Official "Classic" Version? (Similar to Community Edition)

[Footman16]

Actually we did have data for a while post Reforged's release and it's player count online was higher than 1.26's ever was. There isn't much information but there is that.

Then you will learn nothing, you will gain nothing and things won't improve. It isn't what you wanted to say, but it's what people heard. That should horrify you.

You mean it's what you heard, stop pretending you speak for some silent majority. It doesn't horrify me because I know what I'm saying. Things have been improving; I'm on latest patch and honestly it's not so bad and there's even a lot of improvements over 1.26 whether it's 24 players, new GUI natives, new frame APIs etc, one unified online realm to name a few.

There is an incentive: it's the right thing to do,

Whether I agree with this or not (I don't for a variety of reasons) it makes 0 difference to blizzard and as long as that is the case, what you're asking will never come to be.

it'd be helpful and many people want it.

Citation needed.

Now, you're only right in that Blizzard is a greedy, soulless company and they might not listen. I'm not asking you to like Blizzard or have any faith against them.

Good because I don't, I am very realistic and pragmatic when it comes to Blizzard and how they operate.

I'm asking you to stop arguing against the idea, stop telling people they shouldn't want it or it would be bad, and stop trying to argue it's pointless. Almost everyone knows Blizzard is unreliable and corrupt. The only thing that ever seems to move them is public pressure.

Why shouldn't I? I have 3 patches on my machine, 1.27, 1.31 and latest. As it stands I currently only use the latest patch unless it's to play old maps that are only compatible with those two older patches. I have no issues with the latest patch outside of issues that existed before it. Custom campaigns have returned and you can only play online on the latest patch (without work arounds). Why shouldn't I continue to use the latest patch and make my content for it? If I want people to play my content they will require the latest patch. Why have two concurrent versions? You'll say these questions have been answered, maybe they have been answered for you but it honestly comes down to a bunch of issues that people either see as an issue or not i.e. subjective. And to me the vast differences you speak of see, I just don't see them. You'll probably call me blind or something, which fair enough. But at the end of the day we disagree on fundamentals.

Sometimes in life, you have to lead, follow, or get out the way. All I ask from you is to not stand in the way.

(sorry to go in so hard there, but I'm really passionate about this and believe in it strongly)

I can tell you believe in this strongly, which is why I'm hoping you'll accept the improbability of what you're asking from blizzard. There is no mass movement or demand from the player base like there was with WoW Classic. Or at least none I've seen or been shown.

Also the Hive has it's patch repository, you say you play on 1.26 offline anyway, so in terms of preservation the game is I would say preserved across many, many patches.

 

[tulee]

Tulee, I don't know how many times I've said it but this "appeal to majority" fallacy nonsense means nothing to me. Firstly, being in the "majority" wouldn't make you right in the first place. Secondly, you can't possibly know you're in the majority based on just the evidence you have. We have absolutely zero idea how many people stopped playing WC3 altogether because of RF, how many moved to older patches, and how many people don't like or want RF but play it anyway out of what they feel is necessity. It's the exact kind of argument people used against Classic WoW and it was proven tremendously wrong back then too.

Yes, I am referring to the information we do have, which is what is on hiveworkshop. You are on hiveworkshop currently, so it makes sense to check stats on hiveworkshop.
Multiple people have made arguments against the comparison to Wow Classic-Retail, which you ignore completely.

Lastly, I'm obviously not in the way. Nothing I say stops people from playing RF or enjoying it, and nothing I'm proposing would either. That arguement is just a silly thing to say.

What you are suggesting is a diversion of resources which could otherwise be spent upgrading the official patch of Wc3.

So, if your entire argument depends on "the majority of people agree with me!" then you should really just drop it, because it's fallacious nonsense and it isn't going to be any less nonsensical no matter how many times you repeat it.

When did I ever say that? I am saying the trend is towards the latest patch.

 

[Homor]

I'm very disappointed to see this response, Footman. I had hoped you'd have a more reasonable response than just quadrupling down on this ignorant and juvenile "WE'RE THE MAJORITY!!!!" tactic. The fact that you keep trying to turn this into some kind of competition misses the point entirely. You shouldn't be treating fans as disposable stats to be thrown around for argument points. No, citing post-Reforged stats doesn't prove anything except that there was increased enthusiasm around the release of Reforged, which happens whenever there's a new release. You simply cannot know how many people would play a Pre-Reforged client until you release it. I'm telling you I've seen a significant number of people on various forums, comment sections and even on the Hive itself who say they'd want this or be interested in this. You can appeal to the "popularity" of Reforged all you want, but there's a reason it was universally panned on release, why Reforged continues to be insulted on various internet forums, and why Blizzard themselves called it a "mistake" multiple times and openly said they want to handle other remasters completely differently moving forward.

What you're doing is using the logical fallacy of "Argumentum Ad Populum." This should not be a battle of 51% vs 49%. Trying to boil down human beings to ratios and numbers is reductive and childish.

To me, it speaks to flagrant insecurity. If you were truly confident that the "majority" preferred Reforged, you wouldn't be so threatened by the proposal of a Pre-Reforged client. You wouldn't have any fear of splitting the playerbase because you'd be completely convinced nobody would play it anyway. It's clear to me that this isn't about what you think it's good for the community, it's about the fact that you're afraid people will abandon Reforged if they have other options.

If you're going to keep doubling down on this bad logic and these bad arguments, I find that very sad, because it doesn't advance what you believe in, it only hurts your credibility.

I am very realistic and pragmatic

Not at all. It isn't realistic to argue that people who disagree with you don't exist and don't matter. It isn't pragmatic to try to shut down and ignore all disagreement.

You have been childish and bullheaded. The exact opposite of the things you said you are.

I've said all I've had to say to you. I've waited multiple times to see if you'd have anything new or valuable to say, and all you've done is talk in circles. I'm very disappointed to see you take the approach you have been. I wish you the best, but I think you're dead wrong about this.

Multiple people have made arguments against the comparison to Wow Classic-Retail, which you ignore completely.

I haven't seen any arguments at all to that effect. I've seen people say that RF and TFT are exactly the same and all the difference don't matter, which is demonstrably untrue and multiple people have told you, point blank, that they've played both, RF is different they don't like it.

The only honest differences you can find in the situations are pedantry and obfuscation, because they're identical.

 

[Footman16]

I have 0 insecurity or fears about people abandoning Reforged. Especially to a version/client that blizzard aren't going to make. If everyone was on 1.31 I would be on 1.31. For example before reforged re-added Custom Campaigns I was at peace with the prospect of being stuck on 1.31 vs latest as a CC creator and would deal with the fact that there was a chance CCs would not be re-added. CCs were re-added to latest and now I'm on latest.

You say I appeal to the majority yet you just said 2 posts ago and in that post just there that "many people want it".

I have 0 loyalty to blizzard or to Reforged and I think you overestimate my investment in this debate. I am not pushing back on your idea out of malice or loyalty to the latest patch or reforged but out of a genuine desire to make you understand that what you're asking for isn't going to happen despite the arguments you've put forward. I can't tell the future, but I'd bet money on this.

