Was Warcraft a big disappointment for you?

[Maleficus]

I dont understand why people feel the need to compare the two, Blizzard always produces these seemingly simple strategy games that arent really "strategy" games like Total Annihilation or something like that but they do involve a lot of tactics each in there own way, Starcraft has obviously proven it is a great game to many people with its figures and i think a lot of poeple like warcraft, i know i do. They are VERY different games though comparing them really is apples and oranges.


I do fairly well in solo for WC3 but in team games idk me and my friend just suck. Of course it didnt help that we were playing people like TillerMan and LordHelmet...

 

[Balthazar]

Originally posted by: MrGrim
Warcraft 3 was not a disappointment to me because I don't expect anything decent to be produced by Blizzard. After they released my favorite game of all time, Starcraft/Broodwar, they just turned into a mediocre oportunistic bunch that doesn't care for it's customers. (I could elaborate that but this is not the right thread)

Diablo 2 is laughable and Warcraft 3 lacks everything that makes Starcraft/Broodwar such an excellent game. I've been playing Stracraft/Broodwar for 4 years now and I'm still not tired of it, if the university didn't hammer us with so much work I'd probably be playing it right now. I can't say the same for Warcraft 3 since after about 10 games I got bored of it and unistalled it.

Anybody who looks at both games objectively will realise that Warcraft 3 is a very shalow game compared to Starcraft/Broodwar. I read some remarks that were along the line "Starcraft was all about massing units, warcraft 3 is about micro management". I feel truely sorry for you that said/think that because you missed out on such an amazing game as Starcraft/Broodwar; you obviously never really got into it.

Stracraft/Broodwar's community is (was) something amazing and unrepeatable; it is the reason professional gaming is as big as it is today amd never will you be able to say something like that for Warcraft 3. Diablo 2 was a joke, but it took a while for people to realise it; it won't be long before Warcraft 3 is thought of a failure amongst gamers as well.

I must concur that Diablow II sucked hind tit, talk about nothing but revamped graphics....

And also agree that SC/BW was about a LOT more than pumping out units.
Heh, I played some 8 hour games where the number ofunits used had jack to do with the outcome. It was all about defense, keeping your @ss out of the fire long enough to figure out a way around the other guys D.

Also, for those of you who think that may differ so much from WC3, keep in mind that some races, much like in SC, have a stacked defensive capability (undead anyone) and some are middle of the road (orc) some are great for puming out units (elves) just like in SC, the gameplay is deeper, but not by much, and mainly due to the other elements involved in the game, if you were to remove the non-rts features from the game it would play like SC with a much lower pop-cap.

Anywho, my current fave RTS is Age of Mythology, THERE is a group of developers who knows how to crank out top-flight RTS games.

 

[Dragnov]

I liked both games, but I do like Warcraft III a lot more. I'm pretty good at both.. not great or 1337, but a tad bit better than your average player.

I've played Starcraft right up until Warcraft III came out, but ever since have never gone back. Played probably over 1000+ games of WC3 by now, although I only play like once a week (at most) now.

WCIII is much more intense in that you have more to worry about constantly. Theres much more decisions you have to make at any given time. I see SC/BW as more of a fun, simpler strategy game that I can enjoy easier, while WC requires much more of my concentration and I really have to be in the mood to play well.

WC has all the strategy that SC/BW has and more.

 

[LOLyourFace]

I love Both. I am just dissapointed by the lack of creativity in War3 compared to SC. (doesn't mean sucky game)

In StarCraft, the 3 races were truly distinctive. Some examples:

A DRAMATICALLY different setup. Just look at the first tier units for each race in SC. A marine is a very fragile ranged unit with ability to hit air, A pair of Zerglings were pure melee attackers, A Zealot was a power house that could kill off 2-3 marines alone. Yet the game still manages to be impressively balanced in a bigger picture (MarineS are down right threatening when massed etc.) In War3, do you see any single tier 1 unit owning another race's two or three tier 1 unit? No.
Units are all relatively same without being dramatically different (Grunts, Footmen, Hunts etc.) In Warcraft III, all races exactly mirror same tech trees (Tier 1 barracks, Tier 2 spell casters, Tier 3 heavy melee). I am dissapointed that Blizzard got lazy and set things up to their convenience.

