Blizzard should have left RoC players on older patch

General Discussion
22

Thanks for posting my Reddit thread.

While there’s some backlash against RoC players, ultimately it’s the destruction of a community that has occurred pretty much overnight with no advance thought or foresight that has really affected me and the (few) RoC players left. The game has survived zero patches, work, or architecture improvements by Blizzard. We’ve continued to make it work in our own ways. To see it destroyed in this way is truly devastating - as mentioned, the game won’t attract any newbies, but is still populated with Golden Oldies who enjoyed it for nostalgia sake. If it was taking up too much of a server drain, that’s fine. Just please, say something. Say something so I know that my last match played on RoC where I cubed and failed was to be my last match for good. Let us go in and take screenshots of our stats/icons for posterity sake. It is truly a concern this may affect TFT as well, post-Reforged. If they can shaft RoC without so much of an afterthought, it can occur elsewhere.

3 Likes
23

I guess it’s just a difference in perspective and some discussion about semantics. If Reforged wasn’t even a thing, but all these changes were still happening, would it still be the ‘classic game’? Where does the line in the sand and definition end? Isn’t it not the classic game anymore since as far back as 1.10 when there was the pre-Frozen Throne patch? Isn’t Frozen Throne not its ‘classic’ iteration either since like 1.13 where there was a fair amount of numerical and mechanical changes?

I agree, but in a different regard. It should just be the Reign of Chaos and Frozen Throne split.

The thing about this one though is that I don’t think too many people or enough would validate this. Depending on what possibilities we’re talking about, of course. There’s fan interest in an expansion or another race or even just another campaign but those examples are all, on paper, still just doable with Warcraft 3. I also think that there’s certainly more than enough interest that an entirely separate game should warrant something bigger than just a remastering/remaking like Blizzard’s doing now. Something akin to, say, a Warcraft 4.

The thing here is that functionally, they are different games. Reforged isn’t really going to be except in regards to singleplayer, but that’s not really a community thing in a specific regard. That it’s not an aspect of online play whether it’s melee/ladder/customs. Reforged is just an addon more or less. If somone’s owned Reign of Chaos and/or The Frozen Throne anywhere between 2002/2003 and when they were pulled from the Blizzard store (because Reforged now includes and provides them), Reforged isn’t a necessary purchase for the individual.

I’m curious, here. Did you have these same thoughts and feelings back in 2016 when 1.27 hit?

Sorry, I really don’t mean to be contentious here but the interviewer asks him about the game engine. We know that Reforged’s only engine changes are visual. It’s a question about Warcraft 3 gameplay as a whole. That’s why Pete Stilwell goes on to elaborate on what a “progressive” ladder might be, where they’d be changing the functionality of some gameplay elements. Such as larger unit selections. At no point is it specified either way whether it’s Frozen Throne or Reforged.

24

Look, we clearly have different opinions, and you want to get very technical with “semantics” but I’ve already answered your questions. You asked me how I felt about 1.1 vs 1.27 and I already said that IMO 1.26 = classic. Obviously everybody might have a different opinion. But I think you understand what my point is here, so Im not about to write an essay explaining the differences of technical meanings, especially when nothing we say here has no fudging input on what blizzard actually does

2 Likes
25

I’m just trying to follow the logic presented while also inquiring about the personal perspective.

I do understand your point, I just think it’s an odd place to stand.

26

That’s fine if you have a different opinion, I do think the majority of players would agree with you, but I also think theres a decent number of people who would agree with me.

I just don’t see how it would have hurt the community if Reforged was made as a standalone expansion instead of a “remastering” of the original game. I’m not explaining myself enough because Im getting tired.

Heres another point: We currently have a broken map editor… would it not have been easier to just release a second map editor without breaking the original? if TFT stayed as it was we would still have the map making community, and blizzard wouldn’t have to put in half as much work making sure everything is backward compatible. On top of that a fully new map editor could be way better than a slightly improved one

Like I said before, backward compatibility sounds nice but its not that important imo. and its not the same thing as cross-platform compatibility. I personally don’t care about backward compatibility, if I want to play TFT ill play TFT, if I want to play Reforged ill play Reforged, I don’t need them to be compatible. That’s like saying lets make RoC and TFT compatible, its pointless

I have purchased 3 copies of WC3 because I liked having spare cd keys for chatbots (which no longer work, another problem to add to the list) I also refuse to preorder games with stupid skins, but once Reforged is released, if I want to play it Ill buy it. I don’t think that being able to play the classic game against reforged players is important. It might sound like a good selling ppoint, but in the end Im going to end up purchasing Reforged (technically my 4th copy of the game) with or without backward compatibility (that’s not the reason Im buying it)

If a new player buys reforged they get RoC and TFT for free, which could have been true wether Reforged was an addon or expansion or standalone game. So that doesn’t matter. The whole gimmick of backward compatibility is a fudging joke because all it means is they are making the original game unplayable

