Was Warcraft 3 historically considered bad?

[Zboj Lamignat]

What a crock of shit. Most of AD&D's art is fantastic - and even when it isn't, we're discussion style and aesthethic vision here, not only execution. Even when OD&D art was bad, the style was much more intriguing.

(And before you pull that strawman - remember I'm no grognard. I hate AD&D's design.)

You're deluding yourself if you think Icewind Dale is some cherry-picked example - hell, my avatar is from an artist who shat out amazing fantasy out brick by brick by brick and whose art style - copied and spammed everywhere in RPGs at the time - was the primary casualty of WC3 art.

He's right in the sense that you would never mistake a W3 unit portrait for a p0rnstar. Further reinforcing the angle of the game's production values being children-friendly.

 

[DoWhocares]

You're deluding yourself if you think Icewind Dale is some cherry-picked example - hell, my avatar is from an artist who shat out amazing fantasy out brick by brick by brick and whose art style - copied and spammed everywhere in RPGs at the time - was the primary casualty of WC3 art.

Seriously though, you don't see how it's your position that's delusional? You're giving waaaay too much credit to WC3 in terms of influence it had. It's an easy way to group the lumpy cartoony games under one umbrella, but actually beleiving that they look the way they do due to WC3 is insane.

There are very few games I can honestly say are directly inspired by WC3's artstyle. And much as with anything else it all comes down to execution. Heroes 5? Ugly as sin. King's Bounty: Legend? Gorgeous.

The one RTS that's the closest to WC3 in terms of design - Dawn of War (prominent heroes, simplified macro, lower unit count with beefy units you don't want to throw away for no reason, the importance of going out on the map early) - looks nothing like WC3. That alone should tell you something about how influential its art was.

Are you guys actually defending WC3 and WoW art vis a vis classic fantasy art?

No. My position is that 2D games are in general superior to 3D in terms of art, and classic fantasy is untouchable. But once the decision is made to go 3D in the year of our lord 2002, WC3 is among the best games to ever salvage that into something decent, and denying it is just mad.

 

[Grunker]

King's Bounty: Legend? Gorgeous.

Well QED, I suppose

 

[Grunker]

Are you guys actually defending WC3 and WoW art vis a vis classic fantasy art?

No. My position is that 2D games are in general superior to 3D in terms of art, and classic fantasy is untouchable. But once the decision is made to go 3D in the year of our lord 2002, WC3 is among the best games to ever salvage that into something decent, and denying it is just mad.

A much more coherent and much less aesthetically deaf position, yet one that still that denies the consequences. On that point, I suppose we simply won't agree. For my part, denying that WoW (which, again, merely put the finishing touches on what WC3 invented) was a colossal influence on the art style that has tainted nerddom since it was released is just baffling to me. Until today, I thought the position so obvious as to be universal.

 

[DoWhocares]

Are you guys actually defending WC3 and WoW art vis a vis classic fantasy art?

No. My position is that 2D games are in general superior to 3D in terms of art, and classic fantasy is untouchable. But once the decision is made to go 3D in the year of our lord 2002, WC3 is among the best games to ever salvage that into something decent, and denying it is just mad.

A much more coherent and much less aesthetically deaf position, yet one that still that denies the consequences. On that point, I suppose we simply won't agree. For my part, denying that WoW (which, again, merely put the finishing touches on what WC3 invented) was a colossal influence on the art style that has tainted nerddom since it was released is just baffling to me. Until today, I thought the position so obvious as to be universal.

And I'm as equally baffled because in my head you're drawing a straight line between this:

And this:

And while you won't find me listing WoW among the best looking games, at its worst it's still more aesthetically pleasing than Everquest (promotinal images excepting), Dark Age of Camelot, or Star Wars Galaxies.

All these years when people would mention "Warcraft graphics" I thought they were just using warcraft as a prominent example of it on account of WoW's popularity so everyone knew it. Never for a moment I assumed they implied that WC3 started the trend.

