Warcraft 3: Reforged on PC by T.J. Hafer. Blizzard's remaster of this 18-year-old RTS classic is uninspiring and undoubtedly has some cut corners, but Warcraft 3 itself is still a great game worth playing. #ign #gaming
When reviewing this game, you have to think: "what have they added? Are there any improvements?" That is why this doesn't deserve a 7. Not because Warcraft is a bad game.
@@desired2396 I agree, Warcraft 3 Reforged is about a 7/10 as a game in itself, but since it downgrades on the original it's definitely a 0/10 as a remaster. I feel like IGN just needed to state that at the start instead of implying it was a rewiew of the reforging and not the actual game.
IGN: "It's bugged, less polished than promised, and doesn't build upon the experience we already had" also IGN: 7/10 "it has a little something for everyone"
watch how hard they go in on the wolcen review and compare. he describes 2 bugs and gives it a five.... in this he describes multiple bugs, complains about texture packs, and is talking about the first release the whole time........ and gives it a 7
7 of 10? For 30$ skins? Really IGN? Look how Microsoft remastered Age of Empires 2. That's love that we expected from Warcaft 3 Reforge, and not this cashgrab rubbish. 7 of 10, Jesus...
I mean, $30 for a complete re-skin of a game (all assets) isn't that bad considering there are single skins for single champions in games like League of Legends and Overwatch that cost $20... My personal review of Reforged is 5/10, but from a monetary standpoint, I'm not disappointed.
@Zu I never argued that it didn't bring all that was advertised. In fact, that's a big part of why I would give it such a low score. But that doesn't detract from the point I was making regarding worth of the cost. I still think a complete graphical update is worth 30 dollars when you compare it the cosmetic market.
Well it honestly depends on the person and what they were expecting Reforged to be....but I agree these were not minor shortcomings, but rather major atleast when taking into account what they had originally planned/promised.
Dident even mention you don’t own any custom games you make. Remember if u use their editor they own it your ideas your rules and your creation. All of it.
@@Nathan-bf7mt that's pretty smart - look what happened to them from dota 2. It became a global phenomenon. If you wanna make a game that you own, here's a fantastic idea: go make it
I don't believe IGN gets financial bribes directly, but they definitely have to consider being given the could shoulder from publishers if they're too negative, so every review is a coin toss on accuracy.
@@Tangible_D I don't know the inner workings og IGN. But this review was VERY forced into a positive direction. And I have always assumed they were sponsored. But Jesus this was forced.
@@MrElaaks I think for the sake of IGN being able to keep going they have to evaluate potential outcomes from scores. The reviewer might not even realise he is part of it, for example this reviewer is obviously a die hard fan so being unbiased is gonna be harder, maybe the person in charge chose him to review it for this reason?
@@Tangible_D ofcourse :) but as thequartering is saying and other commentors, you can not score this game in what the original has. This needs to score the game in the modified features. And that is a cluster f🥒🍑🥕🌽🥖🍌🌶️ But ofcourse IGN news to protect it's business. I just won't be a part of it any more :)
"There's something for everyone here" Not unless you want to play terrabytes worth of fully voices custom campaigns that has become a staple of the content creation community for the past 17 years. "Its not everything what we expected" It wasn't everything that they advertised either.
@Josh Lee Well, i just hope you know that the game was supposed to be SO much more, but they cut 90% of the promised features. But if you enjoy it, go right ahead.
@Josh Lee they reviewed warcraft 3 not war3: refunded. They literally just described warcraft 3 that is almost 2 decades old. They didn't even review the eula about custom games lmao
The game doesnt deserve a 0.5 for sure, but reviewers like this one need to also understand that they are not reviewing WARCRAFT 3 but REFORGED! And Reforged is definitely not a 7...
I feel a fair score that takes into account all the issues and marketing? Would be a 5 which most sites consider to be Mediocre. Sure you can have fun with the campaigns but they were always great. If you look at the false advertising, ToS/EULA for custom content, bugs, graphical issues, poor optimization? It is mediocre.
