A graphical comparison of Blizzard's remastered "Warcraft 3: Reforged" to the original "Warcraft 3" visuals available within the same client on the Battlenet app. #Warcraft #Comparison #Reforged
I meant "Frozen Throne" not Two Thrones.*** Got Prince of Persia on the mind :P While this video details the graphical improvements that have been made - it's important to understand that WarCraft 3 Reforged has suffered a significant Downgrade since it was revealed in 2018. I've mentioned this at the end of the video, but because Blizzard only showed cinematics, i feel it didn't warrant an entire video to cover it. Point is - Blizzard did not deliver the "reforged" experience that we were all expecting. Sure, it looks nicer - but the reversal of Blizzard's policy regarding the ownership of custom games and the requirement to install the extra 30gb of data even if you don't own the Reforged edition seems like a poor choice by the developer. I personally am enjoying playing through it with the nice visuals - but hardcore fans of Warcraft 3 will likely be disappointed by a number of the changes. What do you guys think? You enjoying Reforged? Or are you refunding it already?
What did you expect? Starcraft Remastered looks exactly like Brood War. Which I'm sure is what they intended to do with this game. If you want a game with updated graphics and game play, beg for Warcraft 4.
@@Fion355 They never promised a totally revamped graphics overhaul and animations though. Since it's paired with Classic, that's just not possible. But the graphics in Reforged are better than Classic.
@@SeanUCF are you kidding lmao. Reforged is not consistent at all, and has completely abandoned the heroic metalhead fantasy look that made Warcraft great.
@@Fr3k3 Yeah, they totally took Warcraft in a whole different direction... Did you see the roof tops for some of these buildings in the video? Warcraft was never about that Asian anime vibe...
i've seen many of those comments. look at the players in wow. its more than ever. the newest main town is fuller than i've ever seen. people like u just stopped wow a time ago for private reasons not because of wow
@@pinterakos3349 You have to play original WC3 to understand. Those animations were not amazing quality but they, combined with the models which have sort of tabletop minature look, had a cartoonish feel to them.
@@EcchiRevenge I've been playing the original since i was 7 years old. I know what are you talking about, but saying everything was more soulfull 17 years ago with the 2D corpses and without lipsync is just kinda stupid.
@@Nick930 I disagree, for a company of the size of Blizzard to lie like this and on top of this crap still ruin the old one, i do think they deserve it.
@@sheepfly That "WarZ" game deserved a 0.5. This new Reforged game by itself is completely playable, looks fine and is reasonably priced. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But there's ACTUAL terrible broken fake products out there that genuinely deserve the low score. The size of a development team doesn't matter. Remaster projects regularly are handled by very small teams
@@Nick930 the problem is sure it is a bit better but features have been removed and its far from what was promised by blizzard via the original reveal. You want a real remake look at AOE 2 DE vs the original version. It adds more civs new campaigns new effects textures sounds ai etc updates the Ui slightly. I loved warcraft 3 as a kid and seeing this lackluster remaster is sad.
@@northwestcoast2220 i know right? I understand that reforged fails to deliver some things. Plus the fact they dont give the option to play the classic experience is a pretty crappy thing to do to for the fans. I dont think this remaster deserves all this hate, its mostly the way they updated the old game instead that truly sucks.
The terrain, trees, and water do not look that great in the remaster. Especially when viewed through normal gameplay not zoomed in. Particularly the water actually look worse in some ways. I also hear that animations were downgraded as units have less animation variety than before.
5:17 - how is this a graphic improvement. The new environment textures and the softer lighting just make everything blurred and bland. The original was obviously going for a high contrast, cartoon feel. The old textures somehow manage to pop out more and convey more detail, even though they are much lower resolution. Just compare the dirt floor and gravel in 1:02. Even the trees are better in the old version. Forget the high-res foliage for a second and consider the tree trunk in 2:32. In the original, the trunk is low resolution, but they sneak in some light/shadow contrast to make it interesting. Now look at the reforged version. It is just a softly lighted, soft shadowed, brown stick, with some extra polygons that do absolutely nothing for it. It is just bland.