Keep in mind, lack of creativity in style doesn't mean Warcraft 3 sucks... It just dosen't have the magic SC has. In result, the game doesn't have the full range of strategies SC had.

SC: Scout Scout Scout. Is he gonna make Dark Templars? Crap, get Comsat... Is Zerg going for lurkers or fast tech to Guardians?
WC: Scouting is no way near essential as in SC. It is still important as to find their location/basic stuff but it's not as time-sensitive and crucial.

SC: Heavy metal, m&m, mass cracklings, hydras, DTs, fast tech to Templars, Reaver drop, Wraith cloak tech, etc.. Each strats are quite unpredicable and distinctive to their own
WC: Creep, level up your hero.. Upgrade to 2nd tier.. make some spell casters (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same). Upgrade to tier 3, make some heavy melee units/advanced spells (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same.. what else?)

*sigh* I enjoy WC3 Very much. I just think it lacks style and Blizz got lazy.

 

[mchammer187]

Originally posted by: LOLyourFace
I love Both. I am just dissapointed by the lack of creativity in War3 compared to SC. (doesn't mean sucky game)

In StarCraft, the 3 races were truly distinctive. Some examples:

A DRAMATICALLY different setup. Just look at the first tier units for each race in SC. A marine is a very fragile ranged unit with ability to hit air, A pair of Zerglings were pure melee attackers, A Zealot was a power house that could kill off 2-3 marines alone. Yet the game still manages to be impressively balanced in a bigger picture (MarineS are down right threatening when massed etc.) In War3, do you see any single tier 1 unit owning another race's two or three tier 1 unit? No.
Units are all relatively same without being dramatically different (Grunts, Footmen, Hunts etc.) In Warcraft III, all races exactly mirror same tech trees (Tier 1 barracks, Tier 2 spell casters, Tier 3 heavy melee). I am dissapointed that Blizzard got lazy and set things up to their convenience.

Keep in mind, lack of creativity in style doesn't mean Warcraft 3 sucks... It just dosen't have the magic SC has. In result, the game doesn't have the full range of strategies SC had.

SC: Scout Scout Scout. Is he gonna make Dark Templars? Crap, get Comsat... Is Zerg going for lurkers or fast tech to Guardians?
WC: Scouting is no way near essential as in SC. It is still important as to find their location/basic stuff but it's not as time-sensitive and crucial.

SC: Heavy metal, m&m, mass cracklings, hydras, DTs, fast tech to Templars, Reaver drop, Wraith cloak tech, etc.. Each strats are quite unpredicable and distinctive to their own
WC: Creep, level up your hero.. Upgrade to 2nd tier.. make some spell casters (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same). Upgrade to tier 3, make some heavy melee units/advanced spells (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same.. what else?)

*sigh* I enjoy WC3 Very much. I just think it lacks style and Blizz got lazy.

i agree with this

wc is good but it will never be "starcraft" good

 

[CraigRT]

It's okay. I wasn't blown away like some new game releases.

The graphics on WC3 are very nice however!!

 

[PsychoAndy]

Damn. Poll is 50/50 split.

-PAB

 

[deerslayer]

I like the game, but I don't like the population limit. I liked it in WC2 where you could build up your army. Overall, I suck at the game. Can't handle all the rushing. It's fun to plan on the LAN tho 🙂

 

[Daovonnaex]

I agree 100% with MrGrim. Diablo 2 sucked (the original Diablo was nothing amazing either)--just a hack and slash game. WarCraft III is irritating. The supply limit is infuriatingly low, heroes serve only to piss me off and detract from it as an RTS, and they still haven't addressed the retarded feature of only allowing you to select twelve units at once. StarCraft II, I suspect, won't have the irritating RPG elements or pathetically low supply limit, however.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: OmegaNauce
WC3 is better. Starcraft was always a turtle in and mass a unit then attack game. WC3 you cannot do that because you WILL lose. WC3 requires much more thought than your average RTS game. Go ahead and try WC3 for the first time using a starcraft tactic...against the computer and a decent player you will lose.

i could easily say the opposite, all you do is rush in wc3😛 and turtle? maybe against newbies that would work in sc. how are you going to expand if you turtle? you'll get owned by any half way decent player.

