Which was the best WarCraft game?

Mr. President · May 13, 2002, 23:45

I liked WarCraft II, for the diversity of units and the graphics. I haven't played WarCraft III yet, so I couldn't comment on it.

Skanky Burns · May 14, 2002, 01:04

It depends on the time it was out.

Warcraft 1 was great when it first came out. I played it to completion, then played it again. It was fun.

Warcraft 2 was also great when it first came out. I played it to completiong, then played number 1 again. Or tried to - it was then I realized how lacking the interface was initially.

Being used to more modern games now, the interface on W2 would probably seem lacking too.

Warcraft 3 is probably good. But I don't have it, lack time to play it and therefore can't really comment.

Triped · May 14, 2002, 01:25

Warcraft I was innovative and fun.

Warcraft II was innovative and fun, albeit completely unbalanced.

With Warcraft III, Blizzard is doing to the series what Firaxis did to Civ3. It's a dumbed down, boring piece of sh*t. I swear, after playing five times all the games seen the same. Almost every respectable top player points out major game flaws, but Blizzard just turns a deaf ear, even going so far as to ban the dissenters.

In conclusion, I'll go with Warcraft II, simply because Starcraft is not an option.

Mr. President · May 14, 2002, 06:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Triped
Warcraft I was innovative and fun.

Warcraft II was innovative and fun, albeit completely unbalanced.

With Warcraft III, Blizzard is doing to the series what Firaxis did to Civ3. It's a dumbed down, boring piece of sh*t. I swear, after playing five times all the games seen the same. Almost every respectable top player points out major game flaws, but Blizzard just turns a deaf ear, even going so far as to ban the dissenters.

In conclusion, I'll go with Warcraft II, simply because Starcraft is not an option.

That's interesting. Which parts of WarCraft II did you find particularly unbalanced?

I sometimes try to play WarCraft II on my computer, but it's not compatible with my sound card (ie. I don't have sound) and my computer is too fast for it. You tap an arrow key once, and the window flies to the other side of the map.

Jethro83 · May 14, 2002, 06:28

Warcraft II got me into the series. It was fantastic for its time (though I was in the C&C camp in the whole C&C vs. Warcraft II debate).

However, a year later, I was so eager to find out how it started, and got Warcraft I. Believe it or not, I actually enjoyed Warcraft I more than Warcraft II.

As for Warcraft III, I obviously can't comment because I have hardly seen it apart from a few screenshots, and units.

So I definitely voted Warcraft I as the best one. It got a more positive reaction out of me than WCII and that was after already having WCII for a year. Imagine my reaction if I had've got WC I first.

Adagio · May 14, 2002, 08:34

WarCraft 1 => Never played, can't judge

WarCraft 2 => The best WarCraft game I have ever played

WarCraft 3 => Never played, can't judge

Grumbold · May 14, 2002, 09:20

Warcraft 1 & 2 were both good for their time. I would prefer II over I just because of the enhanced features. I know nothing about III except for the odd magazine article. It hasn't got me frothing to order an import copy or anything.

Triped · May 14, 2002, 14:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. President

That's interesting. Which parts of WarCraft II did you find particularly unbalanced?

a) Archers are completely worthless unless you are certain that your opponent has dragons/griffins...even then, they're barely cost-effective against them.

b) Ogres/knights make grunts/footmen completely obsolete, which was an unintended effect.

c) Ogre-Magi are ever so much more powerful than knights with bloodlust, and both cost the same.

d) Mages have invisibility and polymorph, which make them irritating snipers instead of support casters, as their real support spells don't have a significant effect on battles for the money spent. Death knights have the same predicament, but don't have any hit and run spells.

So basically what happens is the orcs run for ogre-magi, while the humans run for mages.

It's still a fun game, though.

da_jaymz · May 14, 2002, 14:30

Well, with little research I've done it seems that WC III is gonna suck as their other RTS-games sucked....I've been reading diaries at www.warcraftIII.net and it appears again that something I always hated in these games is back.Players are constantly building same units over and over again....where are the unit-counters to force the player to build some other units for a change???
Gimme an ounce of tactics and strategy...not some build-rush habits dammit!

Juggler · May 14, 2002, 14:43

I've only played Warcraft I and II.
War2 is my favourite. it was a great game, much better than the first part, but it's been sth. like 2 years since I last played it.
As you can probably guess, new units, spells and graphics are the main reasons I liked this part the most. Unbalanced were some really worthless spells (invisibility etc.) but I have no big complaints.
Hopefully I'll buy a new computer this summer and install War3.

Triped · May 14, 2002, 15:10

Quote:

Originally posted by da_jaymz
Well, with little research I've done it seems that WC III is gonna suck as their other RTS-games sucked....I've been reading diaries at www.warcraftIII.net and it appears again that something I always hated in these games is back.Players are constantly building same units over and over again....where are the unit-counters to force the player to build some other units for a change???
Gimme an ounce of tactics and strategy...not some build-rush habits dammit!

Newbie.

And don't read beta diaries of newbies.

da_jaymz · May 14, 2002, 15:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Triped

Newbie.

And don't read beta diaries of newbies.

There are diaries of people who beta-tested Starcraft too...don't get me wrong...10 years have passed in history of RTS-s...not alot of people are newbies these days.

Triped · May 14, 2002, 16:06

Quote:

Originally posted by da_jaymz

There are diaries of people who beta-tested Starcraft too...don't get me wrong...10 years have passed in history of RTS-s...not alot of people are newbies these days.

Good God, that has to be the most misinformed statement I've heard all week.

I'd guess that at least 90% of the people that play Blizzard games don't have a clue, and probably never will!

Even today there are still people on Starcraft forums complaining that hydralisks should be able to swim.

da_jaymz · May 14, 2002, 16:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Triped

Good God, that has to be the most misinformed statement I've heard all week.

I'd guess that at least 90% of the people that play Blizzard games don't have a clue, and probably never will!

Even today there are still people on Starcraft forums complaining that hydralisks should be able to swim.

Guess I underestimated the Blizzard fan-crowd....
I apologize....I will never make another comment about Blizzard games...

Triped · May 14, 2002, 16:29

Don't let my flaming zeal for defending/ripping on Blizzard stop you.

tniem · May 14, 2002, 20:17

I have to say WarCraft II. But I am eagerly awaiting WC3. Of course, the Civ 3 lesson applies, I am going to wait to buy the game until at least towards the end of summer.

General Ludd · May 14, 2002, 20:32

I don't like any of them, really.

I liked Warcraft II when it first came out, but my tastes have changed since then. I've played the Warcraft III beta and was unimpressed - seems to me that they haven't added anything worthwhile since Starcraft, just some lame hero-building crap.

Andemagne · May 15, 2002, 22:56

War Craft 2 Battle.Net

Urban Ranger · May 15, 2002, 23:23

They all suck

Primarily, all the scenarios involved "puzzle solving" instead of "strategy." So a player ended up tinkering with his units over and over again until he got them exactly right. Proceed to next scenario and repeat.

Triped · May 16, 2002, 03:08

Play MP fool.