Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Maybe MediEvil? I've never played it but the remake looks fine, I guess. I personally prefer the early 3D, but I'm weird like that. Refunded failed to retain the original aesthetic, which is a big no-no when attempting remakes/remasters.
AoE2's HD edition introduced a fresh wave of bugs and performance issues into AoE 2 that it didn't have before, and wasn't very HD either. It was basically an excuse release to charge a big price, which made it fairly unpopular with the oldschool AoE crowd. The multiplayer started running a lot worse too. Have a list. These aren't small bugs.
AoE2's HD edition introduced a fresh wave of bugs and performance issues into AoE 2 that it didn't have before, and wasn't very HD either. It was basically an excuse release to charge a big price, which made it fairly unpopular with the oldschool AoE crowd. The multiplayer started running a lot worse too. Have a list. These aren't small bugs.
Maybe, but that's a list from 2013. I didn't follow AoE2 HD edition at all before the DE was announced, and from my limited experience I think everyone was playing HD at the end?
The short end of it is: AoE 2 HD edition was a botched launch that was much buggier and less playable than regular AoE 2 was, with development staff blatantly ignoring the majority of bug reports and complaints. Age of Mythology's HD edition is also more popular than the original (re-releases have a way of doing that), but the original is still a much less buggy experience with its own multiplayer community (on voobly). It just so happens that when HD re-releases are done, the original non-HD versions suddenly become difficult to get a hold of. If the HD edition were as good as you impute, they would likely not have done a DE re-release with a different developer. It's not like AoE2HD's dev (Hidden Path Entertainment) has gone out of business.
Though, can you think of any remaster of a 3D game that went beyond widescreen fix/modern OS support and ended up good? Once you start remaking models, costs climb really high and I think Activision/Blizzard announced the project without thinking how much it would cost to do it right and then they said 'fuck it, let's release it and forget about that'
The short end of it is: AoE 2 HD edition was a botched launch that was much buggier and less playable than regular AoE 2 was, with development staff blatantly ignoring the majority of bug reports and complaints. Age of Mythology's HD edition is also more popular than the original (re-releases have a way of doing that), but the original is still a much less buggy experience with its own multiplayer community (on voobly). It just so happens that when HD re-releases are done, the original non-HD versions suddenly become difficult to get a hold of. If the HD edition were as good as you impute, they would likely not have done a DE re-release with a different developer. It's not like AoE2HD's dev (Hidden Path Entertainment) has gone out of business.
This would not happen if they literally took every sprite/frame and upscaled it. The trouble starts when they change the animations, change their timings, etc. That's where the programmer becomes very tempted to "fix" the code to match the changed timing in the animation. Which starts the chain of falling dominoes.
With 2D games it's possible to not break anything if they take that very strict and conservative approach. With 3D games with a large graphics generational gap, they cannot avoid drastically altering the visuals, and in many cases, skewing their carefully tuned timings.
I think it's much simpler than that. When you hire remaster projects you are more likely to have incompetent hacks who are not good enough to make games for budget saving purposes than actual talent and you will have a team that feels compelled to do work for the sake of saying work has been done (the entire HD project being treated as little more than a filler of busywork in order to say "it has been enhanced") and so you have people fixing shit that wasn't broken and breaking shit because they didn't understand what they were doing and didn't really care either. In the case of Age of Mythology HD they actually liked the fact that they added bugs to the game because it gave them more work to continue "enhancing it" and treated it like it was a clever stunt somehow because now they could keep putting out patches saying "progress was made." This was the actual company position on it. That's the degree of parasitic fuck-ups you had working on it. They were an entire company of the kind of programmer whose contributions are negative because the sheer technical debt they inflict on the project means that their bad work will result in 2 more programmers being needed to fix all the bad shit that comes out of their work and it would've been easier if one of them could just toss out all of their work and rewrite it in a way that actually makes sense, except corporate prefers to plow on ahead than throw out a hire's work. But at least those shit programmers wrote a lot of lines of code (most of it because they do not understand how to write loops, much less algorithms). That's important, you know. HD remaster projects overwhelmingly tend to go to this kind of shovelware firm that makes a name for itself being cheap and terrible but people buy it anyway because the original game was decent so they keep getting contracts. That's also why a lot of HD graphics somehow end up looking worse than the original. They just half-ass it without giving a shit.
Ok, I'm really craving some WC3 action. Has this reforged bullshit been patched and improved or is it still a steaming pile of shit? Jesus fuck it's such a missed opportunity I just can't accept it.
Ok, I'm really craving some WC3 action. Has this reforged bullshit been patched and improved or is it still a steaming pile of shit? Jesus fuck it's such a missed opportunity I just can't accept it.
