste my money on rubbish, I download it first. If I like the game, I buy it. People can judge for themselves. Like I said, there's some nice ideas in what is a very limited game. DMUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duder Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I've heard a lot of grumblings about this game, its a real shame because it had so much hype. I'll be waiting for Age of Mythology, those Ensemble boys are yet to make a mistake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young David Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I knew it ... I saw screenshots and tought it was crap ... but noone believed me. Now I will laugh at them and will get my pretty, pretty Age of Mythology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treacherous Mercenary Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I heard there was a beta for it, so I just thought I would let you guys know although you problably know. Anyway, I hope they fix abit of the resource micromanagement. I was killed in AOK: TC because I couldn't get enough in time to raise an army although I have gotten abit better recently . P.S. Stop by here sometime today . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaming Nut Posted June 22, 2002 Share Posted June 22, 2002 I knew it wouldn't be great like those before it. Things that gave me that opnion. The pop cap 90 is to small and to even get to 90 you have pay huge amonuts of gold. They basicly want don't want you to have more then 50 guys but knew a 50 pop cap would piss people off. I've read some Battle Reports about it their talking about fights with 1 hero and 5 support units as major battles. It dosen't look that good IMO HW, GC, hell any game form the last few years looks as good and most have better unit design. The camrea is their so they can put "3D" on the box. And maybe some pretty screen shots. It dosen't help at all and you likely just park it at SC like angle 90% of the time. Past that I also heard that they didn't adress many problems in the beta such as usless units, bugs, balancing civs agianst all types of attacks and so one. Overall I think the fact that its a blizzard game means it won't suck. But I also think that this will be the last time a blizzard game is expected to be great casue it's a blizzard game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-5 Posted June 23, 2002 Share Posted June 23, 2002 Warcraft 3 doesn't suck because its different. The focus here is less units, but each with special abilities to help you in battle. They also wanted to remove players' concerns from their bases, and to the battlefield. - who cares about the camera, I don't want to see what is on the other side of a tree or rock, I want to play. If SWGB had camera options, I wouldn't use them. - In SC, the greatest RTS of all time, one worker was assigned to one building.. it worked. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. - 90 unit pop... Now this is the one I have a problem with.. but like I said before, every unit in the game has some type of special ability that can turn the tide of battle (in SWGB, besides jedi every unit has the same ability- attack!!). It's about using your units more effectively, not massing more units than the other guy! By the way, 50 units doesn't equal 50 pop. Each unit has a different pop value. More selling points-- Spells!!, Heroes!!, Items to collect!!, Race and unit diversity!!, Creeps!!, and I heard that the single player has a killer story unlike SWGB's. If the magazine reviews rave about this game, it is because it is a great game. Maybe not on the level on SC, but definitely on my "buy this game" list :D !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 23, 2002 Share Posted June 23, 2002 I think they also put in the 90 pop cap because I believe there can be up to 12 players in MP.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaming Nut Posted June 23, 2002 Share Posted June 23, 2002 Nope 8 person max. I saying the camrea is usless and so was piontless to put thxs for agreeing with me. Thats great expect that one civ can put more then 1 guy on building thats like the empire being able to put 10 workers on a building while rebels can put one on can you say unbalacned? All unit's have abiltes but many are not important just like every one used psi strom in SC. But when was the last time you saw someone use halluction and have it make a diffrance? I know SC was already a litte too much about micro and dancing units IMO. If they want to promote thats their call. I personaly think the base should be the most important area on the map. Is this RTS or RPG casue frankly spells, items, and, killing computer controled monsters belong in RPGs not RTS. I've seen magzines rave about games before that I thought where crap. Most magzines gave EE like 8.0 but most guys that bought it say it was buggy crashed and wasn't that fun when it ran. I liked alot of the concpets and thought it was OK not great but OK I also got it as gift so I didn't feel jipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DarthMaulUK Posted June 23, 2002 Share Posted June 23, 2002 If a major release like Warcraft 3 is a poor game, gaming magazines won't always tell you ( I remember PC zone giving Force Commander 81% - just because they got the demo on their cover mount CD). Force Commander deserves 1%. Taking into account many factors, the game is VERY limited. Limited spells in custom games, limited units, it's dull, it's boring and I can see people putting this one back in it's box within days. When you have the likes of Age Of Mythology (AoM) which is looking very impressive indeed, Warcraft 3 is out of touch and very out of date - before it's even released! Oh and you try casting a spell in the 'heat' of a battle - that is, if you can get your cursor on the unit you want. That in its self is a hard job. When I played WC3, I didn't compare it to SWGB - you can't. 2 different games. SWGB has a very good reason for some of its faults and bugs, its using an old game engine, whereas WC3 is supposed to be new. AoM vs WC3 - no contest. DMUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treacherous Mercenary Posted June 23, 2002 Share Posted June 23, 2002 I guess I'll be waiting for a demo on this game or I could it it for my birthday . I heard the game looked great or at least the dude had a DVD to watch the FMVs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.