Warcraft 3: Frozen Throne

lowzeewee · July 19, 2003

Blizzard games seemed to be a lot more popular and more hi-tech than WW's games. :O

DukeLeto · July 19, 2003

Blizzard games seemed to be a lot more popular and more hi-tech than WW's games. :O

1. Wrong: RA1 is the best selling RTS ever, and all the C&C's have sold more copies than their Blizzard counterparts. (C&C more than War1, RA more than SC or War2, Generals will probably be more than War3 - I know Ren has.)

2. That can interpreted two ways: That the actual content is more futuristic in Bliz games, which is obviously worng, or that Bliz games have better grpaphics, which, again, is wrong.

ordos45 · July 20, 2003

Has Blizzard even done an FPS? No.

Its actually a third person shooter, and under development, its called Starcraft: Ghost, I think you've heard of it.

lowzeewee · July 20, 2003

I think Blizzard games still have better graphics and smoother gameplay and a BETTER online game system.

As of then,RA and CnC were like the only RTS games while WC was still in the shadows back then.And because of WW's older games' popularity,people thought that the later games would be even better than the first few but unfortunately not.

Terror · July 20, 2003

Blizzard games seemed to be a lot more popular and more hi-tech than WW's games. :O
1. Wrong: RA1 is the best selling RTS ever, and all the C&C's have sold more copies than their Blizzard counterparts. (C&C more than War1, RA more than SC or War2, Generals will probably be more than War3 - I know Ren has.)
2. That can interpreted two ways: That the actual content is more futuristic in Bliz games, which is obviously worng, or that Bliz games have better grpaphics, which, again, is wrong.

That is utter bullcrap. Dune2 sold more copies than warcraft, C&C and RA sold more copies than Warcraft 2. But they did not sell more than Starcraft, and Generals will definetly not sell more than warcraft 3.

And Blizzard made no FPS, they did make 2 very popular RPG's, whereas Westwood's Nox is a nice try, but never got any popularity. Also, both Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3 where the fastest selling pc games ever, now that means how many fans that blizzard has.

This was the same when TS came out, but people got disappointed and Westwood lost most loyal fans, and now everyone just waits and see if the westwood product is actually worth spending money on

lowzeewee · July 20, 2003

Red Alert 1 came out a little while after Warcraft 1 and at that time, and the latter's graphics and gameplay,obviously,was rather crappy while that of RA1 was good and the gameplay and controls were easy to manage so people thought that all WW products would be like this but unfortunately for them,no!WW didn't improve their methods in their next few games and got quite boring after all.And since EA wanted to buy them,they cannot resist the price.

Edric O · July 24, 2003

Speaking of The Frozen Throne...

For the past few days I've been working on a map that would have the Naga as a playable race. And today I finally finished it! The map itself is not new - it's one of the old W3 maps. But it has one special feature: When you select the Orcs as your race, you get to play with the Naga instead!

Try it out and tell me what you think:

Forest of the Naga

Note #1: The Naga have a new hero, the Royal Guard. It uses the model of the Royal Guard unit from the campaigns, but it has several new hero spells.

Note #2: All Naga units and heroes can swim.

Note #3: There is no new AI, so don't try having a Naga computer player, because it won't do anything.[attachment archived by Gobalopper]

Khan · July 24, 2003

That's really cool, thx Edric O.

lowzeewee · July 25, 2003

What's all that jazz about the mask stuff?

DukeLeto · July 25, 2003

In the Beta, the Orc Shadow Hunter had a cool-looking mask, I'm sure you can find a picture of it somewhere. They took it away in the full version, which looks pretty dumb.

And Flameweaver: Red Alert has sold more copies than SC. RA=8 million, SC=7 million.

lowzeewee · July 25, 2003

A troll hero without a mask!LOL! ::)

If EA was better,Blizzard would have collapsed by now,or earlier than WW.

Khan · July 25, 2003

A troll hero without a mask!LOL! ::)
If EA was better,Blizzard would have collapsed by now,or earlier than WW.

Not necesarrily, considering how much longer WW has been around, when compared with blizzard.

Cyborg · July 25, 2003

They should get subsidised? Their games are an art form? OMFG, now I am 100% certain they imbed subliminal messages into their games or something. THEY'RE JUST GAMES FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! (And mediocre ones at that.)

Don't try to state that making games is not making art.

The movies in the Warcraft games. What do you call them?

It's art, all of it.

And if you look at Blizzard's games without looking only negative, you'll see how good they are at their work. Better than Westwood was.

lowzeewee · July 26, 2003

I prefer interludes and beginning-and-end-movies because they don't take up more than 1 CD's space.And for goodness sake,you don't need 1 movie per mission! ::)

And no matter what,it depends on your choice of game manufacturer.Full stop.

Cyborg · July 26, 2003

I prefer interludes and beginning-and-end-movies because they don't take up more than 1 CD's space.And for goodness sake,you don't need 1 movie per mission! ::)

Which is exactly what Blizzard does :D

Khan · July 26, 2003

I liked the graphics they used to do the end fight scene between Arthas and Illidan.

lowzeewee · July 26, 2003

:) I haven't got FT yet...maybe I might have to wait a few weeks again because it's sold out again! >:(

And I got school and am not free to get it.

DukeLeto · July 26, 2003

Don't try to state that making games is not making art.
The movies in the Warcraft games. What do you call them?

1. Watch me: VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT AN ART! None of them! Not just Blizzard, but WW, Microsoft, Activision, all of them - they're just games. You know, for fun?

2. "Cheap"? ;)

lowzeewee · July 26, 2003

Don't try to state that making games is not making art.
The movies in the Warcraft games. What do you call them?
1. Watch me: VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT AN ART! None of them! Not just Blizzard, but WW, Microsoft, Activision, all of them - they're just games. You know, for fun?
2. "Cheap"? ;)

1.They are an art!The UNIQUE way you DESIGN and MANIPULATE your IDEAS.

2.Wha...?

DukeLeto · July 26, 2003

1. Whatever... :O

2. Well, they couldn't even get real actors...

lowzeewee · July 26, 2003

1.OK then.

2.Who needs real actors?Using animations enable having special effects and supped-up stuff like the thrall's vision battle movie and mannoroth,if not,what do you expect?Some nerd under a mannoroth suit?LOL.Or Ozzy Osbourne as Arthas?LOL.

DukeLeto · July 26, 2003

Or perhaps they could use a combination of Real Actors and digitized effects, like in real movies. StarCraft/WarCraft3's movies look so cartoonish.

Apollyon · July 26, 2003

Computer games are certainly an art form. More specifically they comprise a huge array of different art forms: Music, sound, graphical, creative writing, architecture and many many more besides.

lowzeewee · July 27, 2003

They do not look cartoonish. ::)

Cyborg · July 27, 2003

Or perhaps they could use a combination of Real Actors and digitized effects, like in real movies. StarCraft/WarCraft3's movies look so cartoonish.

I strongly disagree.

They look stunningly real for computer graphics to be.

Sign In

Warcraft 3: Frozen Throne

Recommended Posts

lowzeewee

DukeLeto

ordos45

lowzeewee

Terror

lowzeewee

Edric O

Khan

lowzeewee

DukeLeto

lowzeewee

Khan

Cyborg

lowzeewee

Cyborg

Khan

lowzeewee

DukeLeto

lowzeewee

DukeLeto

lowzeewee

DukeLeto

Apollyon

lowzeewee

Cyborg

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information