EDIT: I never said you don't exist or that there might be a small number who wants what you want as well, but no, to blizzard, you do not matter. And it is not childish to try and convince you of that fact.

 

[Homor]

I've said all I've had to say you, and clearly you've said all you have to say to me, because you just talk in circles.

 

[tulee]

I'm very disappointed to see this response, Footman. I had hoped you'd have a more reasonable response than just quadrupling down on this ignorant and juvenile "WE'RE THE MAJORITY!!!!" tactic. The fact that you keep trying to turn this into some kind of competition misses the point entirely. You shouldn't be treating fans as disposable stats to be thrown around for argument points. No, citing post-Reforged stats doesn't prove anything except that there was increased enthusiasm around the release of Reforged, which happens whenever there's a new release. You simply cannot know how many people would play a Pre-Reforged client until you release it. I'm telling you I've seen a significant number of people on various forums, comment sections and even on the Hive itself who say they'd want this or be interested in this. You can appeal to the "popularity" of Reforged all you want, but there's a reason it was universally panned on release, why Reforged continues to be insulted on various internet forums, and why Blizzard themselves called it a "mistake" multiple times and openly said they want to handle other remasters completely differently moving forward.

"Reforged" was panned on release because it had very high expectations (something Blizzard themselves promoted) and then they didn't deliver, plus it was very buggy on release. I don't see why you need to keep referring back to the initial reception of "Reforged" when judging the game in 2025.

To me, it speaks to flagrant insecurity. If you were truly confident that the "majority" preferred Reforged, you wouldn't be so threatened by the proposal of a Pre-Reforged client. You wouldn't have any fear of splitting the playerbase because you'd be completely convinced nobody would play it anyway. It's clear to me that this isn't about what you think it's good for the community, it's about the fact that you're afraid people will abandon Reforged if they have other options.

People playing on older patches of the game does not affect people playing on "Reforged" at all from a single player point of view, which I think hiveworkshop's population is more inclined towards. When campaigns or maps are made on older patches, people playing the latest patch can still play them without issue, so I don't think that many people here, who are more single player inclined (and you are talking to Footman, who makes single player custom campaigns) are "afraid" of people staying on older patches. It's the people playing on older patches who cannot enjoy content made on newer patches.

I haven't seen any arguments at all to that effect. I've seen people say that RF and TFT are exactly the same and all the difference don't matter, which is demonstrably untrue and multiple people have told you, point blank, that they've played both, RF is different they don't like it.

I have seen many arguments made that they are the same game in this thread, and I myself made some of the comments.

 

[Homor]

"Reforged" was panned on release because it had very high expectations

Reforged was panned on release because Reforged was bad. This isn't just my opinion, this is what Blizzard said themselves in an internal report:

Per Bloomberg: Blizzard Botched Warcraft III Remake After Internal Fights, Pressure Over Costs

It isn't just a matter of "high expectations." The production was absolutely destroyed when the budget was cut to a fraction of what it was and the team was reduced down to less than a dozen people. The people who were in charge of the remaster thought there should be classic client, the very thing you've been arguing against. The reason there wasn't was not made out of altruism for the fans or necessity for the technical limitations, it was made because the executives were greedy. It says exactly that in the article. The game was, and is, still riddled with bugs, the performance is terrible. Multiple features were lost on release and

The people who made Reforged said Reforged was bad and not the game they wanted to make, and thought thought it should be outright cancelled. The only reason it wasn't cancelled was because corporate didn't want to refund pre-order sales.The more you read this article the more you'll understand how bad things were.

It has absolutely nothing to do with "expectations" and everything to do with the fact that it was an abused and overworked team of five people struggling to make the best of a terrible situation, and the resulting mess was the result of a series of compromises nobody wanted. Insider reporters from people like DesignerDave say that the budget was chopped down to 4% of what it originally was. Reforged was always bad and, IMO, it hasn't gotten any better. The original remaster they wanted to make was completely destroyed and every update since has been focused on stabilizing the game and repairing the damage.

People don't play Reforged because it's a "good remaster" but because it's the path of least resistance, and because the community has made so much good content for it.

I don't see why you need to keep referring back to the initial reception of "Reforged" when judging the game in 2025.

Because it's still bad. The performance is terrible, there are still tons of new bugs, the awful chromium menus are still there sucking up resources, and every single cancelled feature is still gone. It still shoves 30gb of bloat on to your HDD whether you use it or not. Everything that made Reforged a bad remaster at its core is still there. Just because they've made it better doesn't mean they made it good.

If it weren't for Blizzard's official support for multiplayer and the community making custom content for it, nobody would play it.

The stuff you wrote about single player content on older/newer patches etc etc I'm gonna skip over, because that was specifically between me and Footman. Just because he makes single player content himself doesn't mean he doesn't like multiplayer content from RF and wouldn't exclude him from having a vested interest in playing it, but I can't read his mind or anything, only judge how his comments come off etc. Again, that discussion was between me and him and it's over. Moving along.

I have seen many arguments made that they are the same game in this thread, and I myself made some of the comments.

Then make those arguments now, because so far in this conversation, you haven't elaborated at all.

What you are suggesting is a diversion of resources which could otherwise be spent upgrading the official patch of Wc3.

This is something I overlooked earlier that I wanna address now: I understand why this is a concern but I really don't think it's as dire as you make it sound. Community Edition shows it's already possible and, basically already accomplished. You add a bit of professional funding and polish to it and give it a wider distribution and you wouldn't need to much else. I'm not gonna outright dismiss your concerns but I think they'd be able to do it without significantly harming the continued maintenance of the main client. As I've pointed out before, a Classic Client would logically require less updates and patience because it was meant to be as pure to the previous version it emulates as possible.

And if you think they're so cheap and incompetent they could do that: why would you even want them to keep updating Reforged? If they're so bad at their jobs that they can't even make a much less elaborate version of a 20 year old game stable, why would you expect them to do anything of value with the current, more complex version?

 

[Drake53]

"Reforged" was panned on release because it had very high expectations (something Blizzard themselves promoted) and then they didn't deliver, plus it was very buggy on release.

As someone who gave reforged a 0 on metacritic, I can tell you there were a lot more reasons why the game was universally hated on release. Sure they may have fixed some of the issues, but not everything.

[Poll] How to fix Reforged?

I'm getting tired of waiting for Reforged to get improved, and have been thinking, realistically it may never meet my standards, and I'll be stuck on 1.31 with no multiplayer forever. So I was wondering, for those who, like me, refuse to 'update' to Reforged, sticking with patch 1.31 or older...

www.hiveworkshop.com

For me personally, I'm still waiting for them to revert the DRM changes. I have legit CD keys for RoC and TFT, but when I tried to add them to my BNet account I'm simply told they are already in use. I know I'm not the only one with this issue, I saw plenty of posts on reddit at the time of release where people were having the exact same issue, but when they tried to contact customer support about it they're simply told "sorry can't help you, just buy reforged lol". That's simply unacceptable and I REFUSE to support a the game until they give back what they have STOLEN from their customers.

