Testing world's best gameplay

Way back in 1998, after the rousing success of StarCraft, Blizzard announced the next installment in the Warcraft 3 series. It was to be one of the most prestigious projects, combining a 3D environment, the Warcraft atmosphere, the streamlined gameplay of StarCraft and Diablo style rpg elements. Blizzard stated that StarCraft, being the pinnacle of RTS gameplay (pretty much so until the present day), was the last inheritor of the traditional RTS concept of basebuilding and unit creation. Originally, Blizzard even minimized the importance of the base and thoroughly increased the value of units. 4 years and one heck of a lot of delays later, Blizzard is entering the final stage of development for Warcraft 3 with the open beta.
In January 2002, Blizzard shipped 5000 Beta copies to North American betatesters. The product includes all races, full multiplayer via Battle.Net on about 10 mulitplayer maps, and all ingame graphics, artwork and sound. Excluded are the cinematics, singleplayer campaign, and LAN mulitplayer. The beta takes up about 400 mb, and is protected by a cdkey. (Read the details of Blizzard's legal fight here)

First thing we noticed was how smooth the game started. While the main menu shows an ingame castle on the background, the menu was up in about 10 seconds. An epic background tune already is laden with foreboding: it was pretty obvious, we had entered the realm of a Blizzard classic. Taking a peek in the settings, we noticed 3D and positional sound, and resolutions up to 1600x1200x32. Technically, Warcraft 3 seems ok. After connecting to Battle.Net and registering a new account, we entered the lobby. StarCraft and Diablo veterans but even rookies can find their way easily in one of the world's best online match-up services. Battle.Net has been around for quite some time, and is still one of the benchmarks in their niche. A bit like Diablo 2, you can choose to "Play a Game" or start a "Custom Game". The former are supposedly games that comply with recommended Blizzard settings, while the latter are "open" games. But in reality, there's not too much difference between the two. While the WarCraft 3 Battle.Net screens were beautiful and easy-to-use, we wanted to play! Desperately! Again this is easy. Choose map, choose race, choose colour, and…wait for other players. Wait. How come the "Start Game" button isn't greyed out when I'm alone? This is one of the rpg elements of Warcraft 3. I'll deal with this right away. If you play without opponents, you can start the game. After loadup, you'll get the message to either stop the game, or continue playing (much like in StarCraft). But the game doesn't have to end there. Remember the critters in StarCraft? Well, in WarCraft 3 these critters are spread around the map and can they fight back. More about the "creeps" later.

Our first impression of Warcraft 3 ingame were, of course, the good graphics. But after the release of Battle Realms, they are not out of this world. Like in Battle Realms, zooming in is a vertical pan. Geometrically, Warcraft 3 seems less complex than, say, Ensemble's still-to-be-released AoE successor Age of Mythology. Perhaps you might think of this as a disappointment. Well, maybe it is. But the trade-in is royal. We were surprised how smooth and stable the entire game ran. Even in 1024x768x32 the game ran smoothly on mainstream pcs (1 Ghz, GF2). Also, the lighting (auras, spells,…) and the day/night cycle added to that typical Warcraftian atmosphere, one that was abundantly present. After setting up some buildings and creating some units, their superior animation came to our eye. The units look great and have a 3D portraits.
The sound & music is excellent, something we'd expect from Blizzard. There was one bug though in the beta, that would crash the game when you cut wood and when positional sound was enabled. But since the beta already entered stage 1.03, this bug is probably fixed. We couldn't make out whether or not the music was event-relative, but even if it isn't, the music is epic and superb.
Gameplay-wise, Warcraft seems to be much like Starcraft. There are many similarities that can be drawn. The interface, menus, minimap… Taking a first glance you'd say nothing has changed, except perhaps you now see the entire map already revealed, but still fogged. As in StarCraft, the third resource (in Warcraft 2 this was oil) was dropped, subsequently sea combat has been removed. Gold and wood are the resources in Warcraft 3, with gold being the most important. There is one new feature added to the economy model. In line with the resolution to diminish basebuilding and camping (something that Terran players really could do in Starcraft), Blizzard has implemented a system called "upkeep". Basically this means that the more units you have, the less efficient harvesting will become. This encourages players to actually use their units instead of hoarding them. While this system is quite enginious, combined with the rather low supply limit (80, and yes, you still need to build supply depots or similar) and the unit selection cap (still 12), we found all these tweaks a bit restrictive. It is a fact though that you'll be much more obliged to attack and scout ahead, which is good. In Starcraft though, you could decide for yourself which strategy you'd like to follow. If you're a bit passive and slower, you could survive in Starcraft, but at the meantime, almost any defense can be breached if you'd use sufficient strategy (lockdown, psistorm, maelstrom,…)

