You didn’t even seen this product yet,all you’ve seen is an unfinished beta…
One of the main reasons why the game looks not as good as 2018 - We doesn’t have an updated World Editor to run it.I’m sure we will may get it with Custom patch
Also,la year ago,Blizzard did said that they had two builds - an the difference between the first one,and the culling one is week and a half in between
yeah the entire point of remaster is graphics, i still have Classic WC 3 so I will stick with that. You think I am not gonna play WC 3? I have been with this community since 2004, The entire point of this was remastered graphics, I will stick with mods like WC3 rebirth which are of far superior quality.
Read my last post - They did mention that the have 2 builds with week and a half in between - and the second one (Culling) is far better than the first one
You do know that will be in the game right? They are two different tilesets the first uses ‘Dalaran’ the second uses ‘Loderon Summer’ that is why the ground is different they have not changed anything they are different tilesets.
3 Likes
They were talking about builds.They said that the first build was too cartoony and some models were weird,so in week and a half they have made a new build for 2018 demo
So it’s make sence that what we’re playing rn is the first Build
I don’t mind graphic criticism but saying the game needs a new engine and no more unit limitation… just no
1 Like
yeah Unit limitation is part of the gameplay, they already told they can remove it for customs, but new engine is possible and they can even allow cross play between classic and reforged even with a new engine in today’s world.
the problem is not the “purists” for god sake, problem is blizzard who cant choose if doing one way or another and staying in the middle, without being able to decide what to do.
Btw I dont see any major difference… they changed some stuffs and filters to fit old style, while maintaninig the 2018 with it, feels weird.
needs more atmospheric animations and models (tress, grounds, birds, etc etc) less contrast/colors, but without being greyish like 2018, and I think it would look much better.
1 Like
Problem IS purists,and problem is you…
What’s the point of a new engine though?
The engine is not the reason the graphics are ‘worse’. This really seems like a choice to make it look closer to WC3 original colors. They could desaturate all the textures very easily if they wanted to and match the 2019 look. The only thing missing are the shadows and lighting really.
Even SC2 has shadows and it’s a 2010 game. Warcraft 3 Reforged beta simply looks like how SC2 looks if you turned shadows off. I doubt shadows are a engine limitation considering what was shown at Blizzcon 2018 should literally be the same engine as we have now; the difference being the game was not optimized and was running on computers without limits. If they are in beta and optimizing, then lighting is one of the last things to get in.
People’s framerates are already fluxuating like crazy without the lighting and shadows in the beta.
When you know nothing but make a comment. Lmao…
Wc3 reforged have a 2003 engine with models in hd, but is the same.
Sc2 use a more advanced engine that is more responsive and the unit ia are more smart, the wc3 units are so dumb because of the engine, just like sc1.
2 Likes
You even can’t tell the difference between graphics and gameplay. Shadows have nothing to do with SC2 AI.
2 Likes
I am so sick of these posts thinking it’s so different. You do realize, that the only difference that makes those things look “better” (and yes I agree the beta looks better) is just a different lighting setup? or, at least it really seems that way.
(And no matter what you say, the map has lights, be that normal lights put into place, an HDRI, or the lighting of the engine, either way, you would not be able to see depth without light, as there would be no contrast).
I am going to start out and say, you are making this a much bigger problem than it is, this is not a big deal. I’ll explain why I am saying this: In the above image there are two options of what Blizzard has done to make it look different:
-
They used the same texture for both the trees and the grass, with the same shader (I suspect this is the case as the grass reflects the same amount of light as in the beta)
-
They used a slightly different texture, or the same texture with a slightly raised bump map (adds volume to a static image) which causes the grass to look thicker and taller. - this is good, it means the texture is identical mostly, meaning small tweaks were used to make it look different, and not an entire texture was created, which means, it should be very easy to re create the beta’s grass look.
Then, look at both images again, and notice that the colours are different, only the colours. Not the glossyness, not the roughness, not the ior (the index of refraction of an object, in other words how much light it refracts) nothing. Just the colour. Now, look at the darker spots on the ground, notice that above the colour palette is much more washed out, this is caused, by lighting, and only lighting. The reason why it looks more foggy, I believe is just because the colour pallatte is washed out more, because I suspect they wanted to add some more environmental perspective to the mission (Faked fog in other words)
If you don’t quite understand here are some examples to show exactly what I am explaining, and why I am saying it’s not a big deal:
HDRI:
Xhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjLDIUDn9dI (thought this was a really cool and simple tutorial to explain the concept of an HDRI and what it does in a 3D software, why it’s important and why creators use it)
Secondly, lighting mods for games (using an HDRI, in this case, skyrim’s real vision. I chose this one specifically to show you difference in colour vibrance, so that you can see why HDRI makes such a big difference depending on which is used)
Xhttps://i.ytimg.com/vi/eNW7ie4JrXI/maxresdefault.jpg
Now, let’s look at the textures. Again, two options Blizzard could have used:
-
Image texture (pretty sure it’s this one) - either a seemless texture used as a stencil over the map, as the world editor works. (could be painted or a realistic texture does not matter as long as it’s an image) Or a map texture, painted and placed over as a single image. (Really don’t think it’s like this, the stencil makes more sense)
-
Procedural texture (I really…really don’t believe they use this, but they are cool) - A texture that is run with a lot of calculations, math nodes, and different combinations of nodes to create a material. Very customizable, but also quite complex. Easy to tweak, hard to get the exact result you envision. Could take days.
Again examples:
Image texture examples:
Xhttps://i.ytimg.com/vi/ucGJ8YqU0wA/maxresdefault.jpg (simple image of a car with an image texture)
Procedural examples:
Xhttps://i.stack.imgur.com/MK6Wj.gif (an image of a procedural texture moving through a person tweaking one setting in his/her node setup)
Xhttps://i.stack.imgur.com/t1DbU.png (the node setup of the above image.) (Very very simple, to create stialized ice for example you would need many many more:
And yes 
you can off course combine both! which I find to be one of the most effective ways to work! my main point however, was that it’s simply taking an image into photoshop (or whatever Blizzard uses) and tweaking those image textures through that software, before re-importing it into their 3D one, or game one. It’s actually quite simple, and should be very quick.
So I hope I have been able to explain in a good manor, why your concerns aren’t as bad as you think, and why I believe it’s just the lighting, and if it is some small texture changes, that changing it back is not that big of a task.
I also want to point out: This is not a downgrade, it’s a stylistic choice. Do I like it as much as the original demo? No. But it is by no means a downgrade visually. It’s the same thing with a different lighting setup. Not a downgrade. Watchdogs was a downgrade, rainbow 6 was a downgrade. This is not.
(I am not touching on the interface as I do not have enough experience in that part of design, or game design to comment on that)
4 Likes
You have no idea how remasters work if you think remaster needs a new engine. Also,we didn’t even see a truly updated editor
In my comment i never talked about graphics, back to school please.
Then why bother replying to me?
I was only talking about graphics. I made no mention about SC2 AI.
This is a remake aka reforged, sc1 is remastered.
Kid.
3 Likes
Who’s told you that this is a remake? Do you even know what remake means? Go back to school
If game doesn’t have “Remastered” in the title - That doesn’t mean it’s not