 

[Pekisa7]

I have 0 insecurity or fears about people abandoning Reforged. Especially to a version/client that blizzard aren't going to make. If everyone was on 1.31 I would be on 1.31. For example before reforged re-added Custom Campaigns I was at peace with the prospect of being stuck on 1.31 vs latest as a CC creator and would deal with the fact that there was a chance CCs would not be re-added. CCs were re-added to latest and now I'm on latest.

You say I appeal to the majority yet you just said 2 posts ago and in that post just there that "many people want it".

I have 0 loyalty to blizzard or to Reforged and I think you overestimate my investment in this debate. I am not pushing back on your idea out of malice or loyalty to the latest patch or reforged but out of a genuine desire to make you understand that what you're asking for isn't going to happen despite the arguments you've put forward. I can't tell the future, but I'd bet money on this.

EDIT: I never said you don't exist or that there might be a small number who wants what you want as well, but no, to blizzard, you do not matter. And it is not childish to try and convince you of that fact.

If we from Hive don't matter to Blizzard than they should have gone out of buissnisse years ago. But I thinks what makes them still going is wow, and only wow. I mean who knows what are they gonna announce for Warcraft 3 at Blizzcon 2026.

 

[Homor]

I have to say, I'm not sure why this subject gets people so heated and defensive when Diablo 2 did the exact same thing I'm saying WC3 should do, and everybody loved it. Nobody complained about it "confusing people" or "splitting the playerbase" then, and it didn't.

Heck, Blizzard makes the original files available -- they just bury them under a mountain of links and menus instead of letting you add them directly from the launcher somewhere. If all they did was that, giving you the files "as is" without even adding online support, that mighty actually be enough for me and I'd probably be happy... maybe. I'm very cynical after all the years of BS the whole community went through. But I'm not quite as rigid as I might seem from this thread.

People might be annoyed because the current Warcraft 3 team, to their credit, actually finally did some good work and the fact that anyone is still working on Warcraft 3 and trying to fix it is a really good sign. So, seeing someone say it still isn't good enough is probably extremely frustrating. Though unfortunately, I full believe that. After all the atrocious things Blizzard executives did to the game and the community, I happen to believe they owe us all a lot more than they've given us, and I think Reforged is still a very bad and broken experience. And the fact that corporate profit motives are the main factor that stops them from doing much more than they have disgusts me.

If it comes off like I'm insulting people for enjoying Reforged, I wanna make it very clear: there is absolutely nothing wrong with liking it and having fun, and I hold no ill will to those who do. Like people have said, it's still Warcraft 3 at its core. I still think its a very, very, very bad remaster that does everything wrong, and despite the commendable progress the current team has made, I still don't think it's good enough. I think the problems I have with it are deal breakers.

Now, theoretically, Blizzard could update Reforged to make everything new toggleable, allowing you to opt-out of the HD assets, replace the chromium menus with the original software ones, basically allow you to make the exactly as it was right down to the original file size and hardware requirements, and I'd actually be satisfied with that... but I'm pretty sure that would be much, much harder, more time-consuming, and more resource intensive than just putting a link somewhere on the launcher that says "(Download Classic Version)" that just gives you the 1.29/1.26 files.

 

[Pekisa7]

I have to say, I'm not sure why this subject gets people so heated and defensive when Diablo 2 did the exact same thing I'm saying WC3 should do, and everybody loved it. Nobody complained about it "confusing people" or "splitting the playerbase" then, and it didn't.

Heck, Blizzard makes the original files available -- they just bury them under a mountain of links and menus instead of letting you add them directly from the launcher somewhere. If all they did was that, giving you the files "as is" without even adding online support, that mighty actually be enough for me and I'd probably be happy... maybe. I'm very cynical after all the years of BS the whole community went through. But I'm not quite as rigid as I might seem from this thread.

People might be annoyed because the current Warcraft 3 team, to their credit, actually finally did some good work and the fact that anyone is still working on Warcraft 3 and trying to fix it is a really good sign. So, seeing someone say it still isn't good enough is probably extremely frustrating. Though unfortunately, I full believe that. After all the atrocious things Blizzard executives did to the game and the community, I happen to believe they owe us all a lot more than they've given us, and I think Reforged is still a very bad and broken experience. And the fact that corporate profit motives are the main factor that stops them from doing much more than they have disgusts me.

If it comes off like I'm insulting people for enjoying Reforged, I wanna make it very clear: there is absolutely nothing wrong with liking it and having fun, and I hold no ill will to those who do. Like people have said, it's still Warcraft 3 at its core. I still think its a very, very, very bad remaster that does everything wrong, and despite the commendable progress the current team has made, I still don't think it's good enough. I think the problems I have with it are deal breakers.

Now, theoretically, Blizzard could update Reforged to make everything new toggleable, allowing you to opt-out of the HD assets, replace the chromium menus with the original software ones, basically allow you to make the exactly as it was right down to the original file size and hardware requirements, and I'd actually be satisfied with that... but I'm pretty sure that would be much, much harder, more time-consuming, and more resource intensive than just putting a link somewhere on the launcher that says "(Download Classic Version)" that just gives you the 1.29/1.26 files.

I totally agree. Just give us the classic version back and update it to 1.3.2. and onwards. Not just give us 1.29. files.

 

[Homor]

I totally agree. Just give us the classic version back and update it to 1.3.2. and onwards. Not just give us 1.29. files.

Ehhh, I'd just be happy to have the old files more prominently and openly displayed from the Launcher and for Blizzard to put more effort into helping people find them. You wouldn't believe how many people I've seen on forums all over the internet who are frustrated they can't play the old version of the game and have no idea there are any older files available. Blizzard does nothing to advertise this fact. I try to help where I can, but I'm very tiny voice in a big world, and Blizzard has way more reach than I do.

Having your older versions readily and easily available (even if you don't updated them or run online servers for them anymore) is something that's the industry standard for remasters. Diablo 2, Starcraft, WoW, XIII, Star Wars Battlefront, Doom, Quake, Age of Empires, Half Life, Bioshock, Titan Quest, Blood, and virtually every single Night Dive remaster all do it. Warcraft 3 should have done this upon release. None of these games have an issue with "splitting the playerbase" and in most cases, unless the remaster is particularly bad or the Remaster is just tremendously better, the playerbase doesn't get split and remains pretty consistent for both versions.

Naturally, people who want the classic experience in its most pure possible forum generally won't abandon the classic game for a remaster, and people who prefer all the cool new changes a remaster makes aren't going to flock to the original as soon as it comes out. So, the idea that having two different versions "splits the playerbase" is, in my opinion, a complete misnomer that seems persuasive at first, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny and has plenty of empirical evidence against it.

If nothing else, despite all this tension, I actually think this thread has been very important and constructive because it allowed people to clearly state what they think, and IMO, it's given me a good chance to address points like the "splitting the playerbase" argument and in my view, refute them.

