Rating: 
Summary: No excuses to not like this game!!!!
Review: First of all, people who say that this is a badly animated, poorly written campaign and a game that isn't as good as the last two warcrafts probably has an old run down computer that was bought in the early 90's. This game has very good graphics and a very good story line in the campaign, first of all if you are a true warcraft fan you follow the story line, so that you know what the game is about. The graphics are spectacular if you have a good 3D card and fast computer my suggestion is atleast a 1.0 gigahertz. All four races are awesome because there races really are alot different, you will find this out if you are a true strategist. Multiplayer is awesome too... Like I said it basically comes down to this, the game has very good graphics, plot, different distinctions between races and awesome multiplayer (GET THIS GAME)!!!!!! If computer has slow or old harware then dont get the game.
Rating:
Summary: I'm a believer once again
Review: From the moment I first started playing Warcraft 2, I was hooked and I couldn't get enough. However, I overdosed on real-time strategy (RTS) games and have hardly been able to touch another since. So when Warcraft 3 came out, I was excited by old memories, but depressed I couldn't stand RTS's anymore. But nostolgia won over logic and I'm happy to say nostolgia was right as this is an RTS with a major face-lift.Yes, the basic RTS elements are there -- base buildings, gather resources, units, fight, etc, but that alone would be far too simplistic to say about WC 3. You have heroes which collect items, level up and are given special powers. There are also NPCs you can kill or interact with in subquests. But best of all, there are four major races (Humans, Orcs, Undead and Night Elves) all of which are unique and are NOT mirror images of each other. In other words, if you want to get good at playing 1 race, playing the other 3 isn't going to help since each one is different in what works to achieve victory. But what about the boring RTS formula of mass produce, attack and repeat? What if I want more tactic and strategy rather than a "might makes right" mentality? WC 3 addresses this with a few elegant solutions. One, you can only have so many units. Two, units (especially heroes) have special abilities which the better player will use and defeat their enemies with, making tactics important. And three, once you get so many units, you have upkeep costs, which hamper your production. For instance, after so many units, you only keep 7 out of every 10 gold you gather. And if you get more units, that drops to 4. Why is this significant? Because it forces you to get your forces out there and fight, so that as your units die, you maintain high production and can make fresher units. But what about those sacred heroes you don't want to die? No problem. If they die, you can resurrect them for a cost at your base, which means USE THEM, because they are your most powerful units. Also, you need to get out there and fight quickly so you can be the one who has higher level heroes, and also find items before your enemy. The result is NOT your typical RTS. That alone could make this game great however, the single-player campaign, which takes you through each of the races, contains a great storyline that will keep you playing to see the next chapter entails. And did I mention great music? Sound? Subquests? Movie cutscenes? Plus, it's got a great world editor so you can make your own scenarios, sagas and in-game movies, which will make the replay value huge since players like are making more! One thing to note is that some have said it has role-playing elements. While somewhat true, this is still very much an RTS. Also, parents may not care for the Undead race for young children. For instance, Ghouls regain health by using their "Cannibalize" ability, which means they munch on dead corpses to regain health. The Undead have other somewhat "gross" elements, and there is also the demonic race you must interact with. That said, it's an overall great game and will receieve tons of awards. And rightly so. After all, Blizzard helped to create the RTS game genre with WC 2, and they've now breathed new life into what had been a dying genre.
Rating:
Summary: BEST RTS SINCE STARCRAFT!
Review: I've been following this game since it was first announced 3 years ago, I was skeptical when they announced the game would be a mix between RPG and RTS, and later on with some of the stuff I heard during the beta test I was worried about how the game would look. It's awesome! it's better than I could've hoped, the graphics are great, the sound is great, the interface is really easy to use once you get the hang of it and it really makes gameplay a lot easier, AND the possibilities for strategies are huge.
The heroes are NO disapointment, they give the game a really cool twist. Without a hero you might have the bigger army, but chances are you'll get clobbered, heroes are a big part of the game, and when you're down to two heroes against an army, the feeling you get when you pull out the winner is sweet!
Rating: 
Summary: is not a great game
Review: i used to play for weeks starcraft, what an excellent game, but W3 is a waste of time, its to easy, it is not better than age of empires 2, i just expected something amizing!! :( not even 2 star better get dungeon siege
Rating:
Summary: Great game
Review: It kicks, whats with all these people saying don't buy it?
1. The animation is good no matter what these people say.
2. The campaign is involving and VERY interesting as it follows 1 heroes achievments (different hero each campaign, well except the hum and the undead).
3. Lan play isn't that hard, you just switch cd's between the comps you are playing on.
4. Cutseens are top notch, just like you would expect from blizzard :D.
5. The only complaint i can find is that the ai is pretty tough in skirmishes.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing game
Review: The only PC games I play are Blizzard games because they never disappoint. WarCraft2, StarCraft, StarCraft2, Diablo2 all were super addictive fun network games. I've played WC3 for about 2 weeks now, my conclusions thus far are mostly negative (-): (-) It is the most expensive Blizzard game ever.
(-) I had to buy a new graphics card just to get rid of video problems.
(+) Blizzard improved the unit controls and made micromanagement easier.
(+) Blizzard managed to fit all the animation, game, and music on 1 CD! No more disc switching like in some previous titles.
(+) Large number of graphics/sound control. Traditionally, the graphics for all Blizzard titles are awesome but WC3 improved on them all.
(-) Hero development is inadequate. The heros are not that strong and frankly there aren't that many opportunities to make them stronger in a normal game unless there are a lot of creeps.
(-) Every race has at least 2 or 3 mobile units that can hit air units very effectively so why even build fragile expensive air units. In WC2 it was worth building only in mass which brings us to the next negative point ...