Ok, I'm really craving some WC3 action. Has this reforged bullshit been patched and improved or is it still a steaming pile of shit? Jesus fuck it's such a missed opportunity I just can't accept it.
I haven't heard anything about it and I think they've more or less abandoned it. This isn't going to get better. The horrible undercooked state it was in at release just screams "we don't want to pour more resources into this", so why would they continue improving it after that? A Final Fantasy 14 situation this ain't.
Ok, I'm really craving some WC3 action. Has this reforged bullshit been patched and improved or is it still a steaming pile of shit? Jesus fuck it's such a missed opportunity I just can't accept it.
It's functionally abandoned. They have like 1 asshole that occasionally pops up on the forums and releases fuckaround bug fixes, but they STILL haven't released the features that the original had that people actually wanted like Ladder or Clans, and at this point its highly unlikely they're going to.
Activision had the bean counters look at this and determine that the money and effort to make it actually playable is more than they'd make from sales from an actually functional game, so they abandoned it.
If that's the case then I think this really deserves the title of worst "upgrade" of all time, since its all but removed the possibility to get a functional copy of the game outside of arcane, legally-dubious methods.
If that's the case then I think this really deserves the title of worst "upgrade" of all time, since its all but removed the possibility to get a functional copy of the game outside of arcane, legally-dubious methods.
Yep. It's a janky mess of 'upgraded' visuals that are WORSE than the originals for actual gameplay (half the ranged units you can't tell who the hell they're attacking), and they actively removed features of the original game.
We're how many months from release now? And not only do they STILL not have a ladder THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL GAME, they have NO PROJECTED DATE for when it will actually be in place.
This is beyond lazy incompetence, they actively destroyed the original.
Probably wrong place to ask, but anyone can suggest good mods for warcraft 3 frozen throne? I have in possession original version (not Warcraft 3: refunded, I don't want even play this garbage). I remember playing some custom maps long ago, but now I also interested in more global mods (but good map packs welcome too).
Do you think we'll eventually get a "new coke" type deal, where Warcraft 3: Reforged is so loathed and so reviled, that a grassroots movement akin to the WoW: Classic one will emerge, pleading for an official re-release of the pre-reforged client as a separate product? (As opposed to just using the older client and not connecting to battlenet). People have already asked for this in large numbers, but I have to wonder if, given enough time and interest, Blizzard will try to sneakily earn some goodwill by giving us back something we already had.
Do you think we'll eventually get a "new coke" type deal, where Warcraft 3: Reforged is so loathed and so reviled, that a grassroots movement akin to the WoW: Classic one will emerge, pleading for an official re-release of the pre-reforged client as a separate product? (As opposed to just using the older client and not connecting to battlenet). People have already asked for this in large numbers, but I have to wonder if, given enough time and interest, Blizzard will try to sneakily earn some goodwill by giving us back something we already had.
People have basically forgotten about this. Only the die-hard Warcraft 3 fans care anymore, everybody else has simply abandoned it. Reverting to Classic would require an explicit admission that Reforged was a piece of shit, and 1) they're too arrogant to ever admit that and 2) publicly admitting that you knowingly sold a faulty product could land you in serious legal trouble in a number of countries, GUARANTEEING that you would have to issue refunds to anybody that bought it regardless of time played.
Do you think we'll eventually get a "new coke" type deal, where Warcraft 3: Reforged is so loathed and so reviled, that a grassroots movement akin to the WoW: Classic one will emerge, pleading for an official re-release of the pre-reforged client as a separate product? (As opposed to just using the older client and not connecting to battlenet). People have already asked for this in large numbers, but I have to wonder if, given enough time and interest, Blizzard will try to sneakily earn some goodwill by giving us back something we already had.
People have basically forgotten about this. Only the die-hard Warcraft 3 fans care anymore, everybody else has simply abandoned it. Reverting to Classic would require an explicit admission that Reforged was a piece of shit, and 1) they're too arrogant to ever admit that and 2) publicly admitting that you knowingly sold a faulty product could land you in serious legal trouble in a number of countries, GUARANTEEING that you would have to issue refunds to anybody that bought it regardless of time played.
I'm not really talking about an outright rollback, so much as a "hey you know that thing you asked for, here is is!" but, in retrospect, you are right. I don't think enough people outside of competitive WC3 players would care. All the people casually checking in on an old favorite already left.
Based on how long people were clamoring for WoWClassic (pretty much as soon as Cata launched iirc), and assuming that the rumors of animosity and resentment between the Classic and "Current" WoW teams are true, there's no way this debacle is getting fixed anytime this decade. Only way it'll happen is if Winne-the-Pooh flexes the might of Beijing to lean on Blizzard; then it will happen instantly.