 

[Dragnov]

Originally posted by: mchammer187

Originally posted by: LOLyourFace
I love Both. I am just dissapointed by the lack of creativity in War3 compared to SC. (doesn't mean sucky game)

In StarCraft, the 3 races were truly distinctive. Some examples:

A DRAMATICALLY different setup. Just look at the first tier units for each race in SC. A marine is a very fragile ranged unit with ability to hit air, A pair of Zerglings were pure melee attackers, A Zealot was a power house that could kill off 2-3 marines alone. Yet the game still manages to be impressively balanced in a bigger picture (MarineS are down right threatening when massed etc.) In War3, do you see any single tier 1 unit owning another race's two or three tier 1 unit? No.
Units are all relatively same without being dramatically different (Grunts, Footmen, Hunts etc.) In Warcraft III, all races exactly mirror same tech trees (Tier 1 barracks, Tier 2 spell casters, Tier 3 heavy melee). I am dissapointed that Blizzard got lazy and set things up to their convenience.

Keep in mind, lack of creativity in style doesn't mean Warcraft 3 sucks... It just dosen't have the magic SC has. In result, the game doesn't have the full range of strategies SC had.

SC: Scout Scout Scout. Is he gonna make Dark Templars? Crap, get Comsat... Is Zerg going for lurkers or fast tech to Guardians?
WC: Scouting is no way near essential as in SC. It is still important as to find their location/basic stuff but it's not as time-sensitive and crucial.

SC: Heavy metal, m&m, mass cracklings, hydras, DTs, fast tech to Templars, Reaver drop, Wraith cloak tech, etc.. Each strats are quite unpredicable and distinctive to their own
WC: Creep, level up your hero.. Upgrade to 2nd tier.. make some spell casters (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same). Upgrade to tier 3, make some heavy melee units/advanced spells (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same.. what else?)

*sigh* I enjoy WC3 Very much. I just think it lacks style and Blizz got lazy.

i agree with this

wc is good but it will never be "starcraft" good

Odd, I completely disagree.

1. Scouting. Just as important as SC. Is he teching? hero leveling? quick expo? If he quick expos and you don't know and never decide to attack early... boy you're screwed, you'll be outresourced instantly (which is MUCH more important in WC because of the upkeep, and the highly limited amount). WC is constant intense 30 minutes, while SC is nothing for the first 10 than mass craziness the last 20.

2. Units. In WC its much more important on what units you make, and every single one counts. You can lose one zergling and you're like whatever.. he was used to scout. In WC you don't want to lose 1 single guy unless it was for battle. Losing 1 guy to a creep can play a major difference. Should I hero rush? Where should I hit? (while in SC/BW thers usually only 1 or two entrances always) Which race should I hit first? If he goes dryads, I'm screwed w/ spellcasters. What items should I buy? Ancient protector push? Maybe chimura tech? Drop behind the trees? WC has everything that SC has and more.

I think its all a matter of what type of games you like. They aim for different things. Keep in mind this is NOT supposed to be the successor of SC/BW. It's NOT supposed to have the same type of gameplay. For the most part, the large majority seems to be dissapointed because its not like SC/BW. Well then thats good IMO, it wasn't supposed to be.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Personally I like the starcraft mass craziness, but only to a certain extent. Unfortunately all the $$$BGH$$$ maps killed off most of the use of strategy... A lot of players end up pumping mass units and hoping for the best in those scenarios. If you play with the limited resource maps it's more fun in that you can't just go ahead and build 20 hatcheries just to pump out 100 guys every 30 seconds.

Biggest piss off in Starcraft: unless you specifically tell your units to aim for the carriers, the AI makes them aim for the F&%@ing interceptors. That gives carriers a huge advantage and it usually means that if you build up to mass carriers you'll probably win a war of attrition even if the other player's startegies are better.