(-) Because of the 90 unit limit the days of attack via supermassive hordes are gone. Yeah, supermassive hordes can be cheezy but (1) it also can be very fun and (2) it makes air units worth building.
(-) I am starting to get bored of the game and it has only been 2 weeks. In contrast I didn't get bored of Diablo 2 until after playing it for nearly 1.5 years. (-) My biggest complaint is Battle.net for WC3 is totally deserted. Where is everybody? You have to wait 30 minutes for someone to join even on "peak" times like Friday or Saturday nights. In Diablo 2, games frequently became packed in under 1 minute and for cow games, under 30 seconds! Blizzard has a huge following so this shows how unpopular and frankly boring WC3 is. This game is 5 stars if you've never played a previous Blizzard title before or if you enjoy playing games by yourself. Otherwise 3 or maybe only even 2 stars. I give it 3 just to be fair but like some people, I regret buying the game.
Rating:
Summary: fantastic!!
Review: Overview:
first off... if you want top-notch 3D, go buy a 3D game. People who knock the 3-D graphics in this game crack me up. THIS IS A 2-D GAME (which happens to have some great 3-D touches). VERY crisp graphics. Killer gameplay once you get the hang of things (i.e. you learn all the hotkey shortcuts for buildings and units). Yes, they ported some content over from Warcraft 2... that's why it's called Warcraft 3. The fans of Warcraft 2 love the inclusion of some of the familiar voices ("whatcha wamme keel?" "DABU!"). Basically, take Warcraft 2, divorce it from a forced grid, toss in some 3D terrain, add heros for some serious strategy variations as well as flavor, add in "forced-formation" movement, seriously beef up the graphics, add more variety (playable undead + night elf armies), and you get Warcraft 3. VERY fun game, about as addictive as anything I've ever played. Single-player: I suppose it's a matter of opinion, but I found the single-player story very interesting. The inner struggle of Prince Arthas, the history of the high elves ostracization from the night elves, the burning legion... all very neat stuff! :-) multi-player: My buddy and I play over [a](...service offered by Blizzard). Lag is nowhere NEAR as bad as when Diablo 2 first came out. Also, they have random match-up feature that lets you do 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, or FFA (free for all) games against random people online... or you can form up a team with your friends and play against random opponents or other "arranged teams" like yours. Overall... if you like RTS games (especially if you have a flair for swords & sorcery), Warcraft 3 is a MUST!
Rating:
Summary: The Best Game I've Ever Played
Review: I got Warcraft 3 on 5th July 2002 and I have played it everyday since as it is so addictive. I can't stop playing it. The Graphics are awesome and the storyline just kicks... The World Editor though requires a lot of time and skill to make a successful level. If you are looking for a 3D strategy game,...get Warcraft 3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Once again, Blizzard freezes you to your seat
Review: Name one Blizzard game that hasn't been fun, addictive, and a huge critical success. Unless they made games before the original Warcraft, I don't think there are any. Blizzard's track record is superb, and Warcraft III is no exception. Personally, I hate real-time strategy. In general, it's too damned hectic, and the repetitiveness gets boring fast. While War3 does, eventually, turn into the "same ol', same ol'," it nonetheless provides a much more entertaining experience than your average RTS. The chief reason for this is the introduction of powerful hero characters, such as Paladins, Blademasters, and Keepers of the Grove. These units add a touch of roleplaying to the game, making it accessable to non-strategists like myself. Another welcome feature of this game is its slower, laid-back pace. Believe me, Warcraft III is still intense, and you'll often find yourself breaking into a sweat, but the game paces along at a slow enough speed that you never feel overwhelmed. The greatest thing about War3, however, is its story. Blizzard has a knack for crafting rich, incredible tales for its' games; Diablos I & II, for instance, each followed powerful storylines (although most were likely too busy hacking through monsters to notice). Just like it's predecessors, both in the RTS genre and without, Warcraft III is carried along by a compelling story that will, much like the hero units, bring roleplayers along for a happy, comfortable ride. Unfortunately, once you've finished the single player campaign, there's not much to do. Single-player skirmishes often find themselves victim of an annoying bug that prevents computer players from expanding their bases, and non-strategists like myself will likely be intimidated by the awkward Battle.net interface, as well as the server's reputation for hardcore pro gamers and leet hacker doodz. In the end, Blizzard has created an excellent game, accessible to RTS masters and neophytes both, and has already sold their first million copies. Unfortunately, for casual strategists like myself, there's little to no replay value whatsoever. Blizzard Entertainment has crafted another incredible story, but while it provides for an entertaining and worthwhile single-player experience, most of us will find ourselves abandoning the game in favor of more lasting experiences.
Rating:
Summary: Just a repeat of Warcraft II; try it out before spending
Review: I've been waiting for Warcraft III for a long time, like many others. And though I'd love to say wonderful things, basically the game is just a repeat of Warcraft II (right down to the verbal responses from the characters and the types of single-player challenges). The graphics, highly lauded by some, seem childish and blocky to me, a bad job, in fact. The new parts of the game, compared to Warcraft II, include the ability to level up heros (more like Diablo) and the ability to play more races, at least once you've made it through the predetermined single player sequence. (Don't expect to play the Night Elves for a long time in single player.) Blizzard is counting on the adage: give them exactly what they've already liked and for heaven's sake DON'T CHANGE MUCH. And Blizzard did exactly that. -100 points for innovation; -50 for graphics that could have been interesting and aren't, and -150 for the SOS (same ole stuff). I'm sorry I spent the money, and I never thought I'd say that about a Blizzard product.
|