This is when the "hiding in plain site" strategy backfires big time. Now its 100% confirmed these clowns are in bliz's pockets. Benefit of a doubt has been slaughtered. GG
@UCYIgLhF9_h7xptTPrhla3xw I mean, I can, but fine. Marketing literally has nothing to do with the product itself. There should never be a time where points are given or taken based on the game's marketing. Bad business practice could mean a lot of things. It could be worth deducting points, but it's based on what those practices are. If it's about the refunds, then no. If it's about their ownership of custom games, then maybe. It all depends if it has an impact on the quality of the game.
@@tamaskalem1492 A review is supposed to inform a consumer's buying decision. If what is being advertised is different than the final product, that should absolutely be discussed. And unlike movies or books, interactive online digital games are entirely dependent on how developers and publishers manage the content. So I think they're both more than fair game.
@@clark2109 no - a review is supposed to review the game. If you, a smart consumer, likes what he sees in a review, you can do your own research. You got a brain right? Use it
"It's still Warcraft 3" ...i'm gonna stop you right there. No, it's not. it's "reforged" and it's $40 for what amounts to some texture work, missing features, and a crop-ton of bugs. And you didn't even talk about the modding implications and "morale rights" EULA update.
Tbh it is. I still own warcraft 3 warchest edition with all 3 disc. Bought reforge and it's almost the same game. I am pretty happy with it and will not ask for a refund.
@@LilBrujoFH18 What the game actually is, is Warcraft 3 with improved (technically maybe not stylistically) graphics and everything else made worse. How can you possibly be happy with it? This new version is way worse than it was all those years ago that alone should be enough to refund it.
Relatively small shortcomings? Failed cutscenes, hundreds of visual glitches, no real improvements on visuals, changed EULA, removed modes, clunky menus, bugs affecting original, no significant rebalance...
James Connolly 1916 Lol True. I’m not sure what people expected though. Since it was announced I was under the impression it was simply a remaster. Did they say otherwise at some point?
@@Naxus2 Try reading their own words and false promises. They were and still are riding the Remake train that led to wonderful things like Spyro, RE2, Crash, which are all wonderful examples and well recieved. SC Remaster was not an overpromised and lied about situation, and it was very well recieved. IGN is purely shilling in this and yes they said plenty to make this a slight. This is just one of YongYea's vids on the fiasco, I highly recommend watching the others as well ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-gui2AqOfVwA.html
IGN, explain to us how a game full of bugs and less features than the original makes it a 7 out of 10? Because it's still WC3? That's ridiculous as is your credibility.
@@manox14 thats 1/10 the score. it's about ratios. 59/100 to 70/100 would be a whole letter grade in school... and 59% is barely passing. Dammit, the one time I used math without a calculator outside of school
@@reganmcdougall93 his point was that ign rated it too high compared to other reviewers, but it was only one point higher than other people rated it.. whats the issue with rating 1 point higher than other people?
"This game is crap... but we want to remain on Blizztard's payroll and still receive gifts and invites..." *IGN begins to sweat nervously* 7 OUT OF 10!!! THE GAME IS GREAT!
I still remember when they gave Ace Combat 7 a 7/10 because the reviewer found the game too hard. Literally comparing it to Dark Souls. One of the devs for the game actually asked the reviewer on twitter what flight mode he was playing on. If he said standard he was obviously a bad gamer. Standard is basically flying the game with a handicap in favor of the player, if he played on standard and mostly likely the easiest difficulty mode on top of that, there is almost no way he should of found the game hard in any way, because even the score based missions have considerably easier standards often with 1/4 to half points to pass a mission. Score missions are often the hardest mission on harder difficulty modes in the game. That being said, I bet more work went into the intro of Ace Combat 7 than the entire Warcraft 3 Reforged. There is no way both deserved a 7 by IGN. =P ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EFxtY4giPk0.html
They wont get the early peak on games if they say something negative,since those "reviews" bring the money in for them.So we get these brilliant videos for it. :]
“They” it was one person, though I’m sure you know this already. As far as the score of death stranding there are plenty of people who like it and just as many that don’t.
4:14: "but what is here works well", you just made notes of the UI issues and then go on to say this... could I please have some of what you're smoking...
