WC3:RF Lowest User Rated Game of All Time (Metacritic)

[StillMcfuu]

It also stifles any enthusiasm in making the next DotA. Not that there has been since DotA, except maybe Auto-chess.

Guess it's just back to Footman Frenzy spam.

I agree with you, although I think most "good ideas" are just happy mistakes, especially when it comes to mods. Other than the game being a massive disappointment, it's still possible someone may accidentally create the next "good idea". But in the history of video games, how many mods spawned a billion dollar franchise or genre. I can only think of 2, Half-Life and Counter-strike (outside of CS, essentially invented competitive gaming/e-sports), and War3 and Dota.
I'm more familiar with CS, out of all the mods and maps, I don't see any gungame, cs-surf, prison break, etc... franchises. It's rare, but it does happen. Chances are there will be no money to be made, but with the EULA the way it is, Blizz has rights to whatever may come.

No sane person with a good idea will then use the Warcraft 3 Map editor.

The smart call would have been:
Keep the rules the same but actually capitalize on a good idea.

They could have had DotA under their wing, but didn't want to because they rather focused on WoW during that time (late TBC / Wotlk).
Any person with a brain that sometimes played Warcraft 3 saw how big DotA was pre LoL era.

No, nobody wins, Blizzard won't get DotA 2.0, Players don't get DotA 2.0, creator will have to trade their idea to use the Warcraft 3 platform.

As I kind of mention above, there is just no way for Blizz to even guess that DOTA would have turned into it's own billion dollar franchise. Even among extremely popular mods, there is no reason to believe that one would be worth anything outside of it's source game.

I don't know if this will stifle creativity, logically I would say maybe. But I think in this day and age of easy education, anyone that has a good idea is going to set off on their own and not use mod tools. During WAR3 prime, game creating tools and education were no where to be found, the easy to use tools of WAR3 made it a focal point for creation. The Warremade doesn't have that creative advantage.

[Skorpionss]

I agree with you, but the change to the EULA isn't even a spec of an issue with the other issues in the game.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah... that was Dota.

Now with this Eula they can have their cake and eat it. So if a mod gets uber popular, blizz can again tell them to go pound sand... while maintaining rights.

Its pretty... scummy, but it's good business.

That's literally not how it works if you actually bother to stop and think for a second. Copyright laws don't apply to IDEAS. That's why you can have Dota and LOL and how many other mobas got made and failed, because the ideas themselves are free to use by anyone. What you can't do is make a map called "Uber Leet Map", then go and make your stand-alone version of the game called "Uber Leet Map", using assets from the war3 map. What you can do is make the game with completely new assets, and change the name to something like ULM (Which is what valve did with DOTA2, instead of Defense of the Ancients 2).

- - - Updated - - -

There are no ladders anymore so new players will get matched with pros. Doesnt seem like that will lead to an enjoyable experience for new players to a 20 year old game.

They said it way back when that they will release ladders at a later date, same as it was with SC:Remastered. Stop being a drama queen.

[Volatilis]

4 or 5/10 seems more fair.

The fact it changes files on the original game is straight madness though. Someone a dark scientist would brew in a lab because hes being tasked by overlords to increase profits for the quarter

Having less features than the original is kind of weird also.

[GreenJesus]

That's literally not how it works if you actually bother to stop and think for a second. Copyright laws don't apply to IDEAS. That's why you can have Dota and LOL and how many other mobas got made and failed, because the ideas themselves are free to use by anyone. What you can't do is make a map called "Uber Leet Map", then go and make your stand-alone version of the game called "Uber Leet Map", using assets from the war3 map. What you can do is make the game with completely new assets, and change the name to something like ULM (Which is what valve did with DOTA2, instead of Defense of the Ancients 2).

- - - Updated - - -



They said it way back when that they will release ladders at a later date, same as it was with SC:Remastered. Stop being a drama queen.

So the game wasn't ready and they shipped it out anyway. Ladders existed in the game for nearly 20 years. Why do we need to wait months after release for a basic feature of any multiplayer game in 2020? Multiplayer functions should have been their number 1 priority to have ready since this game basically started esports.

[Kralljin]

As I kind of mention above, there is just no way for Blizz to even guess that DOTA would have turned into it's own billion dollar franchise.

No, as soon as LoL sprung up, the writing was on the wall and that was in 09 already.

Even before that, people hosted their own websites to have some sort of MMR for Dota matches, if you've been around during the DotA craze during the mid 2000's, you knew that this game was just waiting for someone launching it in some official fashion.

For fucks sake, Blizzcon 05 had a small DotA tournament.

https://web.archive.org/web/20070702...rnaments.shtml

There will also be a DotA tournament held for those interested in this very popular custom map.