 

[Pekisa7]

Ehhh, I'd just be happy to have the old files more prominently and openly displayed from the Launcher and for Blizzard to put more effort into helping people find them. You wouldn't believe how many people I've seen on forums all over the internet who are frustrated they can't play the old version of the game and have no idea there are any older files available. Blizzard does nothing to advertise this fact. I try to help where I can, but I'm very tiny voice in a big world, and Blizzard has way more reach than I do.

Having your older versions readily and easily available (even if you don't updated them or run online servers for them anymore) is something that's the industry standard for remasters. Diablo 2, Starcraft, WoW, XIII, Star Wars Battlefront, Doom, Quake, Age of Empires, Half Life, Bioshock, Titan Quest, Blood, and virtually every single Night Dive remaster all do it. Warcraft 3 should have done this upon release. None of these games have an issue with "splitting the playerbase" and in most cases, unless the remaster is particularly bad or the Remaster is just tremendously better, the playerbase doesn't get split and remains pretty consistent for both versions.

Naturally, people who want the classic experience in its most pure possible forum generally won't abandon the classic game for a remaster, and people who prefer all the cool new changes a remaster makes aren't going to flock to the original as soon as it comes out. So, the idea that having two different versions "splits the playerbase" is, in my opinion, a complete misnomer that seems persuasive at first, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny and has plenty of empirical evidence against it.

If nothing else, despite all this tension, I actually think this thread has been very important and constructive because it allowed people to clearly state what they think, and IMO, it's given me a good chance to address points like the "splitting the playerbase" argument and in my view, refute them.

I totally respect your opinion. But at least I want the classic client to be updated to 1.3.2. onwards and not have reforged stuff in in it but to be close to classic Warcraft 3. Maybe add some more features like increase the size of maps and more space to putt stuff on the map except hd classic graphics. Not just have the .1.2.9. files. But thats my opinion at least.

 

[deepstrasz]

I really don't get this logic at all.

Well, I didn't give it.
Current Classic version is way over what previous version were (from wide screen to new natives and more), stable too, secure (at least less hack risky than older patches).

I want you to read back through this thread, see everything Deepstrasz has been saying, and I want you to realize that his worldview is the end result of the thinking you've promoted.

Now you're asking for flaming. Footman16 is not guilty of anything more than his opinion like all of us are.

As long as the product functions to a specific standard, nothing else matters. It doesn't matter how radically a game is changed, it doesn't matter if the original experience is preserved, because this is not art, this is a machine, and as long as the core functions of the machine are the same, there is no value in preserving it any further."

You have your CDs, you have the original experience. Whether you want to remain in the stone age or go forth is your choice. That's not the business of others who don't. Every update changes the original game to some extent. Reforged did it way more and in many ways for the better. If the main menu not being like it was is your best counter argument then I definitely can ignore that and enjoy the updated modding experience. I'm not playing the menu anyway.
There's no reason to split anything. Who has bought the game has the original experience and even in physical form.

Then you will learn nothing, you will gain nothing and things won't improve. It isn't what you wanted to say, but it's what people heard. That should horrify you.

You should get some help.

All I ask from you is to not stand in the way.

Basically asking those who don't agree with you to stay off the thread. Footman16 even wrote he had enough of the thread but it was you who craved attention and brought him back.

Secondly, you can't possibly know you're in the majority based on just the evidence you have. We have absolutely zero idea how many people stopped playing WC3 altogether because of RF, how many moved to older patches, and how many people don't like or want RF but play it anyway out of what they feel is necessity.

Compare those from the site who still play/mod the game on 1.32+ to those who remained on the pre-1.32. Statistics don't lie.

Cross-sectional data - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can appeal to the "popularity" of Reforged all you want, but there's a reason it was universally panned on release, why Reforged continues to be insulted on various internet forums, and why Blizzard themselves called it a "mistake" multiple times and openly said they want to handle other remasters completely differently moving forward.

There's so much "popularity" in those like you throwing tomatoes at Reforged that your sentence would be null. For starters, in that group, there's those who use pirated versions of the game and don't want to lose their play buddies or modding audience to Reforged. Then, there's purists like you who can't handle change properly. And, the fans who got hurt by Reforged's launch and remained in the past never trying to see the updates with rationale.

What you're doing is using the logical fallacy of "Argumentum Ad Populum." This should not be a battle of 51% vs 49%. Trying to boil down human beings to ratios and numbers is reductive and childish.

Childish is the way of life, when such is democracy. There is no perfect system of representation or choice. You might say a minority should decide because they know better. Do they? What does matter in the end, what is better for few or most? Yes, it can be subjective because there's no pure objective good.
Using such a non-argument to counter statistics though is silly. As tulee wrote, the trend is visibly towards 1.32+, at least on HIVE.

To me, it speaks to flagrant insecurity. If you were truly confident that the "majority" preferred Reforged, you wouldn't be so threatened by the proposal of a Pre-Reforged client. You wouldn't have any fear of splitting the playerbase because you'd be completely convinced nobody would play it anyway. It's clear to me that this isn't about what you think it's good for the community, it's about the fact that you're afraid people will abandon Reforged if they have other options.

"Stop it. Get some help." It has nothing to do with your weird conspiracy. It's just economically bad.

People don't play Reforged because it's a "good remaster" but because it's the path of least resistance, and because the community has made so much good content for it.

You are definitely living in the past.

As someone who gave reforged a 0 on metacritic, I can tell you there were a lot more reasons why the game was universally hated on release. Sure they may have fixed some of the issues, but not everything.

Rate it again today.

For me personally, I'm still waiting for them to revert the DRM changes. I have legit CD keys for RoC and TFT, but when I tried to add them to my BNet account I'm simply told they are already in use.

I have not encountered this problem.

I have to say, I'm not sure why this subject gets people so heated and defensive when Diablo 2 did the exact same thing I'm saying WC3 should do, and everybody loved it. Nobody complained about it "confusing people" or "splitting the playerbase" then, and it didn't.

Seems that only Resurrected appears on the games list: Blizzard Entertainment - All Games
https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Diablo_II Your split didn't get any updates since 2016 while Resurrected did. Quite a great strategy for a game's longevity.

 

[Homor]

Deepstrazs, Imma keep it real with you: I'm not reading all of that. Your grammar is really bad, your post is formatted poorly, you constantly insult me and act smug and condescending throughout and quite frankly I see no reason to tolerate any of it. You argue in bad faith and I'm not putting up with it.

I don't think you're a rational person, I don't think you're a polite person, and I don't think you'll ever listen to me or respect what I have to say and I have no interest in further discussion with you. I'm sure you'd say the same about me, and I admit my passion for the game I love probably makes me act out a bit more than I should. But I don't think you're acting out of passion or care. I think you're acting out of malice and behaving like a troll.

I don't feed trolls, so I'm not responding to you anymore, and after this post I'm putting you on ignore.

