WarCraft III: Reign Of Chaos Review

By Rob Fahey Published 11 July, 2002

Blizzard resumes reign over RTS genre.

Version tested: PC

Rites of Passage

'WarCraft III: Reign Of Chaos' Screenshot feb03b

Hogwarts cameo?

Real-time strategy franchises tend to attract fanatical followings, from the legions of Command & Conquer fanboys to the near religious fervency of Total Annihilation devotees. None more so, however, than Blizzard's WarCraft series - and its futuristic spin-off, StarCraft - a series of RTS games which have honed to perfection a formula which balances relatively simple gameplay with surprisingly complex mechanics, innovative graphics and a healthy dollop of bizarre humour. It's a long time since the last game in the series grabbed the attention of the strategy gamer, making WarCraft III one of the most anticipated PC titles ever; can it possibly live up to the legacy of its forebears?

Set years after the conclusion of WarCraft II, with orcs and humans living in an uneasy co-existence, much has changed in the lands of WarCraft. For a start, they're entirely rendered in 3D now; from the intricately animated menu screens to the often stunning battlegrounds, every element of the game has been given a polygonal, texture-mapped makeover. The interface, which will be immediately familiar to fans of StarCraft, even features animated 3D portraits of each character you select - right down to the bored-looking sheep who occasionally wander through the map.

Purists need not worry, however, as nothing has been lost in the conversion to 3D. The basic gameplay of the series remains intact and, perhaps more importantly, the character and humour of the art in the original WarCraft games has been moved seamlessly into the third dimension. Blizzard were perhaps wise to wait until 3D was quite mature before releasing this latest game in the series; uninspiring, badly textured models would have ruined the feel of the title, but the quirky and beautifully animated models and portraits seen here carry the classic feel of the title admirably.

Nothing offered, nothing gained

'WarCraft III: Reign Of Chaos' Screenshot feb01b

The level of detail is almost unmatched in the genre

Those running low-spec systems will also be pleased to hear that, despite the graphical splendour of the game, it won't cripple even the most basic of systems. Playing four-player games on a network - usually the type of play most likely to bring an RTS title's framerate to its knees - saw smooth and perfectly acceptable framerates even on our lowest spec system, a Duron 800 with a GeForce 2. With a little tweaking, the game is undoubtedly playable on systems even less well endowed than that. Real time strategy titles have never been the most demanding games on the market in terms of system spec, and it's good to see Blizzard continuing this tradition and resisting the urge to add curves, bump mapping and all manner of other widgets which would rule out much of their audience unnecessarily.

But while little has been lost in the conversion to 3D, little has been gained either, although admittedly the move is nowhere near as disappointing as Command & Conquer's abortive foray into voxels. The switch to 3D has opened up significant scope for in-game cutscenes, but for the purposes of pure gameplay WarCraft may as well have remained in two dimensions. Camera rotation and movement is shockingly limited; you can't zoom out (and the default camera is very tight indeed, often making it impossible to see an entire skirmish on screen at once) and the 3D terrain is very obviously a polygonal sheet draped over a resolutely 2D map.

Aside from the updated technology underlying the game, the "big idea" behind WarCraft III is the inclusion of hero characters, with three distinct types for each race. These form the focus of the single player campaign and add a role-playing element to the gameplay by gaining experience through involvement in battle, with players earning a point to spend on upgrading their abilities every time they go up a level. Heroes are remarkably powerful and flexible characters, and their presence changes the mechanics of the game dramatically. Some have automatic status effects on all units within their range, others can cure units in their group, and most possess powerful physical or magical special attacks.

Leader of the Pack

'WarCraft III: Reign Of Chaos' Screenshot feb10b

Welcome to the dark side

Elsewhere, the gameplay of the series remains almost untouched, bar various tweaks. There are four races to play as now, with Dark Elves and the Undead being added to the traditional line-up of Orcs and Humans, and the influences of StarCraft are very obvious - the Undead are effectively a clone of the Zerg, complete with blighted land to build bases on. Each race is nicely balanced in terms of strengths and weaknesses, with the interesting addition of resource gathering abilities to the mix of differences. The Undead, for example, gather resources far more quickly and efficiently than other races, making it far easier for them to expand earlier in the game than the other races.