The art style old Warcraft games were going is essentially "power metal album covers come to life." And you can clearly see it in WC3 despite the 3D cartoonization of it. You could even see it in early WoW. Modern WoW? Forget about it. And the rest of childish cartoony visuals in games and other nerd media these days? I just don't see a connection with the old Warcrafts.

 

[Grunker]

Your examples are cherry-picked. Diablo II and Warcraft II are infinitely prettier games than WCIII or WoW, and if you cannot perceive the fact that those games represent a split in two distinct visions for modern fantasy depictions, and that WCIII/WoW crushed all opposition, I think you are being retroactively apologetic because WCIII was very good.

You're constantly referencing how well WCIII/WoW executed on the artstyle, and again, I think that's kind of a strawman in this debate. In Danish we have a word - 'formfuldendt'. It basically means "a complete execution of a vision." What you're getting at is that WCIII was exactly that: formfuldendt. It executed optimally on the cartoony, juvenile aesthetic that was envisioned. What you're leaving out is that the vision that was executed upon was a terrible, plasticy and trash alternative to other contempory and historic fantasy art styles and that its success derailed everything in the genre - including 2D art. Because that's essentially another faulty argument; that WCIII just "worked in 3D" so it makes sense the style overtook its competition in that dimension. However my examples so far have been almost entirely 2D - book art and concept art suffered just as much from the WoWification as any 3D element. Worse, even, because for the 2D art there was no excuse.

Executing well on the style does not mean the style wasn't a pauper alternative to what existed in the first place - and even less that its success didn't have dire consequences for everything that followed.

For a simple example, arguing that the success of WCIII and WoW art isn't what turned Diablo III cartoony and bright seems equivalent to arguing the cheeseburger didn't follow naturally from the hamburger.

 

[cvv]

It's an easy way to group the lumpy cartoony games under one umbrella, but actually beleiving that they look the way they do due to WC3 is insane.

Interesting. I suppose Christianity had little impact on European culture too, bananas are disgusting and KKK is the leading black rights organization?

Or something even more radical like Kojima is a great writer?

 

[DoWhocares]

Your examples are cherry-picked. Diablo II is an infinitely prettier game than WCIII or WoW, and if you cannot perceive the fact that these two were expressions of two distinct visions for modern fantasy depictions, and that WCIII/WoW crushed all opposition, I think you are being retroactively apologetic because WCIII was very good.

You're constantly referencing how well WCIII/WoW executed on the artstyle, and again, I think that's kind of a strawman in this debat. In Danish we have a word - 'formfuldendt'. It basically means "a complete execution of a vision." What you're getting at is that WCIII was exactly that. What you're leaving out is that the vision that was executed upon was a terribly, plasticy and trash alternative to other contempory and historic fantasy art styles and that its success derailed everything in the genre - including 2D art. Because that's essentially another faulty argument; that WCIII just "worked in 3D" so it makes sense the style overtook its competition in that dimension. However my examples so far have been almost entirely 2D - book art and concept art suffered just as much from the WoWification as any 3D element. Worse, even, because for the 2D art there was no excuse.

Executing well on the style does not mean the style wasn't a pauper alternative to what existed in the first place - and even less that its success didn't have dire consequences for everything that followed.

For a simple example, arguing that the success of WCIII and WoW art isn't what turned Diablo III cartoony and bright seems equivalent to arguing the cheeseburger didn't follow naturally from the hamburger.

See, you're coming at it from the position of "all cartoony juvenile art is trash." Me? I beleive there's a place for it and a way to do it right (Trine would be a great example). WC3 does it right. Ideally we would have both the grounded, well-detailed mature art and the bright vibrant cartoony stuff. And you're blaming the popularity of Dota and WoW for there only being one kind (and done badly). Sure, Diablo III looks the way it does because of WoW mostly. But the rest of the industry? Cmon now, you're giving it way too much credit. If anything that garish CalArts cartoon style and the general pussification of society have way more to do with it.