Edit: General Frank, I have no ill will towards you, but I don't see why you'd react with an angry emoji to me telling someone who insulted and attacked me multiple times that I'm not going to engage with them anymore.

 

[deepstrasz]

Deepstrazs, Imma keep it real with: I'm not reading all of that. Your grammar is really bad, your post is formatted poorly, you constantly insult me and act smug and condescending throughout and quite frankly I see no reason to tolerate any of it. You argue in bad faith and I'm not putting up with it.

Learn to tolerate others. I wasted enough time on your posts and didn't complain like a brat.

I don't think you're a rational person, I don't think you're a polite person, and I don't think you'll ever listen to me or respect what I have to say and I have no interest in further discussion with you. I'm sure you'd say the same about me, and I admit my passion for the game I love probably makes me act out a bit more than I should. But I don't think you're acting out of passion or care. I think you're acting out of malice and behaving like a troll.

I don't care what you think about me. That's not the point of this thread. And what you think is wrong by the way but you still cling to it with unsound thinking.

I don't feed trolls, so I'm not responding to you anymore, and after this post I'm putting you on ignore.

You are truly mature.

 

[General Frank]

Learn to tolerate others. I wasted enough time on your posts and didn't complain like a brat.
I don't care what you think about me. That's not the point of this thread. And what you think is wrong by the way but you still cling to it with unsound thinking.

You are truly mature.

Like Homor said, don't feed the trolls, strasz.

Spoiler: For those who don't get it.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/joke-battles/images/f/f1/UnoReverseCard.png/revision/latest?cb=20220601194839

 

[Homor]

Like Homor said, don't feed the trolls, strasz.

Spoiler: For those who don't get it.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/joke-battles/images/f/f1/UnoReverseCard.png/revision/latest?cb=20220601194839

I'm not trolling. I really am trying my hardest to be amenable here. This entire thread I've been dogpiled, talked down to, told I'm a fool and what I believe is ridiculous, and told that for disagreeing I'm automatically a fringe freak and my opinions are worthless and don't matter. I've certainly been curt and defensive but only because I've been piled on by multiple people in multiple ways.

I'm trying my hardest to be respectful and try to reel in my behavior when people find it rude, but you yourself have been insulting and dismissive to me and I haven't heard you say or do anything to try to cool things down or reach common ground in any way.

I've heard people talk about being respectful for other people's opinions, tolerating differences, etc and I agree -- unfortunately I don't feel like I've received that courtesy at all. For half this thread it feels like I've been on trial getting grilled by a prosecutor.

Your first post in thread:

But if you one of the people that never owned the game in the first place then your ranting and raving is kinda misplaced as your opinion is useless and input meaningless.

You accused me of being a pirate, said I was "ranting and raving" and my opinion was "useless and meaningless." This was your first message to me before I said anything to you.

If I said anything that you found so objectionable that you had to respond this curtly, I'd like to know what so I can either apologize for it or clarify it. I made this thread to talk about something I care about that's important to me, not to pick fights or get people angry. If there's something I can do to temper hostilities and make things more civil, I want to do it.

 

[deepstrasz]

I'm not trolling. I really am trying my hardest to be amenable here.

Sure you have through perfect grammar unlike others.

 

[Footman16]

Guys let's keep things civil and constructive otherwise I will have to lock the thread. If two people have said all they can and have nothing more to say that can convince the other then best to just leave it.

 

[Homor]

Guys let's keep things civil and constructive otherwise I will have to lock the thread. If two people have said all they can and have nothing more to say that can convince the other then best to just leave it.

Thank you, Footman. I want you to know even though we disagree on some things, I still respect you, I apologize for my earlier rudeness, and I respect that we both love the game and the community and want what we think is best it. It's easy to let your passion for something drive you to be a jerk and I'm sorry for it. I really appreciate you for stepping in and being the calm in the storm ♥

 

[Pekisa7]

We will see what's gonna happen in 2026 Blizzcon. Maybe they will give us the classic client who knows. Or if Blizzard isn't intrested in pleasing their warcraft 3 fans then they should have been out of buissness a long time ago . Because that's not how you treat the games fans.

 

[Homor]

We will see what's gonna happen in 2026 Blizzcon. Maybe they will give us the classic client who knows. Or if Blizzard isn't intrested in pleasing their warcraft 3 fans then they should have been out of buissness a long time ago . Because that's not how you treat the games fans.

I'd keep my expectations pretty low. The fact that we've gotten anything at all for Warcraft 3, however small, is something that seriously surprised me.

 

[Pekisa7]

I'd keep my expectations pretty low. The fact that we've gotten anything at all for Warcraft 3, however small, is something that seriously surprised me.

Sure why not keep it the expectations low.

 

[Retera]

As I doomscroll the back and forth above, I can't help but think to maybe circle back to the original topic a bit by sharing an interesting anecdote from my life.

I became a Warcraft III fan as a boy at a time when I had a close group of in-person friends who would play the game with me at LAN parties. Due to an age difference between me and this friend group, they and I were socially separated when League of Legends became popular. They got really into League and I hung out alone and circled back to World Editor for fun. Because of the exclusionary nature of League of Legends, by the time I got back to the same physical location as them I was able to kinda join in but was always the person who wasn't good at the game. So I guess I went back to Warcraft III back then because I had so much fun on WorldEdit. And then I turned to playing Warcraft 3 with online friends.

Because the online friends were brought together specifically around Warcraft 3, as the years went by we all become Reforged players at least to some extent. I'm not going to say I played Reforged a lot, but we all had it on our computers and accepted it as our Warcraft III experience at some point or another.

But from time to time I see that original in person friend group again. And my limited experience trying to play Blizzard games with them has been that they see Reforged through a lens not very different from Homor. In their mind, there are two things: Warcraft III, and the web page that overwrote it made by breast-milk-stealing, good for nothing managers who are absent any passion.

One of them was actually willing to play Warcraft III again with me in 2018, but Patch 1.29 was live at that time. And it was literal garbage. We tried to play the game on that version and were constantly desynced and unable to play. It was really, really bad. I told him that Patch 1.29 "was made by the new people" and then at the last minute I tried to get us on 1.26 but I had already burned out his (admittedly generous) attention span.

My next opportunity to play Reforged with in person friends from so far back was a game in 2021. It was the absolute first, roughest draft of my "rewrite of the game" in the wake of Reforged. A remake of the game built on a 1:1 copypasta of "View in 3D" render engine from Hive, some code from a different strategy game of mine I'd been working on, and a little love... held together for a 2 hour session played over dinner where people kept coming and going from the computers I set up while eating dinner, often distracted by their phones.

Fast forward a few years and we had a chance 6 or so months after Diablo 2 Resurrected released and I invited them to play it with me (after toying with that game a bit with a roommate). By then, of course half the folks from that in-person friend group from so far back have kids and families of their own now. But the half who don't sometimes still enjoy some gaming.