Frustratingly though, the unit control and production foibles of StarCraft have also made their way into WarCraft III. Many aspects of the control and grouping system are superb - the ability to select all units of a single type by double clicking on one of them should be enforced as law for every RTS game, and the "sub-grouping" system which allows you to press tab to move between unit types in your current group, enabling you to access all their various special abilities, is another excellent addition. However, the crippling inability to select more than a dozen units at any given time is every bit as annoying here as it was in StarCraft, and is seemingly arbitrary; the only explanation we can find for this unit limit is that that's the number of icons which would fit in the group panel at the bottom of the screen.

Much more frustrating, however, is the absolute food limit in the game. Each player is restricted to 90 food units total, and once you hit that limit you can build as many farms (or equivalent food-producing buildings) as you like, but the limit won't budge. Not only that, but many high-level creatures and units take up several food units apiece. Micromanagement near the food limit is astonishingly annoying - RTS should be about battles, not trying to get some low-level units killed so that you can afford to fit in another high-level unit! Food also quickly becomes the most important resource in the game, much more so than gold or wood, which is a ridiculous situation. The limit may be there for balance purposes, but if so it's a clumsy and cack-handed way to balance the game, and possibly the single most negative factor about the title as a whole.

Cinema Paradiso

'WarCraft III: Reign Of Chaos' Screenshot feb09b

Scariest doctor ever!

These issues aside, there's a hell of a lot to enjoy in WarCraft III. As mentioned, the sense of humour of the previous games is retained, naturally including the ability to repeatedly click units for a variety of amusing speech clips, some of which are fantastically funny. There's a massive single player campaign which is entertaining and varied, even if the difficulty curve could have done with a little tweaking in some places, while multiplayer is perfectly balanced and a lot of fun, either on a LAN or through the superb Battle.net system. This performs excellently and makes playing on even a humble modem possible. Our only complaint about multiplayer is that many units pop up in the single player game which aren't available in multiplayer - a somewhat frustrating oversight.

One element of the game worth special mention is the cinematic clips that punctuate the single player game. These are, in a word, superb; possibly the most impressive examples of rendered video we've ever seen. While much of this splendour is purely technical progress - cloth, leather, fur and feathers all look excellent - quite a bit of it is down to first-class direction and animation, and the game's classical score contributes in no small measure as well. While these sumptuous cutscenes aren't quite up to the standard set by Final Fantasy X in terms of facial animation, in every other respect Blizzard has leapfrogged Square's video department - an impressive feat indeed.

So does WarCraft III live up to our high expectations? Yes. It's not perfect by any means - the food limit and unit selection limit will drive you nuts after a bit of play, and the "Upkeep" tax on your gold mines when you have more than a certain number of units is frankly daft, since it encourages you to build as few units as you possibly can. It is a worthy update to the series though, and makes the transition to 3D with flying colours while adding some interesting new gameplay elements to an already hugely enjoyable title. No fan of real-time strategy should be without WarCraft III, and many RPG fans will want to take a peek as well.

9 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Rob.

About Rob Fahey

Rob Fahey is a former editor of GamesIndustry.biz who spent several years living in Japan and probably still has a mint condition Dreamcast Samba de Amigo set.

Read more articles from Rob by visiting the Rob Fahey archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (79) Latest comment 8 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • skalmanxl #1 10 years ago

    Does anyone know how this runs on a P2 350 64 megs of Ram and a Matrox G400 card? I'm drooling over this and NWN...but afraid that none of them will run, even with everything toned down...

  • hulahoops #2 10 years ago

    Aaaawwwwwww! I want a PC now...

  • UncleLou #3 10 years ago

    skal, can you hear me laughing?


    ...I am only amused because my comp is even worse than yours ;-)

    But honestly, I read a performance statistics in a German Mag which brought me to the conclusion that it wouldn't even run decently on my gf's PIII 500/196MB/Gf2. They are not always reliable, though.

    edit: *cough* 192 MB, of course
    Edited by 1 at 11/07/02 @ 16:38

  • Mr_Sleep #4 10 years ago

    It is indeed excellent. Well done on the good review.