If theres TFT players who refuse to buy Reforged, then who cares? they don’t get to complain that they cant play because they didn’t buy it, that’s there problem not mine. If blizz just made WC4 would wc3 players get to complain that theres no backward compatibility? of course now, so why does it matter? the majority of wc3 players are going to buy the new game either way, and if the problem is they don’t have a good enough pc well that’s a pretty lame reason to support bc

I don’t know what better way I can explain my logic here, but if I had to guess on how this is going to turn out? well its not looking good right now, based on how these recent patches have been going :frowning:

Let me finish this by asking a big question: I understand if you disagree with me, but do you think my opinion is valid or completely out of proportion? I might be wrong about how Reforged is going to turn out, but I think my concerns are at least somewhat valid

2 Likes
28

Starcraft: Remastered.

No, because Warcraft 4 would be an entirely different game. Reforged isn’t (unless we’re talking about the singleplayer experience).

Not out of proportion at all. And it’s not my place to ever try to outright invalidate someone’s opinion. I just think a rigid banner-planting on what the idea of the ‘original game’ is winds up being a bit stiff and exclusive. Narrowing it down to a patch rather than the game itself.

It’s really shaky now more than ever not just because of no news updates but because 2 days ago there was one hell of a bump in the road with a lot of the reported instability from the latest patch for Warcraft 3.

1 Like
29

There is a small community of people who played (and preferred) RoC ladder. Those people are very upset because not only their accounts but their very favourite game was shut down without any previous notice whatsoever.

3 Likes
30

I don’t play SC:R but from what I’ve read, it wasn’t anything nearly as big as Reforged. SC:R supposedly had a lot of problems when it first launched (and we can assume the same will be true for Reforged) and even though Blizzard said they will continue supporting it (SCR) they haven’t done a whole lot since its released.

Now let me ask you, how many “new players” got into SC:R? Was SC:R for new players? or was it for long time fans? IMO SC:R has a dedicated fan base, and not a huge number of new players are just now getting into it. With Warcraft however, theres a lot of new players getting into the game, and its a real shame that the longtime players are the ones getting the shaft here.

If blizzard wants to encourage new players to buy the game, then don’t ruin the original game for the long time dedicated fans who have kept this game afloat for so many years

really?? is that true? if so then why cant the same be true for WC3

2 Likes
31

But none of this really disputes the point that the release of Starcraft: Remastered didn’t make the original game unplayable. Granted Brood War hasn’t seen a balance patch since… 2005? With some edits to maps.

No idea, truth be told. I can make a haphazard guess that the design docket was to make current players happy with a better looking game, bring back any old fans that didn’t want to deal with the older visuals, and probably bait the hook for new people. I’m sure player retention wasn’t amazing. I’ve also heard that some higher level players stream in Remastered visuals but practice in the original. And I believe in the ASL, a few of those top players still play using the original visuals.

No idea. Again, I can only guess. Maybe there was something too archaic (Starcraft and Brood War both released in 1998) about some infrastructure that they couldn’t bring it up to speed without causing a total collapse. Not like Warcraft 3 was immune to this either because RoC is disabled and AT isn’t returning yet. It’s a question for the devs.

32

that’s a problem, and could be true for wc3. the first thing fans like Grubby and B2W said when they first tested the alpha was “its very hard to identify units” meaning pro tournys will still be played in the original graphics. and the improved graphics are just for “casuals”… its also a bad sign for how much blizzard actually cares, hopefully they corrected the issues people were complaining about, but will it be good enough?

but SC:R was a much simpler upgrade, and we are already seeing the death of RoC, so my whole point is with talk about major changes to WC3 (such as new items and a level system locking items) sounds to me like they are making some drastic changes that belong in an expansion, not a remastering.

I don’t agree with you here. Adding a new race into TFT would be wrong. I mean I would be happy to see a 5th race added, I also would like to see new heroes… but that stuff belongs in AN EXPANSION …. NOT A REMASTER

For me, the last major change to TFT was when they added the last 2 heroes (I don’t remember which 2, maybe alchemist and panda?) but now we are getting new items and units are being moved around to different buildings, and tech is being changed… like these are things you do behind the scenes for a new game or expansion. This stuff doesn’t belong in a remaster… SC:R didn’t get new items or tech changes… and please don’t say Reforged isn’t a remaster cause it basically is a “de-masterng” in terms of all the changes (you know what I mean, lets not get into semantics)

2 Likes
33

I’m not sure if it is expansion material.

If you look at all past WC3 patches during TFT, there were sweeping changes, tons of additions, and the addition of Mercenary Heroes through patches.

Goblin Tinker, Goblin Alchemist and Firelord were all added after the release of TFT, and were not part of the base package or even planned. They were afterthought additions, and we just accept it all as a part of TFT. Same with certain items that they added well after TFT. If I recall, Rod of Necromancy or Sacrificial Skull wasn’t a TFT release item either, it was added further on in balance patches.