The hd character models are really out of place when you compare it to enviroment. What is most out of place and really break the visuals in cutscenes is the reflective armor on characters. In the scene you see all models,textures look normal with absolutely no reflection at all, but very few characters pop out in their shiny super polished armor. Really I cant get over this one.. worst offenders are Uther, Arthas and Thrall and his golden shiny wolf. I dont understand how nobody in blizzard saw this. Those models would be really good if they had little less shine and maybe little bit battleworn armor. Btw this shiny reflection always remind me protoss in starcraft BUT its fucking super advanced aliens so I am ok with their super polished shiny look.
I am sure this problem is in game only because it was not made by blizzard and they contracted one studio to make characters, buildings another to make enviroment objects and textures etc.. Then someone at blizzard used these assets from multiple studios and made the game we got.
@@eth_saver I'm pretty sure you're right. That malaysian outsourcing company had each 3D models from the original game separately and they just made it more detailed with higher resolution textures etc... In fact, all those models look pretty decent when you see them individually. It just doesn't work when you put them all together. Normally, there must be an art director at Blizzard who's in charge of supervising the outsourcing and he's in charge of keeping a visual consistency. If there is one, he did a terrible job.
Yes, let's focus on the most insignificant detail ever and ignore the fact that the whole game looks miles better than the blurry shitshow that is Warcraft 3. I don't know what the fuck this fanbase wants, honestly. Prime example of rose tinted glasses in action right here.
@@Legend1315 Everyone who owned Darksiders 1 and 2 got remastered versions for FREE. Everyone who owned original Skyrim, got remaster for FREE. Everyone who owned Warcraft 3 original got kicked in the balls to spit out extra money for downgraded game, but with better textures.
@@Legend1315 That's what I've been saying! Thank god I'm not alone I have no clue what these "fans" are on but this remaster is way better than the old game by far and its only 30$!!!!! They are acting like they dropped 100$ on a deluxe version of a game sorta like mass effect andromeda scandal and it's not even close to that.
Exactly it looks definitely better than original but it still feels cheap compared to Blizzard standards they used to have. Character models are fine except for their animation BUT the terrain/environments would need still lot of work and many of the 3D characters portraits also look rather cheap/poor
If by modern and excellent look you mean cheap mobile game look done by a different studio you are spot on. They also paywalled some of the existing graphic settings for the classic version. Reforged is horrid.
Lmao that "mobile" look is the same look just upgraded. It is still consistent with the game design. Art resources done by a third-party isn't a novelty either.
there are many texture bugs in wc3remarster, and to be honest the new art style makes the game look bland, shot in 8:30 imo the old version is far more eye pleasing
Alex Xu YESS that’s what bothers me. The color pallet makes it too two dimensional. Like a 5 year old drawing a landscape. I mean comon navy blue river really?! 😂
This was a wonderful review that stuck to facts! I enjoyed the pace of the video and your quality and video edit. This was very satisfying and answered my questions about the Remaster. Thank you!
I personally preferred the aesthetics of the original. They should have kept it looking cartoony rather than go for realism with a cartoony colour pallet. The new one has higher detailed textures but lacks all of the original's charm. It's a shame Blizzard have lost their touch. I hope they keep the hell away from Diablo 2.
There's no such thing as wc3's original 'charm' - it just looks like crap in comparison to what wc3 reforged is supposed to be. Edit: still wished that wc3 reforged was actually good, aside from the bugs and a lot of features removed from the original game, I'd still wish that the models won't reset their stance after every attack animation.
What are you even talking about? How is warcraft 3 reforged anywhere near realistic? It's still cartoony. I dont think the style is the problem, I think it's just the graphic fidelity is underwhelming for a remaster in 2020.
I agree I hate the "realistic" look they went with in reforged WC had always been over the top cartoony feel to it. It just looks like a generic Chinese or Korean mmo feel to their looks.
@@larrythebomb5001 indeed the realism doesn't go quite well with WoW and keeping it more "cartoony" is better I mean in World of Warcraft nowadays I think you won't find Chromium looking armor ,look at the Stormwind Harbor Guards ( Shadowlands or whatever latest models ) they look like decent footman for the reforged version
I heard that Warcraft 3 Classic had certain graphical features blocked behind the Reforged toggle to give the new version an artificial edge in the visual department- notably, the option for shadows (that's been a thing for 15 years) now can only be turned on by buying Reforged. If you're comparing between the two versions of Warcraft 3 from the client, I'd be curious to see a comparison to an original pre-patch copy to see if this is true.