Each winner from the Warcraft III, StarCraft, and DotA tournaments will win a Creative Zen Micro 5GB! So, practice now and dominate at BlizzCon to claim your place in the BlizzCon Fan Tournaments.

[Beet]

Not amazing at all, I'd like to see the real score, not just the review bombers.

How did it come to this, easy. The Devs deved and the whiners didn't like the devs devving because the whiners think they are better devs than the devs. So they review bombed the game. Folks need to learn to walk away sometimes instead of destroying everything because they dont get their own way.

(not you, cause I dont see you whining).

Oh please. Stop blaming the people upset. Did you see what we were shown at Blizzcon 2018? What we were told was coming? And what we got?

I don’t blame Blizzards developers. They are having a hard time with the layoffs and restrictions. I blame Activision Higher ups. The old Blizzard would have NEVER released this version of WC3. They were the when it’s ready company after all. This ain’t ready.

[Skorpionss]

So the game wasn't ready and they shipped it out anyway. Ladders existed in the game for nearly 20 years. Why do we need to wait months after release for a basic feature of any multiplayer game in 2020? Multiplayer functions should have been their number 1 priority to have ready since this game basically started esports.

I don't know, why did we have to wait months for SC:remaster Ladder to come out? And why did no1 rage about it? One of the reasons is because perhaps they wanted new players to get to know the game before enabling competitive play, so they can stand a chance against some older players. Or it may be as you say that they just weren't ready to release it from a technical standpoint. The only ones that know for sure are the people that worked on the game.

[Mukind]

Game reviews are partially about context....

You re release a game with a price tag that was already running fine on the platform....And you make it worse.

Other than ports...which are by definition not the same platform I can't recall anything like this. It's obvious why it happens in ports why would they do this? I can't imagine they made a lot of money off of it relative to the terrible press of having to rework their custom game system.

[Seranthor]

Oh please. Stop blaming the people upset. Did you see what we were shown at Blizzcon 2018? What we were told was coming? And what we got?

I don’t blame Blizzards developers. They are having a hard time with the layoffs and restrictions. I blame Activision Higher ups. The old Blizzard would have NEVER released this version of WC3. They were the when it’s ready company after all. This ain’t ready.

Then say that, say 'that aint ready'. That can be appreciated, that can be respected. But that isn't what is happening. When your toddler pitches a fit because they didn't get their way, how do you treat them? Exactly.

[Skorpionss]

Game reviews are partially about context....

You re release a game with a price tag that was already running fine on the platform....And you make it worse.

Other than ports...which are by definition not the same platform I can't recall anything like this. It's obvious why it happens in ports why would they do this? I can't imagine they made a lot of money off of it relative to the terrible press of having to rework their custom game system.

It kinda is using a different platform than the old one though, since the current battlenet didn't exist back then, so they had to integrate it. They did a piss poor job at it but I don't know what goes on in the backend of their engine.

[Mehrunes]

It's often good to swim against the flow of mindless tears, if it wasn't for the Mass Effect 3 whiners I wouldn't have tried out that series and it became one of my all time favourites.

But did you like it because of the ending?

[Mukind]

It kinda is using a different platform than the old one though, since the current battlenet didn't exist back then, so they had to integrate it. They did a piss poor job at it but I don't know what goes on in the backend of their engine.

Yea but that's their platform. I meant like windows to the switch or playstation. Consumer platforms

You can't charge for that. If they did this all for free that would be one thing, as an excuse to put it all on modern b.net

They charged like it was a port that consumers wanted lol

[Mightdead]

Why Warcraft: reforged deserve this score...
let's take as example a game from 1998. Capcom aka Crapcom... Resident Evil 2, they're doing 3, and now a 2002 game from Blizzard, Warcraft III: REFORGED (not remastered) they're advertising like a REMAKE,
"Visuals rebuilt from the ground up...". (just reskin of old models?)
"Over 4 hours of reforged cutscenes" (showed in blizzcon 2018 "the Culling")
"Updated UI and rebalanced gameplay" (seems the same from 2002)

Yeah for me is pretty clear this score and the hate on this game.

[Hyral]

… while I don’t entirely disagree with you, it’s also a matter of interpretation.

This sort of score is not targeted to the product itself, but to the behavior of the company behind the product, they literally shown players one thing and sold them another, and that’s was just pretty shitty, and honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if some try to push it as false advertising.

That said, despite what many are claiming, I was able to refund mine, however it’s worth mentioning that I had 0 time spent on it, as I was only able to start downloading a couple of days after it was released, by then I had reports about it from a couple of friends and a fuck ton of info about it on YouTube… thus decided to play safe and just say fuck it, it was a mistake pre-purchasing it, pretty ironic considering I always recommend against it, but since I never really regretted buying a Blizzard game, and considering how SC:Remaster was… what could go wrong, right!? Well fuck me sideways with a horse dildo and call me Betsy, never, ever, again.

