Back2Warcraft literally preaching it. I subscribed and followed after watching this video.
What do you guys think? Is he right? Or disagree.
2 Likes
Would you like to give a summary?
1 Like
Nah, I don’t wish to steal someone else’s credibility. However, if you’re too afraid to click on my link, which is understandable. YouTube then search Back2Warcraft - 5 things Warcraft 3 needs in 2026
Mm, personally I do not see giving a summary without getting into specifics as “stealing credibility” but you do you.
3 Likes
I don’t click youtube links with no context.
And I’m especially not fond of threads like this where someone basically just posts a link to something and says “discuss.”
Your topic title says “5 things Warcraft 3 needs.” But in your post, you listed none of them.
1 Like
That’s fine. From what I recall, it’s a lot of points you guys disagree with anyway. WTiiWarcraft also posted a reaction video. - 5 Things Warcraft 3 NEEDS in 2026 | WTii Reacts
If you don’t wish to watch it’s fine, I mainly just posted for other people.
I watched WTii’s commentary on this Video, and they both raise several very valid points. They mention:
- Price is still high compared to what players currently receive, especially when compared to other modern RTS titles.
- Accessibility remains an issue for new and returning players.
- War3 should be available on STEAM - no question about it.
- The game needs a clearer learning path for new players.
- More Quality of Life improvements are needed. For example, adding a dedicated “Select All Army Units” hotkey and removing the 20-unit control group limit.
- Unit pathfinding is still problematic. Since original War 3 , but I say even since War 2 or 1.
- The discussion about AT vs RT matchmaking is particularly important, and WTii explains the problems very well.
- Better moderation eg W3C has way better.
- Chat - chat is dead on BattleNet - and WTii said that is not dead just really not what you expect - and that’s true.
- In game Rewards : portraits , ladder etc.
Video reference:
3 Likes
I also hope there’s a way they can completely restore battlenet multiplayer functionality.
How would you know? you haven’t posted the things, and I haven’t watched the video. You have no idea how I feel about these things if you don’t list them. All you h ave to do is write this:
- Thing A and why
- Thing B and why
- Thing C and why
- Thing D and why
- Thing E and why
If you can’t/won’t do that, there isn’t really anything to discuss. But since the thumbnail above basically lists them, I’ll go ahead and hit them
- Price: $30 is not much to ask for a game with as much game time and value you can get out of it as Warcraft III has, when you compare it to modern games that cost 2-3 times as much. as for F2P, I really don’t want to see a cash shop and I don’t think the experience of this game is well suited to a F2P environment.
- Onboarding: I do agree with this, Any new player really doesn’t have any idea what to do when they boot up the game. Should they jump into multiplayer and learn by experiencing it? Or should they get the mechanics from Single Player. And not just Single Player, but should they do the campaign, or should they do custom games against the AI, or what? This is a fair point.
- Micro/APM I can see why people would say this, but it’s really kind of unavoidable in the genre. Even games like League of Legends that simply the RTS experience down to controlling a single unit still require these skills. Games like Warcraft III are about commanding an army, and commanding an army simply isn’t a trivial task and there’s no way to simplify it that doesn’t entirely dumb down the game and that’s not the route I’d like to see the game take.
- “Multiplayer Experience” This is really vague. I think if we set aside the bugs and issues, there’s nothing wrong with the experience. Yes, we do need to fix those bugs and issues, but if you snapped your fingers and made them go away right now, I think the experience would be fine.
- Reasons to play: Wacraft III is a game that comes from a simpler time, before we needed “achievements” and pats on the back and participation prizes to enjoy playing a game. I suppose. Technically the game does have an achievement system but it’s mostly focused on the campaign and simply getting lots of wins. I suppose even though we didn’t really need it back then, I guess we do kind of need these things for the game to succeed in the modern age, even if I don’t like it that much.
As far as putting the game on steam, I think all that will come of that is another Blizzard game for people to just review bomb because Blizzard is Blizzard. However, I DO think they should put the game on Switch 2, because the Switch 2 has mouse controls and a game like this would be very playable on the console. I think an invitation to make bad publicity is the entire reason they haven’t put the game on Steam honestly, and I can’t blame them for that.
1 Like
PlayStation has allowed developers to support mouse and keyboard since PS3 with Unreal Tournament 3 so I don’t think the Switch 2 makes a big difference. I love console gaming but RTS just feels wrong without a KB/M and it would be weird to require a peripheral for a game which already has a massive entry barrier.
We will probably never see RTS games (War3 + SC2) properly supported on the Switch 2 or PS5.
I skipped the PS5, but I might get a Switch 2 just to play Mario.
It would be more realistic on Steam Deck, which people have already been doing
The claim was to make the STORY of warcraft 30 bucks, and just have multiplayer go free. Sorta similar what starcraft 2, and other games are doing already. 30 bucks for the actual story, but free to play so more can join.
1 Like
The difference is the Switch 2 comes with a mouse and the playstation doesn’t.
Games on consoles sell best when you don’t have to buy anything extra to play them. This is why you never saw that many games for the light guns on the NES/SNES etc. If you need a special peripheral, you limit the potential sales of you game (and this unfortunately also limits innovation because people don’t want to try things that aren’t going to make the most money).
Yes, the playstation controller has a touchpad, but I think you and I can agree that touchpads aren’t great for games like this.
It only needs one thing fresh noobs to be owned so whatever makes it popular with young players who have never played as opposed to old guys who all play the same rts games and are 40 the better we are already here we just need some fresh meat to have fun with. I didnt watch the video but i assume they also focus on high end games which i dont care about but as a channel that makes money they should also want new players.
Right idea, wrong attitude.
2 Likes
No its not its practical realistic and not a bunch of fluffed up bs its called being blunt. Dont you worry karren no children will be harmed
Brutal honesty has a habit of being more about the brutality than the honesty, Mox.
Bluntness has its place. Saying you want new blood just so they can be beaten into submission with the bluntness of a hammer is not the place.
2 Likes
This. Couldn’t we stand to be just a tad more welcoming? Or would you rather those new players just immediately quit within the refund window?
I’m not suggesting sugar-coating here, just maybe not completely laying bare what you really want when it clearly isn’t the wisest play.
I’ve been brutally honest much of my life and trust me, there are a few occasions where that kind of honesty is really not the optimal choice.
Great point.
To be honest, I think Switch 2 or PlayStation for the Warcraft 3 launch would be pointless. For example, just because either can use keyboards now doesn’t mean owners are actively hooking up keyboards and mice to their consoles; in fact, one of the main reasons for getting a console is to use a controller. It would be more realistic to put the game on Steam as the video suggested, ((Which I’m sure you didn’t watch.))
The only increase in accessibility the video suggested was to make multiplayer free to play. Keeping the campaign 30 dollar purchase like other games are doing already. Allowing more people to play and try Warcraft 3. The video posted Nothing about a PlayStation, Switch, or even an Xbox release to improve the game. The video just points out Steam with Steamdeck support, with its 175 million active users, vs Battlenet, 26 million active users. For example, the video is suggesting the Battle.net client is DEAD, and people are stubbornly using Steam. In addition, if I’m going into the battle of consoles for Blizzard IPS. If we’re talking about ANY consoles that have a chance, for Warcraft IPs, it would be an Xbox with Microsoft announcing next gen is basically a PC. And on top of that, XBOX owns Blizzard, not Nintendo or PlayStation. In fact, any future games that get released on those consoles need to get XBOX permission.
1 Like