Warcraft3 - any good?

[yogaman]

Well, I'm considering to get it ... is it worth it? I've heard that it's supposed to be a great game. Can somebody tell me if it is really "that" great? I really liked Starcraft from blizzard whereas Warcraft2 was no match.

thx

[Doomulation]

Yeah, warcraft 3 is a good game.
Except for some limitations. In this game, you have heroes and good units. In this game, strategy is the key. You can no longer make a brute force as in previous games.

But aside from that...it's pretty good.

[Raging Fuel]

Originally posted by Doomulation
Yeah, warcraft 3 is a good game.
Except for some limitations. In this game, you have heroes and good units. In this game, strategy is the key. You can no longer make a brute force as in previous games.

But aside from that...it's pretty good.

Hehe, a downside is that you require strategy?

Anyway, I love the game. Go get it.

[Doomulation]

Let me rephrase...
you MUST use strategy.

In campaigns, you have very little gold, and thus with such small armies, you would never be able to use brute force.

[Johnny_Rico]

Warcarft's problem will always remain it's limit for amount of units chosen, it's unrealistic and totally unnecessary.

As a Homeworld fan, I just can't play their games.

[Eagle]

The limit on units is what forces you to use strategy and makes the game more interesting. Also in WC3 if you build too many units, then your gold mine will stop bringing in as much gold, this is called upkeep. It prevents rushing and makes people play the game as it was intended. After all it is a Real Time STRATEGY game, not a Real Time Brute Force game.

WC3 kicks homeworld's arse. I've played the homeworld series, and many of the other RTS games since they are my favorite including C&C/RA, AOE, Homeworld, WarCraft/StarCraft, and a whole bunch more I cant think of right now. Blizzard seems to have the right idea and is dominating with their release of WC3.

[Johnny_Rico]

Is WC3 different from Starcraft?

[Eagle]

Very different. Warcraft 3 uses a new idea never been tried before that mixes RTS with RPG. While the core of the game is Real Time Strategy, there is an underlying Role Play plot to the game as well. Basically you have a hero in addition to your normal units, and he travels with you throughout the campaign. The hero levels up with each kill he makes and can learn new abilities that no other unit in the game can use, while the other units work like a normal RTS. The Hero can also pick up weapons and magics to help him/her along their way. In addition there are hostile critters. Unlinke the critters in previous blizard games, some of them are hostile and will attack (this has been done in other non-blizzard games). While the RPG aspect is removed for multiplayer, it is taken to a new level because you can level up your heroes and make them hard to beat, and if they die, you pay some gold to respawn them and their back with the same strength making it much harder to play against another human. Finally the graphics are completely out of this world. To put it short, I'm not into games that any fool and his mother can play. I want a challenge and Warcraft III gives it to you.

[Sukh]

I'm sorry, but WC3 sux compared to the Age of Empires series. I should be getting my Age of Mythology beta sometime this week and it is sure to kick WC3's ass!

If you can hold out a few months get AOM, unless you've got enough money then get both

[AlphaWolf]

Careful with wc3, one of my XP computers always freezes at random with that game (requires power down and reboot to fix). I had a similar problem with starcraft, where it would randomly crash to the desktop, and it was a well known problem that blizzard refused to address, and pissed me off pretty bad. They might end up doing the same with WC3, I noticed a few people on blizzards forum are complaining about this and thus far are getting nowhere.