That being said I think I prefer SC to WC but not by much 🙂

 

[samurai20]

After a few months on W3, it has lost its appeal to me. If two decent players are playing each other, the game is going to take a minimum of 25 minutes, due to the need that they're both creeping their hero. So basically, over 50% of the game is just creeping while upgrading base

Due to working full time, I don't have 8 free hours a day to creep all day to upgrade my hero... thus I've stopped playing cause I know I'm never gonna get enough practice. The good thing about SC was that you could just rush somebody's ass and the game would be over if they sucked. In WC3 even if they suck, if they put up any defense you have to spend time to upgrade your crap and creep. I don't have any patience for dealing with noobs who waste my time. I uninstalled it.

 

[stev0]

yea, it was hyped up soooo much, imo, starcraft has much better game play.

 

[MrGrim]

Originally posted by: LOLyourFace
I love Both. I am just dissapointed by the lack of creativity in War3 compared to SC. (doesn't mean sucky game)

In StarCraft, the 3 races were truly distinctive. Some examples:

A DRAMATICALLY different setup. Just look at the first tier units for each race in SC. A marine is a very fragile ranged unit with ability to hit air, A pair of Zerglings were pure melee attackers, A Zealot was a power house that could kill off 2-3 marines alone. Yet the game still manages to be impressively balanced in a bigger picture (MarineS are down right threatening when massed etc.) In War3, do you see any single tier 1 unit owning another race's two or three tier 1 unit? No.
Units are all relatively same without being dramatically different (Grunts, Footmen, Hunts etc.) In Warcraft III, all races exactly mirror same tech trees (Tier 1 barracks, Tier 2 spell casters, Tier 3 heavy melee). I am dissapointed that Blizzard got lazy and set things up to their convenience.

Keep in mind, lack of creativity in style doesn't mean Warcraft 3 sucks... It just dosen't have the magic SC has. In result, the game doesn't have the full range of strategies SC had.

SC: Scout Scout Scout. Is he gonna make Dark Templars? Crap, get Comsat... Is Zerg going for lurkers or fast tech to Guardians?
WC: Scouting is no way near essential as in SC. It is still important as to find their location/basic stuff but it's not as time-sensitive and crucial.

SC: Heavy metal, m&m, mass cracklings, hydras, DTs, fast tech to Templars, Reaver drop, Wraith cloak tech, etc.. Each strats are quite unpredicable and distinctive to their own
WC: Creep, level up your hero.. Upgrade to 2nd tier.. make some spell casters (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same). Upgrade to tier 3, make some heavy melee units/advanced spells (by that time the opponent is probably doing the same.. what else?)

*sigh* I enjoy WC3 Very much. I just think it lacks style and Blizz got lazy.

I'm glad more people see what I see in Warcraft 3. The depth of Starcraft/Broodwar is beyong the imagination of Warcraft 3 players.

I'm not going to start giving examples of Starcraft/Broodwar strategies because there is no point. If you haven't experienced it yourself you won't understand what I'm talking about. Somebody said that scouting is important in Warcraft3 because you have to decide whether you will rush with our hero or not; you can't possibly imagine how funny that sounds. 🙂

Starcraft/Broodwar is a game you can quickly learn how to play against the computer but takes a long time to master. It is obvious that most of you guys played the campains, maybe a couple of games online and came up with a conclusion. There is nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that you have no idea what Starcraft/Broodwar is about. 🙂

 

[Jzero]

Starcraft/Broodwar is a game you can quickly learn how to play against the computer but takes a long time to master. It is obvious that most of you guys played the campains, maybe a couple of games online and came up with a conclusion. There is nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that you have no idea what Starcraft/Broodwar is about. 🙂

ROFL
It's amusing that you should say that after previously posting that "It takes a long time to appreciate a good, deep and well balanced game...and very little to dismiss a flawed and shallow game..."

I guess I considered Starcraft to be flawed and shallow, although I did play it every so often throughout my college days, so at least I gave it more than 10 games' worth. I hated playing it and I only played b/c everyone else was playing and it was more fun than sitting around doing nothing.

There are obviously two opposing camps. Some people obviously like the defense-heavy, lurching, slow pace of Starcraft. Some people obviously prefer the streamlined small-squad combat and very fast pace of WC. Quite frankly, those 8-hour games that Balthazar mentioned is another reason I hate WC. An hour-long game is long for WC. That's a good thing IMO.