    The Cut Scenes are magnificent especially a later one featuring Grom.

    It is also one of the longer games of recent months, they have crafted an interesting single player game and i didn't manage to complete it in under a week ;)
    Edited by 1 at 11/07/02 @ 16:32

  • Tricky #5 10 years ago

    Actually this is definitely the best thing I've seen on PC recently and may be good enough to tempt me away from my Medal Of Honour online addiction. My flatmate's got it and watching him play it has been most entertaining, if frustrating ('cos I wanna play). So I usually just slink back off and play some Frequency on PS2 (which is not getting nearly enough recognition anywhere as far as I'm concerned - bloody excellent game).
    Edited by 1 at 11/07/02 @ 16:31

  • hulahoops #6 10 years ago

    You think you've got it bad? I'm currently running a 486 SX 33 Mhz with 8 Meg of RAM.

    I'm holding out little hope that this'll run.

  • Tricky #7 10 years ago

    Oh, Lou and Skal - I've seen it running on a PII 400 with 512MB RAM and a GeForce 3 (64MB I think - could have been 32) and it ran pretty well. The detail had to be notched down a bit but it still looked pretty nice. So Skal, you may well be out of luck but UncleLou should be okay.

    But don't quote me on that ;-)

    Blank - I'd save your energy and stop holding out *any* hope to be honest.
    Edited by 1 at 11/07/02 @ 16:34

  • Nemesis #8 10 years ago

    Well I've just started on this game and, same as Tricky, I'm wanting to play WC3 more than MOHAA. The presentation is absolutely superb, on a 1900XP+GF4600 it looks lovely. And those cutscenes - pure Blizzard.

    For those of you buying this, purchase this from GAME/EB and you get WC2 Battlenet for free. I had to ask at the counter ; don't ask don't get!

  • UncleLou #9 10 years ago

    "on a 1900XP+GF4600 it looks lovely"

    Go away, troll, haven't you read what we are talking about? ;)

  • Pirotic #10 10 years ago

    looks like i'll have to get the warez version floating about (160mb) and see how it performs on my system before i splash out and buy the full thing..

    ..of course, if i see a demo on a magazine tonight i'd happily stop breaking the law :p

  • Nemesis #11 10 years ago

    Who's that trip-tripping across my bridge.

    Hey, let me bask in glory, I only just got to upgrade!

  • hulahoops #12 10 years ago

    "I'd save your energy and stop holding out *any* hope to be honest"

    Yeah, you're right. Maybe I should splash out on that DX 66.

  • Tricky #13 10 years ago

    I doubt that that version is the game at all Pirotic. The full install for WC3 is something like 700MB. Remember kids, don't do it... bloody pirates.

  • Tricky #14 10 years ago

    No Blank - go for the full on speed of the DX4 100. If you paste go-faster-stripes on the chip it may help too ;-)

  • Nemesis #15 10 years ago

    Hello hello who's been messing with the page formats!

  • kifkludge #16 10 years ago

    Damn good game this - nothing really revolutionary in it, but what there is has been done well and it does feel like a polished game. Especially those pre-rendered cutscenes, which do put FF10 to shame.

    The 90-max food limit is not that bad - if you do notice yourself running out of space for more units, then you probably should be attacking someone already.

    Only being able to select a dozen units at once is a lot more annoying though, but the unit AI can handle itself well enough in a pitched melee, so you don't have to micromanage it too much.

  • otto #17 10 years ago

    EG - no problem as such with moving comments away from the article they (in theory) pertain to, but at least could the 'new comments' column on the right of the screen link to the comments themselves, rather than the story?

  • Nemesis #18 10 years ago

    Maybe this'll slow Otto down at last! !

  • otto #19 10 years ago

    fat chance

  • otto #20 10 years ago

    Ah, fixed...