34

those were all way prior to patch 1.26. Patch 1.27 is when blizzard began working on “Reforged”. I don’t know exactly when the last additions were added, but I’m pretty sure Firelord and Alchemist and Sacrifical skull were all there back in like 2008 irrc? so from 2008-2016 how many major changes did we see in those years? those are the years that I think of when I say “classic TFT”

you might be right, but it could have been expansion material if that’s the path they had chose from the beginning… I know its semantics but imo reforged is the 3rd expansion, that’s how I look at it (even if its not)

2 Likes
35

That’s a very hard line in the sand to draw when there’s crossover in both regards, casuals and competitive. Likely moreso for competitive since I’m sure the average casual player wants the cleaner aesthetics.

But Reforged isn’t even out yet. This is all stuff happening right now for Frozen Throne (and Reign of Chaos). It’s not like 1.30 and 1.31 came in swinging explicitly with Reforged.

Sorry, that part was a little muddled on my part. I should have better tied some of the phrasing together. The example of a new race being ‘doable’ in Warcraft 3 is meant as an expansion concept. An expansion is still the same game just… expanded, hence the name.

So people should have paid for a new expansion entirely just to get the Tinker, Firelord, and Alchemist back in 2004?

Because it’s not just for or because of the remaster. It’s them trying to take another crack at Warcraft 3’s balance as a whole.

36

I certainly do not see it as an expansion, it hasn’t added enough change if it was. I would expect an actual overhaul with them deconstructing and reconstructing heroes to actually function instead of having to shift numbers to make up for obviously broken kits and mechanics.

Death Knight, Mountain Giants are fundamentally broken design units. They have become so effective that entire strategies are centered around their use. Their hands are actually tied be trying to keep the spirit of WC3 TFT gameplay through balance patches. I would actually rather they go the full mile and make it an expansion, but I think they lack resources to do it.

Most of those designers are on diff projects or left Blizzard long ago. Whatever they are doing now is just to smooth things out. Yes, its arguably worse than what we had, but honestly as an observer and not a player, it actually overall looks better. At least Orc has different firstpick viable options, at least NE isn’t mass druid of the talon strat. We complain about meta now but we were stuck with a poor meta before too, and we only accepted it because we got used to it.

37

I think you keep looking at pieces of my argument, instead of my entire argument. Reforged has new campaign changes, new graphics, and could also have new heroes, new units, new items etc… that is an EXPANSION in my mind

its all just semantics and opinion, but imo reforged is an expansion, but we are losing the “Classic” tft in the process… the whole point of my thread is that there should be 2 separate ladders, one that retains classic TFT and one that allows for new changes

2 Likes
38

But they aren’t doing that stuff because it isn’t an expansion.

39

wtf? they are going to be adding those things, reforged isn’t released yet… I cant keep arguing about these little things when you keep missing my point

You said before that the interview with Pete wasn’t actually talking about having 2 separate ladders… well I hope you are not right about that. That’s all I have left so say

2 Likes
40

Where’s the source on them ‘going to be adding those things’ in the case of new units and new heroes? Otherwise, new items alone (like the Sacrificial Dagger) aren’t expansion-worthy.

But he was. Just not in the way you’re thinking/hoping in an orginal/Reforged split. He was talking about the concept of a split between traditional gameplay and almost a ‘playtesting’ ladder that has some mechanical differences like larger unit selection.

In his answer to the interviewer’s question (which was more about the gameplay engine - which is shared between the original game and Reforged) about, specifically, group selection. It wasn’t even related to Reforged. The question or the answer.

41

I cant find the proof right this minute, but you have to please believe me when I say I know for a fact that blizzard has been talking with certain wc3 players on discord (they don’t communicated anywhere else, they only use discord to chat with specific people) and there were some leaks for new items, and an entirely revamped system where items are locked based on your hero level (so like for example you cant buy boots of speed without being a certain level, just as an example). That is just one example

Another example is skins. Blizzard has already confirmed that heroes will have a variety of skins, this is so they can sell skin packs. (which makes me wanna puke)

If reforged is a success it could be very easy for blizzard to add a couple new heroes. And I would be very surprised if they don’t add at least a few. If you think blizzard isn’t going to add more stuff (some of which may have an extra pay wall) your crazy

This is why reforged = an expansion (IN MY OPINION)

2 Likes
42

Well TBH, we’re losing all ladders in favour of one master ladder based on the latest patch.

And to be fair, I think if they were able to keep it and the issues were non-trivial, we would still have RoC today. But due to whatever constraints they have technically with integrating it all into Reforged, that’s what we’re gonna get. I do think they should keep RoC too but to be honest I think people need to move on from that as well considering a divided community is never a good thing IMO.

RoC players pretty much stay in their own bubble and rarely interact with the rest of the TFT playing community. I can’t say it’s a good thing for the game either. Just my opinion.

1 Like