They took a really strong stance against Diablo 2 Resurrected with me and went out of their way to download a fan mod of the 2000s Diablo game in 2D, and distribute that to me to play instead of D2R even though I was a little edgy about the origin of that from a computer security perspective (for example, I have never launched Warcraft III Community Edition on my computer and might not ever, since I have an extremely limited ability to evaluate it from a computer security standpoint).

But one of those guys recently got into some World Edit on one of the old 4x3 resolution versions of War3. And I kind of thought that would never happen. In part I think behind all the tech and behind the stuff he's a nice guy who was looking for a way to spend more time with me personally after modern tech drives everybody so far apart, and TBH I'm sufficiently lost as a person I didn't even try the stuff he made on there yet recently.

But what I'm trying to say here is that in a way that isn't strictly technological, from almost like a marketing perspective I really think Homor might be onto something with this thread.

Here's an idea: what if Microsoft Activision adopted a totally new policy as follows:

• Legacy CD keys of Warcraft 3 go back to directing to a download of Patch 1.27 on the Battlenet by default, instead of 1.27 being hard to find
• Make a new Patch 1.27.3 or whatever, starting from that code version, which changes nothing except for computer security fixes.
  • Removal of all Jass typecasting
  • Removal of array assign stuff used by the exploits
• Bring the servers for this patch back online using the old code, minimum effort and no changes, so that players can queue for versus mode, host custom games (if they have port forwarding enabled) and play hangman in their clan channels

I personally strongly disagree with the "Patch classic to 1.32" ideas for technical reasons:

• The model format on 1.32 has changed four times (v900, v1000, v1100, v1200). All changes are bad for classic graphics.
  • 900: requires all classic materials to designate that theyre not using physics based rendering shaders and designate that theyre not using fresnel colors.
  • 1000: requires all classic materials to designate that theyre not using Reforged Spirit Wolf fresnel team colors
  • 1100: required all classic materials to designate which slot the texture of their Layers use as if they were HD, such as designating Diffuse on all things, which causes KMTF chunks to be malformatted and the Retail client broke classic graphics in production for 1 year from 2022 to 2024 due to this change, and graphics are still broken to this day in some World Editor "Classic on Reforged" previews
  • 1200: requires all classic graphics to declare the intensity of the Dynamic Shadows provided by their light emitters, which is useless since classic graphics has no dynamic shadows
• The map doodad layer format changed on 1.32 so that every doodad declares a type and also skin type. So your Lordaeron Summer Tree can have the Lordaeron Winter Tree type as its skin. The Rocks can have the Birds as their skin. This is all stupid and a waste of processing
• The unit data format changed so that if I edit Peasant and change his stats, the stats split into two parts so that he can have an HD/SD swapping part and then also a constant part, which makes the unit type information all more complicated. Similar changes were made to other object editor components

I could go on, but my point is that 1.32 classic emulation is not only not classic but is also superfluous for classic emulation to the point of potentially breaking it. I strongly disagree with @Pekisa7 as a result, because I think Microsoft corp hasn't got it in them to sort this out in any way that makes sense. As others have said, Classic emulation via Reforged client is already available by playing it.

What do you guys think? Can you see my point about 1.27.3? I think there really are unrepresented people who aren't present in this community anymore who might play 1.27.3 if its servers were offered again. Also, making a 1.27.3 with minimal computer security fixes is probably extremely easy, whereas "porting classic forward to 1.32" is a huge technical undertaking in ways that are hard to describe and I don't think it's a good idea.

Allowing that other group of people, who currently stopped playing Warcraft 3, to have a place they feel comfortable coming back to..... doesn't strike me as bad.

It might even eventually inspire them to try Reforged Classic or whatever.

 

[Homor]

Allowing that other group of people, who currently stopped playing Warcraft 3, to have a place they feel comfortable coming back to..... doesn't strike me as bad.

It might even eventually inspire them to try Reforged Classic or whatever.

Amen. This is exactly what I've been saying. As long as Diablo 2 Resurrected and Classic both still exist, I'll continuing say this isn't an unreasonable proposal and wouldn't hurt the game. Because they were able to do it with D2, and the playerbase for both versions remains active and healthy.

I wanna make it clear: Despite how unnecessarily standoffish I've come off (my fault, sorry) I do understand and respect the other perspective. I know WC3 has been in a tumultuous state for a long time, and the threat of something causing further division or damage among the playerbase, however minor it may seem to an outsider, is a seriously threatening prospect. I understand the concerns, but I still don't agree. I truly believe what I'm proposing wouldn't be harmful, and would actually help create more unity in the community and goodwill for the game.

Here's the interesting thing: Blizzard already allows you access to the old files, they just bury them and don't give people much way to find them unless you know where to look. At the very least, they should make it easier and more intuitive to find them. They don't even have to offer their own multiplayer support as long as they still allow LAN and dedicated servers.

Not giving the classic version official multiplayer support would IMO actually solve a lot of the proposed problems because it means 1) they don't have to bother with security or stability updates, they just offer it "as is" like that already do, and 2) it greatly mitigates the fear of playerbase division because the only way to play matching/ranked/competitive still remains the current version. Also, Reforged would most likely still be the only version on Game Pass

A great example of this is the recent rereleases of Doom and Quake: when you purchase and download them, you also gain access to the legacy versions -- the original DOS versions, GLQuake, etc -- and they're very easy to find, identify and play. They're no longer supported or updated, but access to them is made very clear, easy and reliable. There's no confusion because only one version is clearly the "official" one, and there's no division among players because the different versions offer different things to different people.

That's my hypothesis and I stand by it. You're free to disagree, and I could absolutely be wrong. But I think it's pretty reasonable and would be helpful, not harmful. It's important to remember that, as I said earlier, we all love the game and the community, are passionate about it, and want what we think is best for it. We can agree to disagree respectfully without being mean to each other, and I'm truly sorry for any negativity I've put out there.

 

[Retera]

They don't even have to offer their own multiplayer support as long as they still allow LAN and dedicated servers.

I find this sentence confusing because if we consider Patch 1.27 from a computer security standpoint, as-is it is not capable of anything besides LAN and the official cryptographically signed Battle.net servers (which are no longer available).

So if we forego online multiplayer, this version and its LAN play are already available. But it has a huge well documented security hole that can take over your computer and bypass virus protection from the moment you join a game, and it no longer has official Battle.net servers. This is why, to me, some attempt to begin officially providing it again should logically derive from fixing those two points - not neglecting them, and not neglecting either one in favor of the other.

 

[Homor]

I find this sentence confusing because if we consider Patch 1.27 from a computer security standpoint, as-is it is not capable of anything besides LAN and the official cryptographically signed Battle.net servers (which are no longer available).

So if we forego online multiplayer, this version and its LAN play are already available. But it has a huge well documented security hole that can take over your computer and bypass virus protection from the moment you join a game, and it no longer has official Battle.net servers. This is why, to me, some attempt to begin officially providing it again should logically derive from fixing those two points - not neglecting them, and not neglecting either one in favor of the other.

I thought that was 1.26? IIRC they patched that in 1.27. In any case, it seems like an important fix but one they've probably already accomplished and could figure out how to do again if need be. But I'm not a programmer.