    Nice one rauper ;)

  • Pirotic #21 10 years ago

    >> I doubt that that version is the game at all Pirotic.

    hmmm.. appears to be, single-player works fine once you get a crack, it has no FMV and no music. which could explain why its smaller (together with compression)

    Runs fine on my 1.5ghz (Geforce2).. so, looks like i'll be buying the full thing, must be an irony that if it wasn't for the warez version i would not of bothered (i always play demos first, just to test perfomance)

  • skalmanxl #22 10 years ago

    skal, can you hear me laughing?

    Yeah I hear it, and are those jackals in the backgrond?

    I'm waiting for the demo for a while. Or hope to get that fucking job.

  • Super Stu #23 10 years ago

    Especially those pre-rendered cutscenes, which do put FF10 to shame

    Care to back that up, especially considering that PS2 CGI is mpeg2 encoded and PC stuff is... well, a bit naff.

  • Tricky #24 10 years ago

    Fair enough P. Get the full version though - it's so worth it for the multiplayer and the cutscenes are, as kifkludge says, tremendous. Underneath it all it may be a fairly standard RTS but it's got atmosphere in buckets and that wins it for me every time.

  • Polymath #25 10 years ago

    I've been playing this game for about a week and am still trying to decide whether or not I prefer the micro focus vs the macro of starcraft. The 90 food limit and upkeep is a very novel idea in that it changes the emphasis on those that can keep an economy going to those who can organize an efficient assault group with efficient balance.

    Because you can no longer organize a huge army and keep a huge army at home, space management and surveillance is much more important.

    You rarely can use more than 2 or 3 full control groups, as opposed to SC where you might have 5 or more if you played a zerg race.

    The control group issue, thus, isn't as big a deal because without careful management of what each spell caster is casting, you can't maximize your combat efficiency.

    Another big difference is that you can probably bring your army from battle to battle. Losing your entire force is something much more devastating now. There are many more ways to preserve your beseiged forces now.

    It's actually very different.

    I'm not sure I like it better, but the subtle differences make a huge impact on how the tactics are played out.

  • Polymath #26 10 years ago

    BTW:
    I've been gone for a while. Has ES been banned?
    I haven't seen any flame wars for awhile...

  • hulahoops #27 10 years ago

    Tricky - Do you think I'm made of money?!?

  • Polymath #28 10 years ago

    jt-
    point conceded. The upkeep should be looked at as a penalty for keeping large forces.

    The individual unit focus is one of the more remarkable, though subtle features of this games.

  • Shinji #29 10 years ago

    "Care to back that up, especially considering that PS2 CGI is mpeg2 encoded and PC stuff is... well, a bit naff."

    Sod the encoding - WarCraft III just has plan better videos. Better art direction, better rendering, breath-takingly good music... No, the encoding isn't as crystal clear as the PS2s MPEG2 playback, but I really don't think that's the question here.

    That said, some of the bits of Xenosaga I've seen look better again....

  • kifkludge #30 10 years ago

    Especially those pre-rendered cutscenes, which do put FF10 to shame

    Care to back that up, especially considering that PS2 CGI is mpeg2 encoded and PC stuff is... well, a bit naff.

    Soz - was working for a change and missed this. I was just going to say what Shinji's said more eloquently anyways. Polymath's comments were spot on as well.

    Warcraft's videos have atmosphere, but in FFX ... I dunno, something's missing and with all the time Square spends on FF games I expect more. Keep buying the damn things tho.

  • reto #31 10 years ago

    including the ability to repeatedly click units for a variety of amusing speech clips, some of which are fantastically funny.

    Did you LOL and stuff? Are they actually that funny!

