PDA

View Full Version : Warcraft III review on Gamespot.


Funkodrom
09-07-2002, 14:23:58
This review (http://www.gamespot.co.uk/stories/reviews/0,2160,2118525,00.html) actually makes Warcraft III seem mildly interesting to me in the beginning, which sucks because I'd like to keep my levels of Blizzard disdain as high as possible. Luckily later on it reminds me of the things that I thought would be annoying about the game which is a relief. Anyway if anyone out there was interested in this and hasn't already ordered it you can read the review here (http://www.gamespot.co.uk/stories/reviews/0,2160,2118525,00.html).

Venom
09-07-2002, 15:50:59
Better go check the interview now. It won't be free forever.

Funkodrom
09-07-2002, 15:51:45
Is Gamespot going pay as well?

Venom
09-07-2002, 15:55:41
Ah that's UK's gamespot site. Never mind.

Snapcase
09-07-2002, 20:48:49
I loved Warcraft II, I hated StarCraft. Will I like this game?

Snapcase
09-07-2002, 20:59:59
Oh, never mind. I read the review, and I won't like it. :D

(It'll be the fucking steep skirmish learning curve and the lack of curmudgeonly Warcraft humour that'll spoil it for me.)

Funkodrom
10-07-2002, 09:52:39
The skirmishing hero thing was actually something that appealed to me. It got let down when it mentioned wizards and other specialist units.

Snapcase
10-07-2002, 09:56:09
We obviously dislike Starcraft for different reasons, then. I expect to be able to, when I finish like half of the campaign on the easiest setting, to be able to beat the AI in a skirmish on the easiest setting. No chance!

Funkodrom
10-07-2002, 09:58:58
I've never played StarCraft. I hated Warcraft II.

I agree with what you say though, actually I expect to be able to beat the AI in a skirmish on the easiest setting without ever playing the campaigns. I very rarely even look at the RTS campaigns these days, just use skirmishing as a warm up for MP games. Skirmish on easy should be a nice gentle stroll where you can learn what all the buildings and units do.

Funkodrom
10-07-2002, 10:02:07
If I've played half the campaigns I'd expect to be able to give the computer a game on normal in skirmish then just play humans from then on. After that you've either worked out how to beat the AI or it cheats so much it's pointless.

Shining1
10-07-2002, 12:20:28
The Starcraft A.I was actually pretty good. It did some cheating but nothing material (i.e plus resources). You get to learn how to beat it just like any other player.

Warcraft by all accounts has an exceedingly good A.I

Venom
10-07-2002, 13:51:53
Starscraft cheated like a mother fucker in the skirmish missions. Not as bad as the Empire Earth AI cheats, but still.

Fistandantilus
10-07-2002, 14:01:23
It got let down when it mentioned wizards and other specialist units.


Yep, the way it seems you have to micromanage your units... the horror!!

Funkodrom
10-07-2002, 14:32:55
I like, send army one here, they fight, send army 2 there, they fight. I'm the general not a tank commander or cavalry sergeant.

Fistandantilus
10-07-2002, 15:23:51
Exactly. Micromanaging in real time spells doom, imo.
It seems you can automate something but that reminds me too much of the governors in Civ3... we'll see.

Funkodrom
10-07-2002, 15:26:09
It's impossible to arrange decent combined arms pincer movements if you can't trust the units of one jaw to fight at least reasonably when they get there whilst you concentrate on the other jaw.

Shining1
11-07-2002, 07:12:11
Venom: How? I played a map with a whole pack of map revealers and the build up seemed to entirely normal. A bit slow, perhaps, but you get that with an A.I:).

If I recall, it does some weird things with being able to see your production and the whole map, and it's A.I quick on using the special abilities of it's units, too. But nothing very difficult to beat.