For all I know, they may have already fixed it for the older files they offer, because it's hard to imagine that they'd make them publicly available if they were dangerous.

 

[Retera]

For all I know, they may have already fixed it for the older files they offer, because it's hard to imagine that they'd make them publicly available if they were dangerous.

They are dangerous, and it is not fixed. This is not up for debate and can be easily verified by someone with sufficient technical skills. [Edit: The files are probably not "publicly available" intentionally, and that's important to know that, since they might disappear at any time. Especially if we draw attention to them as folks on forums do, and if we simultaneously draw attention to what I say below.] It is possible that leandrotp who originally reported the issue in 2016-2017 was power hungry and told Activision Blizzard the same stuff he told Hive -- which was that "patching out the arbitrary writing to any data in the entire PC can be done without patching out reading any arbitrary data in the entire PC and we should keep arbitrary reading" which is insane to me and puts any critical passwords or other internal data in the computer at risk and is not something that I personally find reasonable. This might simply be a case where I disagree with him. But, regardless, Activision Blizzard security appears to have eventually agreed with my opinion (despite me not espousing it much at the time publicly -- I think they would have independently arrived at the same conclusion as me) and so they removed the first step of launching the exploits in Patch 1.29, even if there's some chance that 1.28 or 1.27 fixed the later stages of exploits that made viruses easy. I would personally not play any map on a patch prior to 1.29 unless:

• I reviewed the map for viruses first [this is a real thing that I do and have a process for doing]
• I made the map myself [then I obviously trust it]
• It is a sufficiently popular and reviewed map from a trusted source, and is without question the original historical version from before this issue was known

[Edit: Note that a virus map can initiate the virus from the moment you join a lobby, not the moment the play session of the map finishes its loading bar, so these bullet points must be achieved prior to joining a legacy client lobby.]
If you believe that what I am saying is fear-mongering bending the truth, which some fans of exploit maps on 1.26-1.27 will tell you because they want their maps to have power over your computer to add features that are not a part of the game, I find it quite easy to investigate leondrotp's guide to typecasting in patch 1.26 and reproduce the typecast all the way through the later versions of Patch 1.28. [Edit: He says in one of his forum posts that "the issue" was patched in 1.27b, but he is lying so that he can retain his power over the game, because humans desire power.] Once you understand that most custom maps from 1.22-1.25 (and prior) were lost and deprecated because typecasting was deemed by the old guard to be the pathway to viruses, and the hashtable type was added to the game as the replacement for typecasting, and then you understand that typecasting is possible up to and including Patch 1.28 using leandrotp's publicly available and easy-to-use guide on Hive, I think you can draw your own conclusions about whether to trust the old guard rather than to trust some kiddos on Hive. [Edit: And if we trust the old guard, all "memhack" maps are viruses and the pathway to making them is an exploit asking for viruses.]

Amen. This is exactly what I've been saying.

If my imaginary Patch 1.27.3 sounds so good, it might be worth taking a moment to imagine the consequences if the official Battle.net launcher actually started offering this game Warcraft III (2003) as an available production similar to the Diablo II (2000) offering that was present last time I was on the Battle.net launcher. (For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume D2 still exists as a game even though someone earlier in this thread tried to claim it no longer exists, and I am not presently at a Windows computer to review the matter.)
An interesting consequence of this game being for sale again would be that Footman16 probably would not play it. Deepstrasz probably would not play it. Tulee probably would not play it. They would remind you that "Classic slider on Patch 2.0.X Reforged engine" is the-same-but-better-in-every-way for every use case in their life.

That raises some interesting questions that might merit some discussion (@ Homor / @ Drake53 or to a lesser extent @ Pekisa7 despite my aforementioned disagreement with you):
- What are the use cases that exist in your life but not theirs, that would make this product meaningful to you. (Maps? Mods? Campaigns?)
- If those use cases were resolved on the 2.0.X client in a future patch, would you move to it? Or is the biggest gripe the menu difference that it "feels different" ?

Edit:
For example, for me, I would like the Reforged Classic emulator to change:
- Ribbons should not be weirdly dark. In Reforged Beta this darkness bug affected both particles and ribbons, and the devs appreciated that it was a bug due to the transition to DDS textures and the changes in sRGB to RGB color space conversions necessary between BLP and DDS, and then devs fixed it for particle emitters. That the same fix was not applied to ribbons is heresy and makes Reforged visuals look different than their classic counterparts for no other reason than "the devs don't care" which hurts my feelings even if most players don't care how the game looks
- Reforged changed the resolution of water in "Classic," maybe in some aspiration to make it look "better" by making the pixels smaller. I'd rather just emulate classic "as it was then" and so the water resolution should be put back. If people that I'm not aware of like using a different water resolution, make it a slider bar in Graphics options

 

[Homor]

They are dangerous, and it is not fixed. This is not up for debate and can be easily verified by someone with sufficient technical skills.

Holy crap, dude. If that's true then they shouldn't be offering these files in any form until they're patched and safe. This completely changes the conversation we should be having and I'm extremely concerned now.

 

[Retera]

they shouldn't be offering these files in any form until they're patched and safe.

"There is no Frozen Throne other than the Reforged."

Edit:
In all seriousness, if you want to become educated enough to challenge what I am saying and try to prove me wrong -- since apparently you really, really want me to be wrong -- there is a good summary of my knowledge on the issue in this post (#12).

...
...
...

"Please... a one-way ticket to heaven..."

 

[Homor]

"There is no Frozen Throne other than the Reforged."

Edit:
In all seriousness, if you want to become educated enough to challenge what I am saying and try to prove me wrong -- since apparently you really, really want me to be wrong -- there is a good summary of my knowledge on the issue in this post (#12).

...
...
...

View attachment 548768

"Please... a one-way ticket to heaven..."

It isn't that I "want" you to be wrong, it's that if you're right I find the implications are fucking terrifying and I think there's been a severe underreaction in the community. At least if I understand correctly.

 

[Retera]

It turns out, what people "react" to is often defined by social media and not defined by objective understandings of technology.

For all I know, the mass-promotion of pre-Reforged patches might be an intentional methodology for a foreign state-level actor to distribute spyware. Or it could be completely harmless and the natural response of people to the budget cut management issues with Reforged, and it might be that nobody anywhere is actually exploiting the security hole to make viruses because anyone with sufficient skills will infect a larger number of people by utilizing a platform other than Warcraft III as their malware distribution (which is actually quite likely).

A fairly reasonable counter point to what I'm saying is that giving the keys to your house to anyone who walks by does not equate to them actually entering your house to take anything, especially if you live in a nice neighborhood.

 

[Homor]

A fairly reasonable counter point to what I'm saying is that giving the keys to your house to anyone who walks by does not equate to them actually entering your house to take anything, especially if you live in a nice neighborhood.

Maybe. But that's where we get into the issue of "informed consent." If people don't know the risks of a choice when they make it they can't consent to the potential consequences.