  • Gestalt #32 10 years ago

    "you didnt even mention the addition of the heros"

    You didn't even read the review, or you would have seen that they are mentioned at the bottom of the first page (admittedly briefly).
    Edited by 1 at 11/07/02 @ 20:58

  • [Alt][F4] #33 10 years ago

    9 is abit high imo..8 or even 7 would have been more accurate.
    MY reasons why :
    1.Graphics are great, cant touch that, except the in-game(during-mission?) cinematics.. they are just plain blocky. Seeing that pally run makes me laugh.
    2. Engine, while I understand that the zoom out was predetermined because of balanced reasons, there was no reason whatsoever not to implement full sideways 360 degrees movable camera..as it is right now, you can only move abit right/left and the thing goes back to the original position on its own (very annoying).
    3.Sound- is great, same with speech. Music is very weak. There is only 3 songs per race during the match, and 1 of the 3 in each is worth listening to; others are just mediocre at best.(you'll know which ones, that's how big the gap is)
    4.The story.. so far I got half way through Orc campaign(~75% of the whole game?), and I can say it's nothing to write home about, but I guess a step forward from your preditable warcraft2. Yeah, like you didnt know he's gonna switch sides, common..
    (not gonna say anymore details so I wont spoil it for those who wish to rent/buy it, but don't expect any "wow how did that happen" twists.. at least not till end of Orcs I guess)
    5.The cinematics between scenerios..I dunno, the trailer seemed a hell of a lot more spectacular in what is going on then the ones presented in the game..I guess that's just trailers thingy, they are suppoused to make you run out and buy it.
    Still, a shame.
    6. Multi- great fun, although it slowly accures to me everytime I play I'm doing mostly the same thing..same amount of peons, grunts, get a hero, go like mad toward healing ward & doctors etc..still fun I guess.
    One more thing, if you are a die hard of Starcraft, you'll still be playing that on b.net rather then War3.

  • Shinji #34 10 years ago

    Few points to respond to :)

    Sneti :-
    I do see where you're coming from and there's a lot of personal opinion involved in my criticism of this factor. That's why it didn't affect my final score greatly. However, of all the people here playing it, all of us found the food limit MASSIVELY painful and annoying... Which suggests to me that a lot of people will think similarly.

    Kifkludge :-
    Oh I don't know about that... Some of the videos in FFX were utterly breathtaking in every respect; WC3 has better ones, but that doesn't make the FFX ones bad by any measure or means. The Tidus/Yuna in the lake video with Suteki Da Ne playing in the background is one of the best bits of video I've ever seen.

    Reto :-
    Yeah, I actually LOL'ed at some of the stuff. In real life, like. With my lungs. Or whatever bit of you technically does the LOLing :)

    AltF4 :-
    I have to disagree really strongly on the music. I've got the soundtrack to the game, and it's excellent - some superbly dramatic orchestal stuff. Beats the crap out of 90% of game soundtracks.

    Multiplayer, hmm... I have to admit that the first time we played it multi, I wasn't impressed, but it's grown on me a LOT.

    Maul :-
    Read the effing review FGS :)



  • Polymath #35 10 years ago

    Actually,
    I think the multiplayer is where blizzard will get to see whether or not the game is really worth their effort. The campaign scenarios are still based very much on the traditional RTS balance, which means huge standing armies hang around waiting to pounce having large bases for you to destroy. Now that we're using small skirmishing bands of units, it's disproportionately difficult to deal with 4-5 similarly endowed groups in terms of mass and size.

    In multiplayer, since we all start from the same initial resources, challenging one another in terms of micro, macro, reaction time and map awareness is huge. Additionally, coordination between partners appears to be even more critical than games like SC due to the much greater requirement for attention. The micro two teamed players can achieve in one battle with shared unit control is absolutely frightening.

    The outnumbered guy will be shafted.

    In a sense, the game has become unit control, not economy. More Tactical, less strategic...

    Talking about it makes me go home and play!
    Edited by 1 at 11/07/02 @ 23:03

  • Slim #36 10 years ago

    I also liked the food limit. It made you avoid the 'build a huge army of pooning and go rush the enemy base' of other rts's. I'm sure the limit raised when I created a second base too, but I might be going mad?

    Biggest fustration for me, apart from the unit selection, was the utter waste of oppurtunity from the 3d engine. Very little in the way of camera controls, no rotating, etc. Silly. Might has well have left it 2d.
    Edited by 1 at 12/07/02 @ 00:51

  • Khab #37 10 years ago

    Well, after having played a bit of it at my brother's last night, I have to say I've never understood and never will understand why Blizzard won't let that 12-unit selection rule go... it's insanely annoying when you need to move 13 or 14 units somewhere... and it's something that's so fundamental it's scary that they haven't addressed it.

