Reforged is an uninspiring remaster, but Warcraft 3 itself is still a great game nearly two decades later.
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Last week, Blizzard celebrated the 30th anniversary of the Warcraft franchise with a slew of announcements and celebrations. These included the release of new remasters for Warcraft 1 and 2, but also a somewhat surprising nod to the game Blizzard's been trying its hardest to sweep under the rug: Warcraft 3: Reforged. More than a nod, in fact, as the company brought us Patch 2.0, the first patch of such significant numbering not just for Reforged but for Warcraft III as a whole. Would this patch finally be the redemption this game has so badly needed?
Well... you read the title, I’m sure."
From VGC: "The president of Blizzard Entertainment has stated that there will be new information on Warcraft 3: Reforged in June.
The remaster of the 2002 strategy game was released on PC in January 2020 and attracted widespread criticism from its fanbase, resulting in it becoming the worst user-scored game ever on Metacritic at the time.
Blizzard promised in a blog post in May 2020 that it would be “working towards a roadmap” to fix the game’s issues, but just a few months later it stopped releasing updates."
Of course this has nothing to do with the Microsoft buyout being finalized.
No doubt microsoft has a team in there going through everything with a fine tooth comb to save/make every dollar this team was no doubt on the chopping block.
I mean all blizzard has done is ports/mobile games then overwatch 2....... would not be surprised microsoft was like ok what do you have and they are like oh oh were fixing this game look look.
Oh and of course they have overwatch 1 the game that had over 5 million active users a month then 3 yrs later everyone is like oh yeah that game is it still online?
I think over watch is pulling what 10-22k a month now in players? if that
The overwatch 2 twitch viewership disaster enough said there.
I'm hoping Microsoft can step in and force Blizzard to deliver what the early trailers promised.
BLG writes: "You take a big risk when you set out to remake something. Have you stayed true to the original? Have you made any worthwhile contributions of your own? Did you make sure that all the characters are wearing the right color hats? It’s a tricky thing to get right, and sometimes, it goes horribly wrong, hence the following list. These are the worst video game remakes of all time."
Remake or Remaster? I think the writer doesn't know the different between remake and remaster
They just found bad rereleases and lumped everything altogether.
As someone who knows what it was like to write for nothing sites before I started shaking hands with the bigger sites, even the small sites barely paying anything in the name of "helping build you a portfolio" there were always weekly quotas you had to make in terms of articles, despite the fact they were barely paying you at all.
I'm guessing things are no different, being written articles are even more dead than when I was doing it.
I know that the Silent Hill HD "remaster" isn't the biggest offender on this list, but because I hold those games so dearly to my heart, the horrific end-product by an indifferent studio felt like a personal attack on some of the greatest "gaming years" of my life.
The SH HD Remaster I enjoyed I also had fun trophy hunting it for PS3. I know it has it's quirks that fans hate but I paid $30 for it on Ebay. The PS2 port is fetching around $150 so I saved myself $120 Canadian going the PS3 route I will grab SH3 on PS2 sometime. But I enjoyed the game specially since I have never played SH3 before SH2 I got free with a $10 Xbox I bought.
To the end of the earth all the way till eternity people will still get confused about REMASTER and REMAKE. Like episodes of the Twilight Zone. Forever and ever with no end
It's INSANE!!
It's like they think a new 4k version of Oldboy is the same as the American remake.
I use the movie example because i assume most videogame journalists don't like videogames and just took a job they could get...
A 7?
Go home IGN you are f***** drunk
This version is supposed to be improved, not worse than the original. By that logic this game shouldn't have a high score just because the original is still great.
> Pinning Blizzard down in court would likely be similarly difficult, regardless of justifiable complaints.
This is probably true. Especially since they have a refund process now in place for people who are dissatisfied. If they were not offering refunds, a plaintiff could show damages and point to false advertisement as the source of those damages.
Actually, on second thought -- owners of the original Warcraft III who had no intention to upgrade and who are not offering retroactive refunds from some 18 years ago might have a claim to objective damages here.
Just because the original classic is more or less preserved, that's a s**t excuse to bump the score. You're reviewing the remaster, and it's terrible.
IGN is terrible at their job.
"The relatively minor shortcomings of this edition shouldn’t stop you from returning to this classic"
Really? relatively minor? Give me a break IGN.