 

[MrGrim]

Originally posted by: Jzero

ROFL
It's amusing that you should say that after previously posting that "It takes a long time to appreciate a good, deep and well balanced game...and very little to dismiss a flawed and shallow game..."

If you find it funny then you obviously don't understand the words that I'm writting.

I guess I considered Starcraft to be flawed and shallow, although I did play it every so often throughout my college days, so at least I gave it more than 10 games' worth. I hated playing it and I only played b/c everyone else was playing and it was more fun than sitting around doing nothing.

You have every right to consider it a bad game but that doesn't change the fact that after 4 years of its release it has a community larger than Warcraft3 with world wide professional tournaments. It also doesn't change the fact that it has sold over three million copies around the world. I guess they are wrong and you are right.

There are obviously two opposing camps. Some people obviously like the defense-heavy, lurching, slow pace of Starcraft.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Saying that Starcraft/Broodwar is a slow peace game makes you look like a fool to the eyes that understand the game.

Some people obviously prefer the streamlined small-squad combat and very fast pace of WC. Quite frankly, those 8-hour games that Balthazar mentioned is another reason I hate WC. An hour-long game is long for WC. That's a good thing IMO.

So the bottom line is that you hate Warcraft 3 and that's a good thing, right? No wonder you couldn't understand what I was saying.

 

[Furyline]

I think its a fine game. It's held my attention to this point at least.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: MrGrim

Originally posted by: Jzero

ROFL
It's amusing that you should say that after previously posting that "It takes a long time to appreciate a good, deep and well balanced game...and very little to dismiss a flawed and shallow game..."

If you find it funny then you obviously don't understand the words that I'm writting.

That's because they don't make sense.
First you say it takes a long time to "get" a good game, but you can write off a bad game very quickly.
That logic is flawed to begin with--if you can write off a game after playing 10 matches, then you can write it off long before you can ever "get" it.
Then you say that anyone who doesn't "get" SC wrote it off too early. But by your own logic, it is possible to write it off on the quick.

I guess I considered Starcraft to be flawed and shallow, although I did play it every so often throughout my college days, so at least I gave it more than 10 games' worth. I hated playing it and I only played b/c everyone else was playing and it was more fun than sitting around doing nothing.

You have every right to consider it a bad game but that doesn't change the fact that after 4 years of its release it has a community larger than Warcraft3 with world wide professional tournaments. It also doesn't change the fact that it has sold over three million copies around the world. I guess they are wrong and you are right.

That says maybe. But if that is the case, then we must defer the rest of this discussion until 2006. Comparing the size of the community of a game that has been available for a few months to one that has been available for 4 years is foolish.

There are obviously two opposing camps. Some people obviously like the defense-heavy, lurching, slow pace of Starcraft.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Saying that Starcraft/Broodwar is a slow peace game makes you look like a fool to the eyes that understand the game.

I'd say talking about a video game as if it were a fine scotch makes you look like a fool to the eyes of those that understand that it's just a video game.
It IS slow-paced. It is a slow-moving game. Some people like a nice long game of chess or go that runs for a few hours. Some people prefer to tear through a quick game of Settlers of Catan.
Different strokes for different folks. I don't see why you think that's such a horrible thing.

Some people obviously prefer the streamlined small-squad combat and very fast pace of WC. Quite frankly, those 8-hour games that Balthazar mentioned is another reason I hate WC. An hour-long game is long for WC. That's a good thing IMO.

So the bottom line is that you hate Warcraft 3 and that's a good thing, right? No wonder you couldn't understand what I was saying.

Now you're just being obstinate. You know what I was talking about.

 

[MrGrim]

I'm not going to discuss this any further, it didn't help when Diablo 2 came out and it's not going to help now. I just wanted to make one thing clear.

Starcraft/Broodwar is an easy game to learn how to play but it takes a long time to master. As in, you play it for 3 months you like it and you think you know it; one year later you still like it and you are still learning but you are on a completely different level. You start to realise that each matchup (race vs race) requires a completely different approach and that you have to adapt to your opponents strategy.