  • Pirotic #38 10 years ago

    fredrick - in a way i see your point, but then again your saying 'its clear your system spec meets the requirements' yet we both know the specs on the box are most of the time totally unreliable, anybody remember TA:Kingdoms? 300mhz recommended.. yet it ran like a dog on anything twice that speed.

    if i see a PC game i like, first thing i do is check the official website for a demo, then and only then would i consider getting a pirated version. i've ordered the full game from Game (comes with Warcraft2 battle .net edition). so i dont think my actions hurt anybody.
    Edited by 1 at 12/07/02 @ 09:39

  • kifkludge #39 10 years ago

    Khab: why Blizzard won't let that 12-unit selection rule go... it's insanely annoying when you need to move 13 or 14 units somewhere...

    Yeah, that's when it annoys me the most - when you're just a few units over the limit. Wish they'd have included a "kill-your-own-unit" key.

    Shinji: The Tidus/Yuna in the lake video with Suteki Da Ne playing in the background is one of the best bits of video I've ever seen.

    Certainly - there's quite a few that stick in my head: the one where you see Yuna sending for the first(?) time, the clip of them "arriving" at the wedding and of course, the battle scenes.

    I just found myself watching the FF vids for the technical details, seeing how they've come on with facial animation and movement.

    On a side note, I still get surprised at the length of the credits in an FF game - am I underestimating how much work does go into it or is it commonplace to have someone do the menu programming and nothing else, someone do the hair animation and nothing else?

  • KingRoLo #40 10 years ago

    Well done -- Rob "Shinji" Fahey

    a very good review.

  • Dorag_kid #41 10 years ago

    I kinda, almost, well i did like Warcraft 1 and 2 but it got pretty lonsome on an alien planet. Pretty much the graphics were good, and if these graphics were good warcraft 3 will be better i guess. so 2 thumbs up ill give it.

  • Pirotic #42 10 years ago

    great game, i dread to think how much love and attension has gone into thoose fantastic menu screens.

  • Pirotic #43 10 years ago

    Been playing online for a fair while now, its far more complicated then i at first perceived, i spent some time to read thru the guide on the website, and theres alot of stuff u simply would not know about if you didnt so having a read is highly recommended.

    The FMV IS incredible, if you have a problem with the quality order the collectors edition version and you get a DVD which contains all the cut-scenes without the rather poor-quality divx compression

    The FMV doesn't really suit the game tho, its a nice reward but its so dark and gloomy in contrast to the games colorfull 'mario-esque' graphics.
    Edited by 2 at 15/07/02 @ 14:17

  • Mr_Sleep #44 10 years ago

    Well i did actually manage to complete the single player game in just over a week, still really great though.

  • UncleLou #45 10 years ago

    skal, have you tried in the meantime if it runs on your comp? I have read in a forum that a lot of people with PII 400 say it runs fine, but your RAM might be a problem. My girlfriend bought it (yes!) and she says it runs perfectly fine on her PIII 500, GF2 192 MB, so with a bit more RAM you might be fine.

  • skalmanxl #46 10 years ago

    Sorry Lou haven't gotten to try it yet. I'm gonna try and borrow a copy from a mate, and then see for myself.

  • UncleLou #47 10 years ago

    Warcraft III should at least be a better choice than Neverwinter Nights, because a friend told me NWN is hardly playable on his PIII 500/GF2 setup, while WCIII runs fine (in case you rather trust a man than my girl-friend.) Yes, i know a lot of people with cheap comps.

    Well, with my PII300/Voodoo3 I don't even need to bother at all.
    Edited by 1 at 18/07/02 @ 14:01

  • Thamuhacha #48 10 years ago

    "Warcraft III should at least be a better choice than Neverwinter Nights..."

    Speaking of which - has Eurogamer any plans to review NWN? All the minor problems aside (and I have experienced very few) it is a very good game indeed!

