Is Warcraft III: Reforged really that bad?
Source: Windows Central | Blizzard Entertainment
Last week Blizzard launched Warcraft III: Reforged, although you’d be hard-pressed to have noticed. Blizzard did minimal marketing for the game in the run-up to launch, with very little shown off since the game’s reveal at Blizzcon 2018.
Warcraft III: Reforged should’ve been, could’ve been a total slam-dunk for Blizzard. Warcraft III was arguably the title that spring-loaded World of Warcraft, with its immersive world, intriguing characters, and industry-leading RTS gameplay that still holds up even in 2020.
What the fel went wrong?
Why people are mad
Source: Windows Central | Blizzard Entertainment
When Warcraft III: Reforged launched last week, it became immediately apparent that Blizzard had falsely advertised the game, with promised features omitted, while removing fan-favorite features from the base Warcraft III client, which has now been fully replaced with the Reforged version in Battle.net.
Source: Windows Central | Blizzard Entertainment
Finally, there is a litany of small bugs and anomalies that betray Blizzard’s previous image for quality and polish. The UI is incredibly sluggish, moving UI elements often overlap or get frozen, in our own testing. People have also decried the “stiff,” amateurish-looking animations (which were outsourced to a smaller developer), while also being frustrated that the upgraded cinematics Blizzard previously advertised are now missing in action. Also, some Naga units seem to have human ears, despite the fact they evolved (devolved?) from elves. GAME BREAKING.
Is it actually that bad?
Visually, Warcraft III: Reforged isn’t particularly impressive by modern standards, but I’m not sure anyone was exactly expecting to be blown away. It’s nice being able to zoom right in and see detailed characters and models, depicted in a way not seen before. That said, I agree with the community at large that the animations are rough, giving Warcraft III: Reforged the stylings of a game from a far smaller studio, rather than something deserving of the Blizzard name.
The art style is also a little odd for a Warcraft game, leaning a lot further into realism than the original game, or even the Warcraft models from Blizzard’s MOBA, Heroes of the Storm. The graphics still aren’t exactly what I’d describe as bad, though.
My main take away from Warcraft III: Reforged is that, honestly, it remains one of the best examples of a story-driven RTS, all these years later, and despite the problems. It’s a testament to how great the original was, that despite this rough coat of paint, the hero-oriented systems, light RPG mechanics, and the engaging story still makes it far more interesting than the vast majority of modern RTS games, at least to me. I could’ve gone on that same nostalgia trip without spending the $30 asking price, though.
For casual fans like me, they’ve added very little, and for hardcore fans, features are either missing or muddied. It’s frustrating that Blizzard doesn’t seem to have given the game the respect it deserves.
Blizzard should’ve learned from Age of Empires II: DE
Source: Microsoft
The backlash towards Warcraft III: Reforged could’ve been avoided
A lot of the backlash towards Warcraft III: Reforged could’ve been avoided with greater communication, coupled with the fact Blizzard exists under a microscope right now. Not to delegitimize any of the issues with the game — they are of course numerous — but Blizzard could’ve weathered this if they had treated Warcraft III’s fanbase with the respect they deserve, rather than hoping to cash-in immediately on their decades-long passion for the franchise.
Microsoft set up a dedicated Insider Program for Age of Empires II Definitive Edition, as they do with Xbox, Windows, and many of its other services and games. Blizzard has forums and runs public test servers for some of its games, but rarely do these exist in the run-up to a game’s launch. Warcraft III had a multiplayer beta, but I’m unaware of any public testing access for the game’s story, which would’ve allowed Blizzard to gauge feedback more accurately.
Source: Microsoft
Age of Empires II offers players the ability to experience the game as it was when it originally launched, or the modernized version, with dozens of toggles and settings that give players complete control over their experience. Warcraft III: Reforged does this too, but it’s by no means as extensive as what World’s Edge and Forgotten Empires did with Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition. Why not include both the original campaigns and the planned updated campaigns, and allow players to tweak at will? Even now, Blizzard’s website for Warcraft III describes the game’s “four hours of reforged cutscenes,” despite the fact they were removed.
Another frustrating blow to Blizzard’s legacy
Source: Windows Central | Blizzard Entertainment
It’s quite possible that no company on earth has, or will provide more raw entertainment hours to me than Blizzard Entertainment, which is why it’s so impossibly frustrating to have to write another article like this. What happened to the Blizzard that shipped games when they were polished up and ready? What happened to the Blizzard that was transparent with its fans?
Sure, many of those slamming the game on Metacritic are people just jumping on the latest outrage bandwagon they saw on YouTube, but for actual fans who are genuinely frustrated — they’re mad because they want that Blizzard back. Warcraft III was absolutely the wrong game to try and make a quick buck on.