Newer graphics is not always a better graphics, while the textures and models have improved in resolution and details they do not look better and mostly they do not feel like they belong/fit to this game. For RTS games high end graphics and very high texture detail does not necessarily improve the gameplay as some might think. Whole view is displayed from considerable height and you don't need super graphics for game to look good.
While I do like the new models, this is one thing that keeps bugging me. Unfortunately, this isn't new to Warcraft, WoW started the de-saturation trend because...reasons.
This is a very baffling statement. The grass in reforged for example is neon green already, the only way I can imagine to make it more vibrant would be to give it an eerie uranium glow. The same goes for everything really.
That's because they probably outsourced to Philippines where cheap monitors as well as talent were used. Anyone remembers what happened to Dragonball when it was outsourced to Toei Philippines?
From what I can tell. the 'classic' mode from reforged is NOT the same as the real 2002 classic, has something to do with the engine. I was hoping to see the comparison between the real old and new. E.g. the unit shadows ARE supposed to be there, and they can clearly be seen in the old classic, but they are gone in reforged classic. The problem with all those new details is that they can only be seen in cut-scenes, the 'realistic' grass looks like crap from the basic gameplay angle (view from the top). The detailed units also look less distinct, which is a death crime for a RTS
Nick930 honestly? And I’m not trying to be funny here...I feel the reinterpretation of that sign was way off and is reflective with how out of sync Blizzard is all across this remaster.
Nick930 I know and it’s a bit fourth wall breaking but that’s something I appreciate with older Blizzard games; genuine fun (sometimes out of place) flourishes that showed playfulness, that there was warmth and charm and the developers personality in the product. It was also nice that fun out of place things like this could be okay because older Blizzard games seemed to be able to coalesce into something that transcended individual parts that would stick out and detract from lesser games. It also never felt egotistical, pandering (so hard to not make a pun then), or too self aware. Was just genuine fun.
@@Fuuntag Fair. I don't feel as though the new version is really avoiding that "charm" though. It still feels fairly playful in its art direction, with rounded edges and exaggerated features. Honestly.. I prefer the design of Warcraft 2. It started to look silly by Warcraft 3.
Sure the reworked game looks a lot more realistic, but Blizzard was never going for realism when they created Warcraft 3. It's nice of them to have gone into the files and swapped them with new hyper-realistic models but whats the point when 95% of the game is viewed from an aerial angle - I feel like the new models lost that "Warcraft" charm, they're very generic... look at the night elf wisp or the dryad for example. The UI is literally the same, gameplay elements like only being able to select 12 units maximum still stuck in 2002. If they wanted to keep the game as close to the original so both classic and reforged players could compete in multiplayer why did they remove so many multiplayer elements (ladder, clans, profiles)? Sad to say but the whole thing looks rushed and a cash grab, which is unfortunate as this was probably the highlight of Blizzcon 2018 announcements for a lot of people. They had one chance to improve the game and they blew it.
Everything about the classic looked better. The cartoony, blocky and starkness was stylish. The new stuff is overkill, generic and lacks the laid back, humorous signature of the original. and don't even get me started to what they did to the core elements of the game.
Something I don't like about modern RTS games is how the sprites seem to flow or glide over the ground, whereas older RTS's had a more believable walk or run. Really puts me off playing these things as pretty much all new games do that.... Could have used some hit detection to make it more fun too like Diablo 2
Um your joking when you say the grass looks flat right? He showed you how the grass moves with a unit in this video, it doesn't look flat, the original version was flat
@@RINJ0ker Yes it may look good when zoomed in, but when you play the game in top down view the new grass does look flat. The problem is that each of the 3D grass blades fail to stand out from the rest of the terrain, either due to the lack of lighting or shadow. The colors of the grass also blend in too much to the rest of the tileset color palette. Compared to classic, while it did not implement any foliage , it shows a sense of layer and transitions very well into a different tileset. source: old school wc3 player and a side artist
I was happy to see an update at all. Im not a WoW fan so it was awesome to see some love shown to this game I loved. They could have done better, but I am happy to play Story Mode again
It's weird, when you zoom in and examine the models, the Reforged ones are clearly much better and more detailed. But when you're zoomed out just normally playing the game, it doesn't feel any different.
