Slashdot Mirror
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
Warcraft III runs on Windows 95/98/2000/NT and Mac OS. My setup was easy as pie, which was surprising since I run WinXP. And, on a side note, I was running it on a LCD screen and had no problem. Blizzard has an effective video setup that allows you to customize the game to match your hardware by changing the resolution, model detail, animation quality, texture quality, particles, and lights. This is especially helpful if you're running on an older machine and still want your game to run fast. The sound setup even allows you to have Dolby Surround!
I'm always disappointed that Blizzard's betas only let you play multiplayer, but that's life. In multiplayer mode, I found my abilities only let me get about 30 minutes into the game before I was demolished by the hard-core players. Maybe it was me, but Warcraft III seemed to have a faster pace than the previous two releases. The pace is a double-edged sword, because some players like their video games to be fast paced while others like to take their time. I think Warcraft II is somewhere in between Urban Terror and Civilization III. So, until I can take it low and play in a single player campaign mode, I'm counting the days until Blizzard releases Warcraft III 1.0.
Most important, if you're looking forward to the game, be assured: the gameplay is cool. This time you have a choice between four races: Human, Undead, Orc, or Dark Elf. Your race really doesn't matter in multiplayer mode; winning basically comes down to building everything up quickly and creating a massive army with which to crush your opponents. Or in my case, getting crushed.
This is where one of my favorite features comes into play. When enemies are attacking you (or your allies), the map flashes, letting you know that there is a throwdown and you should send in backup. Features I'm looking forward to in the upcoming release include: LAN games (five laptops, five six-packs, you know the drill), the single-player campaign, map editors, and polished cinematics. I realize that cinematics may not really be a game feature, but I can down a tub of popcorn when I'm watching Blizzard's cinematics, they're just that cool.
Warcraft III gives new meaning to strategy RPGs. If you like to play pure strategy games where your only goal is to be the last one standing, this game is for you. If you like games where you can take a character, build him up, and watch the character grow over the life of the game, this game is for you. Warcraft III is a successful cross between the two genres. You can build your basic Orc Grunts and go fight the enemy, but you can also build Heroes. Each class has different Heroes with which you can gain experience, attain new levels, and learn new skills. Warcraft III even lets you carry around an inventory!
I think the biggest improvement that Warcraft III has over its predecessors is Blizzard's ever more impressive graphics. With a decent video card, the graphics are crisp and clear. Nowadays, 3D is the name of the game, and Blizzard again comes a step closer to reality with this strategy role-playing game.
Most important, if you're looking forward to the game, be assured: the gameplay is cool. This time you have a choice between four races: Human, Undead, Orc, or Dark Elf. Your race really doesn't matter in multiplayer mode; winning basically comes down to building everything up quickly and creating a massive army with which to crush your opponents. Or in my case, getting crushed.
RTS is dead. Its all about who's the 1337 D00D that can build up his army faster and rush the enemy. Adding 3D and new races isn't helping. You need to force strategy on the opponent. Games like Conquest:Frontier Wars is a game thatforces stratgy on the player, and removes the micromanagement. That needs to be done to bring RTS back to life.
I'm afraid WarCraft3 is nothing more than an upgrade of Warcraft2. Sure, its pretty, and will entertain for about a week, but it'll all come down to who can rush faster.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
From the WC III FAQ: Are there any plans to port a Linux version?
We are currently developing WarCraft III for the PC and Macintosh and have no plans for versions on other operating systems.
Would have been nice to know if was going to be available under OSX or Classic. Perhaps I just missed where it was listed??
I know I can't be the only one that refuses to play RTS games until they come up with a decent AI for your forces? For me, the real question about the beta is what your forces do when they are finished with their assigned task? Do they stand around waiting for another order, or do they do something intelligent?
;-)
Until RTS games have decent enough AI that when your grunt is done building that fort you assigned him to build he goes and either returns to his previous job or starts doing some other productive job, I won't play them. I don't want to micromanage a bunch of grunts, that's my boss's job
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
Lacking, to say the least.
"winning basically comes down to building everything up quickly and creating a massive army with which to crush your opponents. "
Yawn. Boy how original. In 1984.
Hmm, theres combat, and that part of the screen flashes, gee just like every other RT strat. game.
Yawn.
Has Dolby Sound, could be cool, unfortuanatly a very small percentage of there payer will have a speaker set up for this. I'd hate to think the game took so long to develop because of this.
Detects your hardwaye, now thats new. oh wait, no its not. Yawn
"Warcraft III gives new meaning to strategy RPGs. If you like to play pure strategy games where your only goal is to be the last one standing, this game is for you. If you like games where you can take a character, build him up, and watch the character grow over the life of the game, this game is for you. "
didn't you say its all about building up fast earlier in your review?
How where the graphics? did you need to look up anything in the manual, or was the interface intuitive? did you try it with different settings, on different machines? in which way is it better or worse then WarcraftII?
When Considering the reputation of Blizzard, and comparing it to the reputation of Slashdot, I'll believe the reviewer just isn't any good at doing a review and assume Blizzards game is going to be good. Mind you, thats only because I've enjoyed their *Crafts series so much.
Although I couldn't stand Diablo.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I am leaning toward the idea that it is more Vivendi than Blizzard.
Blizzard has recently been practicing the "good fight" by using technological rather than legal means to try and slow down the crackers. One of their patches took a week to crack, and another one took only a day but it was rather funny since the game found out if you were playing a cracked version and generated invincible hostile monsters in your base.
I also don't think Blizzard would have been just so plain inept in their action if it was their own. Vivendi managed to legally attack all the wrong people while missing the Warforge team that actually made the Warcraft III beta playable. Eventually it seems that someone from Blizzard came to IRC and talked to the leader in a civilized and normal fashion. I don't think the details of this conversation ever came out but it is the opinion of some that they came to some sort of private agreement, which certainly seems possible.
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.