    MUCH more enjoyable than Dungeon Siege and Morrowind.

  • Gestalt #49 10 years ago

    "has Eurogamer any plans to review NWN"

    We're working on it, but it's a huge game and we didn't even get sent a review copy until a couple of weeks after it was released. :-/


    "HALF THE GAME IS LOST CUZ THERE IS NO NAVY AT ALL"

    I doubt that has anything to do with the conversion to 3D. :)
    Edited by 1 at 19/07/02 @ 10:51

  • Pirotic #50 10 years ago

    i got the full game now :) been playing it for ages, infact was just about to win a 3 on 3 game but then the server decided to cut me off.. :( seems to be really busy today.

  • FWB #51 10 years ago

    I bitched and moaned about the ingame graphics but I finally have a copy in my hands and I must say I was mistaken. They aren't great fully zoomed in, but they certainly look damn good from a distance. I love the animation of some of the units.

    The smaller armies are a neat idea and I love the upkeep. It forces you to really think about what you're party consists of, something I really don't think I've done for a long time in a game. Do you go for one-two dragons or a shit load of ghouls.

    I've yet to play online, but would ne interested in giving it ago. Anyone here fancy a game at some point? It'd be nice to find some guys who will go easy on me since I'm a novice. :)

    "HALF THE GAME IS LOST CUZ THERE IS NO NAVY AT ALL!"

    Yes, it is sad they kicked them out, especially when they have the models there. Perhaps in an addon?

    The only other addition I'd like is more RPG elements. More spells/abilties for your heroes BUT a limit as to what they can learn. At the moment its kind of sad that a maxed out hero has every skill. It means you really don't need to think about what you pick when levelling because you'll have everything in the end anyway.

  • Pirotic #52 10 years ago

    maybe, but you dont normally get maxed out in battle.net games, so its important to pick which one you wish to level up first. i play as humans and normally pick to learn the 'sheild' skill so my hero cannot take damage, then he can easily defeat the mobs and get the points needed to learn the heal-skill.

  • FWB #53 10 years ago

    Well Artha, or whatever his name is, does sound like an American-jock. His sword is firmly shoved up his... well you know. :)

  • FWB #54 10 years ago

    lol.

    "And really, UK ones would have been far more authentic, considering that the Americans were still living in tribes back then "

    What time is "back then"? I don't recall the undead, eleves or the horde taking part in our history.

    Has anyone played any of the other games MP yet? I've had a go at Hero Arena (alot of fun and definately something that could be expanded upon. It also really highlights the deoth of the game, showing so many characters you never knew existed) and the maze game (although I got yelled at by someone for not dealing with my part of the maze, although I politely argued otherwise). It seems like a neat little engine they've built.

  • richard #55 10 years ago

    I've played the first human campaign through on a P3 450, 192Mb RAM with a G400MAX, and with all the settings on minumum (oncluding 640x480x32), the slowdown is bearable. Just. What a shocker. The cutscenes were apalling. Gobsmacked by the pre-rendered video, though :)

    Having said that, the game is pretty boring too. Then again, I haven't seen the genre do anything too exciting since Dune 2, except improve the interface, add networking (which I don't have the time to use) and make it 3D. Booooring.
    Edited by 1 at 22/07/02 @ 04:45

  • UncleLou #56 10 years ago

    "anyways im more confused as to why Blizzard, a UK company used US accents over the local ones"

    As far as I know, Blizzard is as American as cheeseburgers, baseball and the Beach Boys.

  • Nemesis #57 10 years ago

    Sunny Irvine IIRC.

  • Pirotic #58 10 years ago

    I too was under the impression it was an american company, a quick delve into there website reveals that they are located in Irvine CA, so Nemesis got that spot on.

    as for the accents, can't say i noticed. i think a good old scots accent would suit the 'humans' rather well.. with there big bearded hero's n all ;)

  • otto #59 10 years ago

    lol

    I was sitting there trying to work out who the hell Sunny Irvine is and what he has to do with this thread... o_O

  • Pirotic #60 10 years ago

    lol.. o_O indeed

  • Nemesis #61 10 years ago

    He's Eddies Alter Ego.