I agree with that interpretation as well. Which is why I oppose the idea a lot of people have of vetting customer reviews. (Unless the review is just spam unrelated to the product or company, obviously.)

Customer reviews are a means to gauge the public's reception to a company's product. If a product managed to get customers angry enough to engage in review-bombing then to me that's as legitimate a representation of what the customer reception was to the product as any review. I just think it would be more productive in the long run if upset customers gave it a legitimate review, then detractors wouldn't be able to use the ridiculous score as an argument that the reception was "overblown."

But then we'd all live in a better world if everyone was capable of being fair instead of emotional. It is what it is.

[GreenJesus]

Why Warcraft: reforged deserve this score...
let's take as example a game from 1998. Capcom aka Crapcom... Resident Evil 2, they're doing 3, and now a 2002 game from Blizzard, Warcraft III: REFORGED (not remastered) they're advertising like a REMAKE,
"Visuals rebuilt from the ground up...". (just reskin of old models?)
"Over 4 hours of reforged cutscenes" (showed in blizzcon 2018 "the Culling")
"Updated UI and rebalanced gameplay" (seems the same from 2002)

Yeah for me is pretty clear this score and the hate on this game.

Just look at FF7 remake for a good example of a remake. Jesus that game looks good. Completely rebuilding it from the ground up. Now obviously that wasn't the goal of Wc3 Reforged, but still. Blizzard should have just said "remaster".

[Amarys]

0.5 is a hilarious score. IMO it's actually more of a 4/10. But I think it's just the hype compared to disappointment, expecting 'Blizzard polish', and the thing that was incredibly scummy = deleting the old game completely.

No, it's not. 0.5/10 is fair as the game is pretty much an amateurish scam. The score isn't for the game overall but what the "reforging" adds to the old game and since they cut pretty much all the cool features they advertised and added bugs in their place, it's well deserved.

[Onikaroshi]

Why Warcraft: reforged deserve this score...
let's take as example a game from 1998. Capcom aka Crapcom... Resident Evil 2, they're doing 3, and now a 2002 game from Blizzard, Warcraft III: REFORGED (not remastered) they're advertising like a REMAKE,
"Visuals rebuilt from the ground up...". (just reskin of old models?)
"Over 4 hours of reforged cutscenes" (showed in blizzcon 2018 "the Culling")
"Updated UI and rebalanced gameplay" (seems the same from 2002)

Yeah for me is pretty clear this score and the hate on this game.

It was always the same engine, it was NEVER advertised as a Remake. Remakes are from the ground up with modern engines, this was always a remaster. Even the word reforge alludes to remaster not remake. Reforging is taking an existing item and literally REFORGING it so that it is functional again. It's not creating a new item like a Remake would, that's like taking an item as blueprint but you're using all new materials to craft it.

As for the cutscenes and shit, they said they were cutting that. Their reason was people didn't want to them to rewrite parts of the game to match wow, you can believe whatever you want, but people were informed.

[Jastall]

But did you like it because of the ending?

I think the point was more that people bombing the game because of the ending painted a bit of an inaccurate picture. Yeah, it was a terrible ending by most people's accounts, mine very much included, but enough to rate the game in its entirety THAT low? Your mileage may definitely vary. And hey, some people (somehow) actually liked ME3's ending.

Company of Heroes 2 is another example of a bombed game. It has a 2 on Metacritic user scores because a bunch of Russians were angry about the game's portrayal of the Red Army and carpeted the ever loving shit out of its rating because people on Youtube told them to. That's not really relevant information about the game to anyone not in the target demographic of "Russian who cares entirely too much about how the Red Army looks in a vidya gaem", but a casual glance would make something think the perfectly fine game is an abomination.

It's why I don't like these bombing campaigns. Yes, Blizzard delivered a very sub-par remaster even if I like the models. Yes, what they did to the Classic version of WCIII is blasphemy and should be reversed posthaste. But the single worst game on Metacritic, ever? "Sending a message"? Give me a break, this is more akin to a tantrum.

[Andonais]

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wa...r-update/18425

Blizz update

[Edge-]

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wa...r-update/18425

Blizz update

We went a little deeper into the thought process behind that at the show, but the main takeaway is that the campaigns tell one of the classic stories in Warcraft history, and we want to preserve the true spirit of Warcraft III and allow players to relive these unforgettable moments as they were (albeit rebuilt with new animations and the higher fidelity art).

"We decided to reverse course on this significant change to cutscenes that we used as part of our marketing to sell the game. We didn't think it was worth actually telling anyone about this, we thought you might enjoy the surprise! Please understand."

What a garbage non-apology from them. "Sorry to those of you who didn't have the experience you wanted", no, it should be "We're sorry we didn't live up to the expectations we set for you."