Based on how long people were clamoring for WoWClassic (pretty much as soon as Cata launched iirc), and assuming that the rumors of animosity and resentment between the Classic and "Current" WoW teams are true, there's no way this debacle is getting fixed anytime this decade. Only way it'll happen is if Winne-the-Pooh flexes the might of Beijing to lean on Blizzard; then it will happen instantly.
The big difference is that with Classic, the state of WoW that necessitated that movement was slow and gradual. The game did not become functionally "broken" or have the lowest metacritic score ever, it merely moved away from its original design philosophies over the course of a decade. Warcraft 3 was actually wrecked in the space of a day.
It’s been too long since we’ve shared an update on our team’s progress. After a challenging launch, we’ve been regrouping, listening to your feedback, prioritizing the things we need to do for the game, and building a plan to deliver on our next steps. While we’ve been quiet these past few months, know that there is a dedicated and passionate team that’s been hard at work on Warcraft III: Reforged behind the scenes. As our team works toward a roadmap that we can share in the near future; we’d like to start communicating more frequently and meaningfully about our plans, and what’s coming next for the game. Let’s kick that off right now, with the first in a series of articles diving into what the team is focused on.
Ongoing Updates: Bug and Desync Fix Patches
Since launch, we’ve delivered a series of patches in an ongoing effort to continue fixing bugs and making quality of life changes across Warcraft III. These updates have come at a rate of at least once a month, and include fixes and improvements to art, gameplay, systems, and features across the game, including Campaign, Custom Game, and Versus modes.
Some of our most impactful bugs since legacy Warcraft III involve desyncs which occur when two or more players’ game clients get out of sync and force their game to end prematurely. Due to how disruptive these desyncs can be, a heavy emphasis will continue to be on finding and resolving the most common issues that are causing desyncs. In addition to actively approaching desync issues from different angles, we’re also developing a tool that will better arm us against future desyncs.
Balance Updates
As with other Blizzard games, our team will also be releasing balance updates for Warcraft III. Our goal is to preserve classic strategies where possible while promoting increased strategic variety. Warcraft III is a hero-focused RTS (Real Time Strategy game), and we want to celebrate that by providing opportunities for players to open with different Heroes while retaining the unique playstyles inherent to each race and the asymmetry between races.
Each of our balance patches will aim to ensure competitive integrity at the professional level while providing a variety of different strategies for new and returning players of all skill levels. Our first balance patch since launch will be coming to the Public Test Realm (PTR) for testing this week and will feature a bevy of updates. Check out the patch notes soon for all of the details, and don’t forget to provide your feedback once you’ve had a chance to play the changes on the PTR.
Upcoming Features
In parallel to these ongoing bug fixing efforts and balance updates, we’re also working to deliver features to the game, including Improved Matchmaking, Ranked Ladders, Profiles, Custom Campaigns, and Clans. While we’ve mentioned before that these features are in development, we wanted to start providing more details on the direction we’re taking with each, share some additional insights, and give players an opportunity to provide feedback. Up first, let’s talk about our ongoing improvements to Warcraft III’s matchmaking.
Matchmaking Reforged
Matchmaking is the system we use to find and match allies and opponents of similar skill. To support this, player skill is tracked using a numerical representation called a player’s Matchmaking Rating, or “MMR” for short. A higher MMR reflects a more skilled player, and matching players with others of comparable skill using their MMRs keeps games as fair and fun as possible.
A player's MMR gets updated at the conclusion of each match, with the amount of points received being dependent on several factors that serve to determine their predicted win chance and an internal value called “variance.” We use variance to represent how confident our system is that a player is rated at the right skill level. When starting out, variance is high because the system doesn’t have enough information yet. Over time, as more games are played, this number will decrease. Higher variance means that there are larger swings in how MMR is adjusted after each match, while lower variance results in smaller MMR changes. Initially, our system will make large changes to MMR to get a player near their proper rating and then refine over time with smaller changes as more games are played. Consistent performance over time will allow a player’s MMR to move up (or down) as they win or lose games.
In a departure from the legacy version of Warcraft III, Reforged now has a per-race MMR in all modes except Arranged Teams which allows for more competitive matchmaking while freeing players to play their favorite races or learn new races without fear of impacting their overall MMR.
Also new, Reforged now features Global Matchmaking for all modes, which allows players to test their mettle against the best Warcraft III players around the world. While this addition is an exciting feature, we are aware of community concerns surrounding latency with Global Matchmaking. In reaction to this feedback, the team has begun rolling out a series of server updates which have reduced the number of high-latency games by over 60% since the week of May 4th. We will continue working to further reduce the occurrence of these high-latency games by implementing additional fixes in the coming weeks, so please continue to give us feedback on your experience.