    ;-)



  • FWB #62 10 years ago

    I've played the first human campaign through on a P3 450, 192Mb RAM with a G400MAX, and with all the settings on minumum (oncluding 640x480x32), the slowdown is bearable. Just. What a shocker. The cutscenes were apalling. Gobsmacked by the pre-rendered video, though :)

    Well I'm running a P866 512MB Radeon 64DDR (1st generation) at 1024x768x32 and it runs absolutely smoothly with everything maxed out, even during huge multiplayer games. Compared to other games I don't find it that demanding.

    Anywho, yeah the cutscenes are bad, but that's where the good performance comes in. The models look pretty poor close up. If you're finding it boring, check out some of the online play. There are numerous mods, some of which are worthy multiplayer games by themselves.

    Edited by 1 at 22/07/02 @ 13:23

  • Pirotic #63 10 years ago

    I realise they've done a great job in keeping the specs low, but the model detail even on high is a bit pathetic. also the FMV is incredible, yet they divx compressed them to 40mb files.. terrible quality, how could they?

    oh, so ppl by the special edition box set with the DVD version? i see ;)

    bloody fantastic game tho, totally addicted to it.

  • FWB #64 10 years ago

    oh, so ppl by the special edition box set with the DVD version? i see ;)

    Is that what the DVD version has? Just improved FMVs?

  • Nemesis #65 10 years ago

    WC3

    Blizzard get heavy with the cheaters. No messing about.

    Updated with proper clicky link
    Edited by 1 at 08/08/02 @ 17:35

  • Blerk #66 10 years ago

    Blizzard will ban the CD key of anyone caught using this hack in Warcraft III

    Wow! About time someone did this!

  • UncleLou #67 10 years ago

    Although to describe a no fog of war cheat as a "slight advantage" is a bit of an understatement, isn't it?

  • Whizzo #68 10 years ago

    is a bit of an understatement, isn't it?
    That's what I thought, I don't play Warcraft3 but I'm impressed that Blizzard aren't pussy-footing around over the issue.

  • brutal #69 10 years ago

    "Blizzard will ban the CD key "

    what... has noone put out a keygen yet??

  • Nemesis #70 10 years ago

    Maybe there's some smallprint that says "Cheat and we'll withdraw the free on-line service" or something. All credit to Blizz. for not taking any $hit. Online cheaters REALLY f..k me off. MOHAA is ruined by complete t0ssers some nights.

  • Nemesis #71 10 years ago

    I know I know. I'd much rather get beaten by skill than a mod to the shotty or something.

    I once beat a friend with a rolled up newspaper (true) for downloading weapon-based hack for MOHAA. Play it properly. He got a clan demotion. One more demote, and he's officially going on as "Tea Making B1tch"

  • Mr_Sleep #72 10 years ago

    Something awful have created a rather bizaare guide to Warcraft III, enjoy

  • eviltobz #73 9 years ago

    nice link Mr Sleep. especially liked the interesting mathematical skills that he used to caluculate you could have 440 orcs in huts :)

  • Mr_Sleep #74 9 years ago

    Wow I posted that ages ago...

  • FWB #75 9 years ago

    lol. Yep, a good link:

    Now in Warcarft 3 there are 5 differeant races too choose from! If yuo choose one taht does not mean yuor racist though,

    I like his guide to protecting your hero and then when someone counters it he attacks the game-code. His psychological warfare is interesting too.

    There's an neat take on Penny-Arcade if you go to his main website:

    http://www.somethingawful.com/jeffk/muchbettarthan pa/index.htm

  • eviltobz #76 9 years ago

    yep, but i'm a slow reader.

  • ssuellid #77 9 years ago

    play.com have this for £13.99

  • peejay #78 8 years ago

    I think the best thing is about this game is the custom games on battle.net they rock eg. Dragonball Z rampage will be one of the best custom games you will find.

  • Pirotic #79 8 years ago

    *throws a net over jeffery*

    i got one lads!! caught my very first tard!!