Warcraft 3 is a very shalow game. I came to that conclusion first by looking at the four races and releasing that it's the type of game were every unit has a class and every race has the same classes. Very dull in terms of strategy and tactics. Then I played a few games and the gameplay re-enforced my original thoughts, all you have to do if find your race's best hero and upgrade him. Then support him with your strongest unit and a couple of spell casters.

That's what I wrote from the start, you just didn't get it.

That says maybe. But if that is the case, then we must defer the rest of this discussion until 2006. Comparing the size of the community of a game that has been available for a few months to one that has been available for 4 years is foolish.

I was not comparing, I was retaliating the fools that tried to make Starcraft/Broodwar sound like a bad game. Read the entire thread first and then critique my writtings.

 

[Dragnov]

Originally posted by: MrGrim
I'm not going to discuss this any further, it didn't help when Diablo 2 came out and it's not going to help now. I just wanted to make one thing clear.

Starcraft/Broodwar is an easy game to learn how to play but it takes a long time to master. As in, you play it for 3 months you like it and you think you know it; one year later you still like it and you are still learning but you are on a completely different level. You start to realise that each matchup (race vs race) requires a completely different approach and that you have to adapt to your opponents strategy.

Warcraft 3 is a very shalow game. I came to that conclusion first by looking at the four races and releasing that it's the type of game were every unit has a class and every race has the same classes. Very dull in terms of strategy and tactics. Then I played a few games and the gameplay re-enforced my original thoughts, all you have to do if find your race's best hero and upgrade him. Then support him with your strongest unit and a couple of spell casters.

That's what I wrote from the start, you just didn't get it.

That says maybe. But if that is the case, then we must defer the rest of this discussion until 2006. Comparing the size of the community of a game that has been available for a few months to one that has been available for 4 years is foolish.

I was not comparing, I was retaliating the fools that tried to make Starcraft/Broodwar sound like a bad game. Read the entire thread first and then critique my writtings.

Still saying the same thing. You must play SC/BW for a long time before you realize what a deep game it is. But you played WC3 for short whlie and already written it off. Thats exactly what Jzero is saying.

Riiight, and WC3 has nothign to do involving what units you should build and race matchups.

Please do tell, what is the STRONGEST unit? The Orc Tauren? Why I remember getting 0wned by an ARCHER (the weakest unit in your book) player because piercing rapes heavy armor.

Different games. Different style of play. Different audience.

 

[Noriaki]

I don't enjoy it as much as I'd hope, nor do I enjoy it nearly as much starcraft.

But it's not that bad.

Overall I'd have to say yes, it was a dissappointment for me, but it's still an okay game.

 

[Maleficus]

Originally posted by: samurai20
After a few months on W3, it has lost its appeal to me. If two decent players are playing each other, the game is going to take a minimum of 25 minutes, due to the need that they're both creeping their hero. So basically, over 50% of the game is just creeping while upgrading base

Due to working full time, I don't have 8 free hours a day to creep all day to upgrade my hero... thus I've stopped playing cause I know I'm never gonna get enough practice. The good thing about SC was that you could just rush somebody's ass and the game would be over if they sucked. In WC3 even if they suck, if they put up any defense you have to spend time to upgrade your crap and creep. I don't have any patience for dealing with noobs who waste my time. I uninstalled it.

what in the world are you talking about? a minimum of 25 minutes!?!?!?!? right...

www.replayers.com
www.warcraftreplays.com

go watch some top "gosu" players replays most are over in 15 minutes.

 

[samurai20]

the fact that the biggest part of the game is creeping makes it trivial. The hero thing is cool, but the creeping part, doing it over and over and over makes the game too repetitive for my blood and then having the game coming down to one big battle, where if you start winning your opponent just quits and the game ends... so basically 85% of the actual combat is creeping, 15% is the battle against your opponent and that lasts no time at all, cause you don't even get the satisfaction of destroying him while he's playing you.

 

[pecel]

It's a good game, although I'm waiting for Starcraft 2.
I love starcraft/Broodwar Better though.

I don't like the HERO thing 😛