Warcraft III has three primary matchmaking modes: 1v1, Team Games (2v2, 3v3, 4v4), and Free-for-All (FFA). The goal for all modes is to match players in a way that provides the best games possible while doing so in a reasonable amount of time. To accomplish this, the system starts by looking for a perfect match and slowly loosens its requirements over time if it can’t make that match. The parameters for finding matches and the way these restrictions are relaxed are different for each of the matchmaking modes, so let’s dive into each of them.
1v1
Among the three matchmaking modes, 1v1 will have the most stringent matchmaking parameters as this game mode is all about individual performance. Reforged to further enable players to find the best and most competitive 1v1 matches. As part of these changes, the matchmaker will now adjust search parameters specifically for higher MMR players to find the most competitive matches, even in exchange for longer queue times. Regardless of MMR, the matchmaker will slowly loosen the search parameters as time goes on in order to find a match. This adjustment will take longer for higher MMR players in order to continue prioritizing finding the most competitive matches. We believe these changes will allow the most competitive 1v1 players to find the best matches that most closely mirror their skill.
Team Games (2v2, 3v3, 4v4)
For team games, the system is slightly different to account for the fact that the outcome of a team game is not solely tied to the performance of an individual. Team Game players who watch MMRs closely will notice that it takes more games before their MMR settles into its proper range, and they’ll see larger MMR adjustments per game—and for more games—than in 1v1. Since the outcome of the game is influenced by others on the team, the system takes longer to dial in on an individual player’s skill.
In recognition of this, Arranged Teams consisting of a full team of self-organized players are now tracked separately using the team’s MMR rather than a player’s individual rating. Playing games as an Arranged Team does not affect your individual MMR for that game mode or race, so you can switch races freely while within an Arranged Team and not worry about affecting your outside ratings. Since Arranged Teams are tracked separately, they will also have separate leaderboards once Ranked Play arrives to better gauge overall performance.
One of our goals is to provide as many options as possible to allow players to play alongside their friends, and this means minimizing restrictions for party size and MMR. In service of this, players of any MMR can party up together so that—no matter your skill—you can always bring along a friend to play with. Players can also group up as a partial team, allowing friends to queue up together while the matchmaker finds other players to fill the remaining slots to complete the team. Players assembling partial teams will be rated by their individual MMR rather than their team’s MMR.
For the first time, the system will allow Random Teams to be paired against Arranged Teams. This is a departure from the precedent set in the legacy version of Warcraft III, so we wanted to share our thoughts behind this change. Pairing Arranged Teams solely against other Arranged Teams often resulted in very long queue times, especially for highly rated teams. These extended queue times often led to poor quality games, since teams would be matched against any available opponent once enough time passed. This change will help make more closely matched games more often, and we’ll be keeping an eye on things to ensure the right balance of match quality versus queue time.
Free-for-All (FFA)
Free-for-All (FFA) has historically had the most unforgiving matchmaking system as there could only be one winner and three losing players. This system felt inaccurate given that the “losing”’ players are issued similar penalties despite some surviving longer than others during a match. Victories also resulted in a single player gaining a lot of MMR, but all opponents’ MMRs decreasing. This tended to cause a disparity in MMR ratings which made it more difficult to match players up and resulted in increased queue times for everyone. With these challenges in mind, we have completely redesigned the way MMR is calculated for FFA games.
Instead of having one winner and three losing players, Free-for-All games have shifted to a placements system of 1st through 4th places. At the conclusion of a game, multiple calculations are run to determine how each player’s MMR will change based on both placement and the MMR of the other players in the game. This results in a more nuanced change to each players’ Free-for-All MMR which should keep players of similar skill levels closer to one another in MMR. These updates help inform more accurate adjustments in MMRs and cut down on player queue times by keeping players grouped better with competitors of equal or similar skill.
Moving to a placement system can raise concerns of potentially incentivizing players to prolong their play with unsportsmanlike tactics such as hiding buildings as an attempt to stay in the match longer. These problems have been inherent in Free-for-All since its inception and are challenging to directly address. Overall, we believe that by tying Free-for-All MMR changes to a placement system, we are actively encouraging players to finish off weaker ones, as each opponent defeated directly translates into higher MMR gains or reduced losses. As with all our other changes, we’ll continue to test and monitor these new systems to ensure that they work as intended and achieve our goals.
To Be Continued...
We’re excited to continue rolling out these matchmaking improvements, and moving forward, players can expect ongoing communications from us at regular intervals as we release patches. As part of those communications, we’ll have a series of feature deep dives and development updates like this one, as well as lighter looks at other aspects of the game and community. Our next feature deep dive will be focused on our upcoming Ranked Ladder system, so keep an eye out for the details on our plans in the coming weeks. We plan to provide a roadmap for our future releases as our work progresses, but in the meantime please continue sharing your feedback and know that our team is working hard to deliver features, bug fixes, improvements, and balance updates as we strive to make Warcraft III: Reforged better with each release.