Or something even more radical like Kojima is a great writer?

Now let's not get too crazy here.

 

[Grunker]

Yes, my posts are about the fact that fantasy art styles were more beautiful before WCIII and WoW. You actually agree completely by your own accord. Yet when I repeat it, you don't respond "I agree", but instead defend WCIII's style.

That's where you've got me confused. If you agree that the OD&D art style and the connected styles in other fantasy media was better, why even plant your flag on cartoon-art-style-can-work island? Unless, as a point of fact, you don't object much to the paradigm switch after all?

In which case, well, that's a much larger divergence that just disagreeing on how big its influence was.

As for the latter, maintaining that by far the most popular fantasy IP of its time had little influence on the fact that almost all contemporary fantasy IPs carbon-copied it and still do is just something we'll have to disagree on - little point in arguing it further, I think. We've both made our positions fairly clear.

 

[DoWhocares]

If you agree that the OD&D art style and the connected styles in other fantasy media was better, why even plant your flag on cartoon-art-style-can-work island? Unless, as a point of fact, you don't object much to the paradigm switch after all?

I do in fact object to it and find it very much upsetting that we don't get any cool classic art these days. Only I go even further in appreciating the old pulp magazine covers and whatnot. All I'm saying is I don't mind cartoon art existing. I just don't want it to be the only thing out there.

I also maintain that old 3D games worked better with cartoony visuals and are much better to look at now than those that attempted to be realistic.

 

[cvv]

If you agree that the OD&D art style and the connected styles in other fantasy media was better, why even plant your flag on cartoon-art-style-can-work island? Unless, as a point of fact, you don't object much to the paradigm switch after all?

I also maintain that old 3D games worked better with cartoony visuals and are much better to look at now than those that attempted to be realistic.

I for one don't denounce all art that's not strictly realistic.

For example the concepts for W2 are also technically "cartoony" - but in a good way. They're stylish and cool as opposed to childish, plasticky or dumb.

And then you get this:

No man, the W3 style wasn't the only one well-fitted for early 3D. It's just it stomped everything else into the ground so we don't know any better.

 

[Alex]

(...)
View attachment 55163
(...)

Whenever I see that drawing, I remember looking at it in the manual when I first got Warcraft 2 and thinking it was bullshit that elves and trolls had the same amount of hp.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

Warcraft 3 was a big technical advancement for the time and in some ways still is. Since the end of the rts golden age, there just hasn’t been any decent modding and custom campaign scenes.

Anyway, yeah, the story in warcraft 3 is terrible. But the “story” in warcraft 1+2 is very sparse and made of exposition, not prose or actors emoting. It’s easy to fill the gaps with headcanon and make it seem cooler than it is. It’s not so much a story as a story pitch. Nothing wrong with that, but it’s disingenuous to say it’s better than War3 when the formats are so different. I say that as someone who thinks War1+2 could have a way better, more grounded political military fantasy story if it was properly fleshed out.

 

[DoWhocares]

And then you get this:

There's no need to pollute the thread with Reforged art.
https://classic.battle.net/war3/human/units/peasant.shtml
The original peasant looks perfectly serviceable and has a certain charm to him. The real in-game portrait is:

I'm half convinced you have some idea how WC3 looks in your head, and it's 10 times goofier than how it actually looks. Compare this portrait to the Dungeon Siege screenshot I posted earlier in the thread and tell me which one looks better. These are games from the same year.

 

[JarlFrank]

WC3 and especially WoW popularized the very overexaggerated plasticy style that plagues fantasy until today, and especially plagued fantasy games of the mid 00s.
The biggest problem is one of proportions: armor pieces and weapons are way too huge to the point of being ridiculous and looking like toys.
Throughout the 00s it was a meme to point out fantasy art direction with too large pauldrons. Pauldrons so huge they are bigger than the character's head.