@@Nick930 Wastelanders is gonna come with the Steam release as far as I know Ido if is true but if it is... Bethesda would have a chance to reedem his actual reputation
The muted colors of Reforged make it look dull when compared to the original. The old game felt much more alive, it felt like it had more detail than the new edition where there's almost no contrast. OG wins this.
The new spell effects are WORSE too....honestly wish they would just touched upon the doodad trees and character models ONLY and blew them up to better WoW like scale. Nothing else needed an overall Especially not the UI.
Old version vs New version(Reforged) of WC3 Graphics: New Version(Reforged) Gameplay: Old Version(which is spells are still old from New Version.) Cinematics battle from Undead final scenes(Arthas vs Illidan): Old Version. Script speed: Old Version(New version mouth moves are perfectly great. But, some dialogues are just stopped with their speaking of mouth moves. And next scenes are kinda slow....) Game Characters: Reforged Music: Both Calling their names on chapter scripts: Old Version.(Ex: Old version - Grom, You've got to come with me. and Grom?) (New version changed into Hellscream as a last name instead of first name.) And that's my reviews.
They forget one thing, the footwork and movement of the units 😞. The classic is more realistic than reforged who's units is like sliding instead of running 👎.
*It's not a bad game...* they put nice details on it, *BUT* that is useless if the connection fails frequently..., creative freedoms are restricted, and you have to meet many requirements to be able to play (to be able to play a game with common graphics for the times in which we are) *If we leave all that stuff out Reforged is a casual game that all wc3 fans would play normally.*
1 detail in the first mission with the bandits. When you encounter them stealing the ledger you could surround the leader, prevent him from running and kill him quite easily. In reforged he is invulnerable and cannot be attacked until he reaches his camp. Really made speed runs a lot longer.
@@Nick930 Same mate , the original trilogy was legendary. At least a remaster of Warrior Within would be greatly appreciated. Ubisoft Montreal should really pick development on PoP back up , since Assassin's Creed's already kinda gotten oversaturated....
I think the sound is a little disappointing but I'll be buying it for sure. Will we be getting the Frozen Throne at some point too? That would be awesome.
Can someone explain to me why does when observing different segments individually, Reforged looks so much better, but when observed as a whole, it looks worse? How is that possible?
Everything has a tad bit of Asian too... Have you seen the roof of the townhall? The roof of the Barracks looks even worse than that too... Very oriental like. It's what happens when you allow an Asian dev company to "reforge" reforge.
The point is that they simply remade the visual effect, instead of updating the whole landscape and the whole background is totally outdated. Hundreds of development, zero innovation.
look like for the sound effect they copy and paste it from the old game. I guess the only good thing about this remake is the graphic, i dont know about the content from Reforge compare to the original Warcraft since im not gonna buy this remake
There is definitively a graphical improvement but I feel like they could do more. The last time I played WC3 I was 16 years ago (!) so I will probably buy it anyway.
Firstly its because the cartoonish style. Then theres the coloring. Also no one mentiones how light the old version feels when you play it. Animations are waaaay beter in the old version
God i wish someone who's actually interesting in making/playing games would run blizzard.. Now its just a bunch of suits finding ways to juice money as much as possible and give as little as possible for the money.
Now i know why those unit in reforged looks floating when walking, those new animation has no tempo and way too slow. Blizzard seems like let someone has no experience in RTS design at all to monitor this project
The individual visual elements are pretty good, but the overall style doesn't really age well... also, I don't think they redid the sounds at all, just adjusted the volume and cleaned it up a bit.
The main problem in envoriment detail is. They didnt give good lighting and shadow effect. Yes the terrain look detailed than clasic but only if you zoomed it. If it on normal window. It look bland and as if it dint have volume... Also i prefer the old UI when patched. The reforge one is just the copy paste from old one without border ui for widescreen resoluyion
