Why did Warcraft III fail?

lux · Post by **lux** » 2003-07-24 04:30pm

Straha wrote:
lux wrote:I love the hero system in wc3. It wasn't supposed to be like SC, or WCII.
It's a different type of RTS. Some people like it (me), some people hate it with passion (JediNeophyte).

Without heroes there wouldn't be a Pandaren Brewmaster, and I would cry.

FOR PANDARIA!!
They added Pandaria? You know that may just be reason enough for me to buy the game...

Nah. They didn't add Pandaria. Just a Neutral Pandaren hero. IF they had added Pandaria, I'd be playing the game right now.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2003-07-24 06:27pm

lux wrote:
Straha wrote:
lux wrote:I love the hero system in wc3. It wasn't supposed to be like SC, or WCII.
It's a different type of RTS. Some people like it (me), some people hate it with passion (JediNeophyte).

Without heroes there wouldn't be a Pandaren Brewmaster, and I would cry.

FOR PANDARIA!!
They added Pandaria? You know that may just be reason enough for me to buy the game...
Nah. They didn't add Pandaria. Just a Neutral Pandaren hero. IF they had added Pandaria, I'd be playing the game right now.

What does he say? I bet the annoyed quotes are just so cute!!!

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-24 07:11pm

Uraniun235 wrote: Yeah, but the maps themselves are kinda dull. Symmetry is fine for, say, tournament maps or something like that, but they get really old.

And unfortunately the game doesn't seem to have spawned quite the map-making craze Starcraft did. The editor has even more options, buts a side effect is it's far more confusing and harder to work with.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-07-24 08:55pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote: Yeah, but the maps themselves are kinda dull. Symmetry is fine for, say, tournament maps or something like that, but they get really old.
And unfortunately the game doesn't seem to have spawned quite the map-making craze Starcraft did. The editor has even more options, buts a side effect is it's far more confusing and harder to work with.

Not to mention it's not that reliable. I can't get it to work on my computer despite the fact that Warcraft 3 and Frozen Throne run just fine.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-07-24 08:56pm

Oh and Straha, Frozen Throne reintroduces naval combat in some maps. If for nothing else that made the game worth it.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2003-07-24 08:57pm

Stormbringer wrote:Oh and Straha, Frozen Throne reintroduces naval combat in some maps. If for nothing else that made the game worth it.

It did now did it.... how good is it? And how much do you think it would cost to get the Game and Expansion? (I haven't owned it since Beta)

EDIT: Changed wording to make it clearer

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-07-24 09:03pm

Straha wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:Oh and Straha, Frozen Throne reintroduces naval combat in some maps. If for nothing else that made the game worth it.
It did now did it.... how good is it? And how much do you think it would cost to get the Game and Expansion? (I haven't owned it since Beta)

EDIT: Changed wording to make it clearer

There's not much of it in the first player campaign, at least that I've played. But I rather like it. Suffers a little on the variety, there's only transports and frigate so far but it's good. Especially since there are some more nautically oriented maps.

I got the collecters edition which was eighty bucks (normal edition- fifty bucks), and Frozen Throne cost me forty bucks at Best Buy. Worth it in my opinion. Especially since it adds a lot more than just naval units. Far more was added than in Brood War or Beyond the Dark Portal.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-07-25 06:05am

JediNeophyte wrote:!? There's a bunch of asymmetrical maps! I haven't played in awhile, one is a 1v1 night map "Silent River" IIRC. Try downloading the bonus jungle map too.

Most of the official maps are more or less symmetrical. Not necessarily in starting points, but the geography itself is roughly symmetrical.

It might not be perfectly symmetrical, but Silent River is easily dividable into two "reflections".

And besides, it seems like all the "asymmetrical" maps (not that there were many to begin with) are small maps... all the large ones are pretty bland.

gravity · Post by **gravity** » 2003-07-25 06:20am

Uraniun235 wrote:
JediNeophyte wrote:Slightly OT, but this reminds of one of the few things C&C: Generals improves upon its predecessors, map control. My friend and I usually play no-superweapon games, so turtling is not really an option. With supply stashes and tech buildings, quick and decisive map control is a huge factor for victory.
Yeah, but the maps themselves are kinda dull. Symmetry is fine for, say, tournament maps or something like that, but they get really old.

I dunno, I usually prefer at least roughly symmetrical maps in RTSes (though a little variation, like The Lost Temple in SC, is fine). Wildly non-symmetrical maps tend to be unfair to one player.