WoW armor and weapon design looked more like action figure toys than actual armors and weapons.
But this is not the only way to do weapon and armor designs in early 3D games.
If you compare WoW to other games from that time, like the Gothics or Morrowind, you'll see that those also exaggerate some proportions for visual clarity, but they're a lot more subtle about it and don't make everything look like a toy.

Warcraft 3, and after it WoW, created this action figure style visual design, and due to its success it was copied by a lot of imitators and became the standard high fantasy style of the mid to late 00s and beyond.

 

[Lyric Suite]

If you compare WoW to other games from that time, like the Gothics or Morrowind, you'll see that those also exaggerate some proportions for visual clarity, but they're a lot more subtle about it and don't make everything look like a toy.

That's because those games weren't isometric. The size of the model determined the degree of exageration you needed to make it able for the player to determine what it was he was looking at.

Units in Battle Realms also had exagerated proportions because it was the only way to allow the player to make out what they were from a distance:

The above is from the "zen" edition which i'm not sure if they did something to up the detail in the game but you get the point.

 

[Lyric Suite]

And then you get this:

There's no need to pollute the thread with Reforged art.
https://classic.battle.net/war3/human/units/peasant.shtml
The original peasant looks perfectly serviceable and has a certain charm to him. The real in-game portrait is:

I'm half convinced you have some idea how WC3 looks in your head, and it's 10 times goofier than how it actually looks. Compare this portrait to the Dungeon Siege screenshot I posted earlier in the thread and tell me which one looks better. These are games from the same year.

I was gonna say lmao. Imagine using Reforged shit to make your point about WC3.

Concept art of WC3 was made by Samwise Didier who i'm pretty sure is the one who drew that peasant art from the Warcraft 2 manual. And most of the art in the latter was done by Metzen who was the creative director in WC3.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

WC3 was considered good and was very popular.

 

[ghardy]

Didier > Metzen

 

[ghardy]

On the other hand, here's a quote from 2004 from his (Didier's) Wikipedia page:

"Artistically, we've always gone for the same sort of goals: we try to keep everything over-the-top, over-proportioned, and really colorful, then we add in as much 'comic factor' as we can."

 

[Lyric Suite]

Sam Didier worked on Lost Vikings his mindset was probably shaped by the early origins of Blizzard.

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

Why are people who weren't even born in 1995 trying to rewrite history re: what was popular and not?

The idea that WoW's style wasn't a direct continuation of W3 is also preposterous; I guess that some people are just blind. Personally, I hated that style from the very first second, despite enjoying the game a great deal. It's not about "cartoony", btw, Warcraft was always like that, it's the plastic look, the weird colors, the bloatedness.

 

[Lyric Suite]

BTW, reguarding the idea that WoW was a "natural" evolution of WC3, i think it was more of a crime of opportunity that arose from the fact WC3 had done so much in terms of assets already. If you replay Reign of Chaos you can see pretty much the entirety of WoW was already there, down to the sheer variety of the creeps. When they decided to make an MMO about the "world" of Wacraft, they discovered they had already done that in WC3, which in a way shows the sheer amount of work they put into the latter in their effort to create this synthesis between RPG and RTS.

WoW was literally the World of Warcraft 3 more than anything else. In a way this parallels Warhammer since i'm pretty sure the reason for the exagerated proprotions there is that it made it easier for people to paint their minatures. Especially the giant shoulders were probably like that so people could paint their custom emblems and allow them to be visible when they fielded their armiers. It then became its own art style. I reckon the same applies to WoW picking up certains traits of WC3 that were originally intended to be purely functional, like the blocky nature of the units.

 

[ghardy]

It occurs to me that Stormgate might benefit from employing Didier's design goals: exaggeration, vibrancy, comedy.

 

[Demo.Graph]

WC3 and especially WoW popularized the very overexaggerated plasticy style that plagues fantasy until today

You say it as if Disney, anime chibis and FF series, Warhammer, Tomb Raider, etc. never existed.