The thing we'd really wanted to test were the races, and how'd they play and interact. Would it be the superlative differentiation as in Starcraft, or a more conservative approach, like in Battle Realms? Well, the answer is "somewhere in between". Warcraft 3 has 4 races (which are all available in the beta): Human, Orc, Undead and Night Elves. First thing I'd like to mention is the fact that the building trees are now much more streamlined. There is no longer the split between advanced and basic buildings. Also, online help is promptly given to state the prerequisites of the building and its description. The kind of buildings are pretty much the same for all races though. You have the Town Hall which creates peasants or similars, your basic barracks, research facility, hero shrine (more about the heroes later),… There are subtle differences between the races, but they are not quite as obvious as in Starcraft.
Let's take a closer look at the races. The humans are your average every day "we rule and suck in everything" race. They support mostly on technology and less on alchemy and magic. Basic warriors of the Humans are already quite formidable: Footmen are quite capable melee fighters. Also, Humans have a variety of shooters like the Gunner or the Tank. All in all though, the humans are somewhat the least exciting race of the 4. The Humans also have the most conservative build tree, with workers that collect both Gold and Wood, and construct buildings. In comparison, the Humans are a bit like Aramon of TA: Kingdoms (the quadruple split in Warcraft 3 is almost identical to Cavedogs title).
The orcs are the same fun and beasty horde we knew from Warcraft 1 & 2, but they have become more refined. Because of our limited time with the beta, we could not thoroughly play the Orcs, but what we did notice, was the fact that the Orcs are still very formidable in melee combat. Especially the Taurens and Tauren Chieftain (hero) are very powerful. Trade-in is that these units are rather cumbersome. Besides that, we also noticed that the Orcs gained some finesse vs. being the brutish horde in WarCraft II. Shamans for example have some impressive skills like the Lightning Shield. The orcs are Zhon of TA: Kingdoms.
Third race are the Undead. Unlike the name implies, the Undead are clever and tricky guerilla fighters, with some darn nasty (literally and figuratively) tactics. All in all though, the units and technology of the Undead seemed the least refined. While very strong in some points, the Undead also have serious flaws. Gold mines for examples simply disappear when gold is depleted, and rebuilding them is quite expensive. Undead heroes are also somewhat the lesser counterparts of the heroes of other factions. On the other hand though, the Necromancers can unlimitedly summon skeletons, and the Undead's building base substance Blight (=Creep from the Zerg) add restorative properties to all Undead units. The Undead are very cool, and have much potential, but also need the most work. Taros from TA: Kingdoms would be a good comparison to the Undead.
Lastly, you have the Night Elves. This is my favorite race. First of, their design and character is simply brilliant. The Night Elves pretty much are the Dark Templar Protoss of Starcraft: shrouded in darkness and lethally efficient, but honourable, wise and respectful towards nature. There are some minor differences in their build tree. Their basic worker for instance, the Wasp, is only needed to chop wood. The Town Hall (and most other buildings), the Tree of Life, can be "uprooted" and become mobile. It can even attack. Well, Trees of Life need to planted nearby gold mines. The gold mine is then entangled, and gold is automatically drawn from the mine. Wasps can also self-destuct and whilst doing so, blowing away the mana-reserve of any nearby hostile opponent. The basic unit of the Night Elves is the archer. Generally, Night Elf units constitute mostly ranged fighters, although there are some melee units (Huntress,…). In contrast to the Protoss, Night Elves are not designed to have total power. But on the other hand, the Night Elves also have some striking weaknesses. Night Elves for example have a limited range in daytime, and like the Zerg, they lose their basic worker when buildings are erected. Night Elves indeed are, design-wise, the Warcraft version of the Protoss.
Of utmost importance in Warcraft 3 are the heroes. Each race can call upon a maximum of 3 heroes at their Town Hall, a first available directly, the two others available after required buildings. Although heroes from different races have different spells and attributes, usually a race has 2 melee heroes, and 1 spellcaster/archer hero. The Humans for example have the Mountain King and Paladin on one side, and the Archmage on the other. These heroes bring the depth of hack & slash role playing to the otherwise straightforward and classic RTS approach in Warcraft 3. Heroes can level up, collect up to 8 items (which can be accessories or expandable items like potions and town scrolls e.g. Diablo) and have stats. What's fun in Warcraft 3, is the existence of "creeps". These are computer controlled, yet idle, hostile creatures that have items. We found it very fun to stroll around with my heroes (at a relatively early stage of the game), kill some creeps to get experience and some items, heck, we were almost playing Diablo! And that's probably the beautiful gameplay Blizzard had in mind. With multiplayer matches with more than 3 players, we found the creeps a bit annoying though. Although they are idle, these creeps often guard new gold mines, and if you've got 2 or more enemies on your back, plus the creeps, things can get a bit messy. Of course, you can also play the game in a smart fashion: bang some creep heads with heroes early on in the game, level your heroes up, get good items, and then attack your enemy. Because believe me, a level 8 Paladin with a Ring of Strength is not something you want to go up against.
Wrapping up on the races, they are very colourful and mixed they will deliver blissful gameplay, but we just missed the pin-point balancing and brilliant techs-countertechs in StarCraft (Archons vs. EMP, Siege Tanks vs. Lockdown, Guardians vs. Psi Storm). But it is exactly this reason why Blizzard released the beta: to refine and rebalance the units and gameplay.

EP sez:

Overviewing the beta, there was predominantly the immense stability and "readiness": technically the beta (especially version 1.03) can be shipped. The graphics, sound, animation, terrain, etc. all seem to be definitive, although I hope Blizzard would liven up a bit the terrain. Excellent marks go to the relatively low system requirements and fast performance, although Blizzard has announced the retail version will have slightly heavier specs. As usual, the Blizzard's gameplay is extremely addicitive, this time offering a lethal mix of Starcraftian and Warcraftian RTS and Diablo hack & slash role playing. Certain new features like upkeep are striking, but need further refinement. What we'd also like to see perfected after the beta are the units differences. The basis is great, all 4 races are diverse enough and are designed brilliantly, but the gameplay still needs that razor-sharp edge Blizzard is renowned for. But putting on a less demanding face, the Warcraft 3 Beta is an impressive product that already levels with Warcraft 3's earlier released, biggest rival and most succesful clone, Battle Realms.

© 2002 Erwin's Pages
The Erwin's Pages Central Team, compiled by Erwin "Reaper" Husin

Links

> World of Warcraft Preview
> Blizzard
> Warcraft 3 Official Site & Beta Center