 

[Retera]

You can go and read the thread I linked yourself. When there was no Reforged, and no reason to hate, the first person to discover the 1.26+ vulnerability posted on Hive that he thought it was a good idea to create a virus in a map that would silently spread across all of Battle.net and cause people's PCs to infect their maps to spread to more PCs until everyone had the new game version he envisioned with the new stuff he envisioned that would make the game "better."

(citation: see the bottom of that post)

Oh, and there's also one more thing that just crossed my mind... We could even use the exploit itself to propagate our mod! People wouldn't have to download it at all, we could simply make a map that uses the exploit to run code in the user's machine, code that will automatically download and install our custom stuff!

Now, with Reforged, there are a lot more people with a lot more emotions in their heads. If the above is what the level-headed people do "when nobody cares" in 2016, imagine what the motivated people do now that they got Reforged.

With regards to your "informed consent" point, I think the top level people originally promoting pre-Reforged patches probably knew about all this and knew what they were doing. So it's probably moreso a matter of intentionally not informing people. As the memhack post I cited above says:

What about security?
Sure you can write viruses basing on this. Heck, you were able to do so long ago, like Preload never been fixed since 2008 or w/e it comes. Thing is, atomic energy are also destructive, yet humanity somehow managed to make it most healthy way to get energy, so you can actually access this page right now via your PC, which is also mostly based on military researches. Everything has 2 sides.

From your side you can notify users about this hack, remind them about possible danger of playing unknown, non-official maps, or maps downloaded from different sources. That's best you can do. Rest is up to players.

I find the atomic energy argument to be different than how I prefer to handle security with regards to my computer. It sounds to me like a rationalization for someone who started from the assumption that he wanted power over the game, and then worked backwards from there for what to say. I like to believe draco did this because he legitimately wanted a better version of DotA and not a virus, but I don't really know him personally. He really gracefully reached out to me one time and asked if he could use a model I made on Hive as a paid skin in a map he was building in another country or something like that, even though I don't give a hoot and there's an ocean between us. So I do think this rationalization was provided for modding-motivated purposes and not for virus-spreading purposes.

Doesn't change the fact that I disagree with it, at least with regards to how I handle computer security on my computer personally.


Edit: attaching a funny meme from 6 years ago... It's been 6 years, hah

 

[Homor]

Holy crap, dude. This changes the entire conversation. Before it was "I think Blizzard offer their own classic client because it's more convenient!" now it's escalated all the way too "Blizzard should offer some kind of classic client because the alternative is literally dangerous and could brick people's computers."

I hate to be "that guy" but I think people need to contact Blizzard immediately and tell them to take down any "official" links to classic files or put a serious warning on them. Nobody should be exposed to dangerous exploits just because they wanted to play a game they enjoy the way they wanted to.

I'm very, very concerned. This is so far beyond what I thought it was.

 

[Retera]

Hmm, so over the course of this thread you went from saying we need a "Classic" client separate from Reforged Classic to saying that we should intentionally eliminate anyone's current access to the "Classic?" I did not expect that turn of events.

What will you tell the people who say you are overreacting? No offense but if you take your concern seriously you're probably going to sound like a Reforged shill.

One might even say that, "The only person with an incentive to actually infect the pre-Reforged client users would be someone who wishes to promote Reforged." Would they be wrong? Maybe is that why it didn't happen [to me*] yet?

 

[Homor]

Hmm, so over the course of this thread you went from saying we need a "Classic" client separate from Reforged Classic to saying that we should intentionally eliminate anyone's current access to the "Classic?" I did not expect that turn of events.

What will you tell the people who say you are overreacting? No offense but if you take your concern seriously you're probably going to sound like a Reforged shill.

One might even say that, "The only person with an incentive to actually infect the pre-Reforged client users would be someone who wishes to promote Reforged." Would they be wrong? Maybe is that why it didn't happen [to me*] yet?

I really, really don't want to have them taken down. But if what you're telling me is true, it sounds like the potential risk is so great they make have to take it down. Like I wouldn't want my whole city to lose power, but if we were using the same reactor as Chernobyl I'd say there's no choice.

Maybe I'm overreacting? You're the one who told me about all this and it makes me very, very concerned.

The "Atomic Energy" metaphor a guy made in a quote you posted earlier might be on point, but not the way he thinks. Atomic energy is safe when handled carefully by an expert who knows what they're doing but has the potential to be incredibly destructive when passed around carelessly by people who don't.

 

[Retera]

it sounds like the potential risk is so great they make have to take it down.

Ahh, but you're overlooking one thing:

They
don't
care

Edit:
In all seriousness, the current status quo is probably the result of them trying to be as nice as they can. Even if they fixed the security vulnerability I referred to above, it was also the case that on paper the classic client's server architecture violates the new GDPR laws in the European Union -- according to an insider -- in a way that the Reforged servers do not.

So, they're not really going to make "a classic client" independent from Reforged, because for these and so many reasons... for their technical people... there is no going back.

The people on the ground at Activision know. If they don't advertise the 1.27 download and don't hold themselves responsible for it legally, they can probably leave it up for people-in-the-know who take the risk of going to get it -- and say it was an accident if a lawyer finds it some day.

But if you draw more attention to this and then have them take it down, there's not going to be a replacement. The replacement is the Reforged client.

 

[Homor]

Ahh, but you're overlooking one thing:

They
don't
care

Edit:
In all seriousness, the current status quo is probably the result of them trying to be as nice as they can. Even if they fixed the security vulnerability I referred to above, it was also the case that on paper the classic client's server architecture violates the new GDPR laws in the European Union -- according to an insider -- in a way that the Reforged servers do not.

So, they're not really going to make "a classic client" independent from Reforged, because for these and so many reasons... for their technical people... there is no going back.

The people on the ground at Activision know. If they don't advertise the 1.27 download and don't hold themselves responsible for it legally, they can probably leave it up for people-in-the-know who take the risk of going to get it -- and say it was an accident if a lawyer finds it some day.

But if you draw more attention to this and then have them take it down, there's not going to be a replacement. The replacement is the Reforged client.

Holy shit dude this is a horrible situation. There was to be some better way than this. Seriously, this is a fucking nightmare. There has to be some alternative to either "You can never play WC3 in its classic for ever again. Reforged is the only option." or "You can play classic WC3 but at a huge risk of malicious vulnerability by hackers, and even addressing the problem publicly makes it more dangerous." These simply can't be the only two possible options, because either one is a terrible no-win scenario.

 

[Retera]

I'm not sure it changes anything. You can just play Community Edition on patch 1.29 like you said. Most likely, the known vulnerability is patched on 1.29 [specifically -- and not anything before it]. Some other vulnerability might still exist on 1.29 or on any version after it, but nobody told me about it.

 

[Homor]

I'm not sure it changes anything. You can just play Community Edition on patch 1.29 like you said. Most likely, the known vulnerability is patched on 1.29 [specifically -- and not anything before it]. Some other vulnerability might still exist on 1.29 or on any version after it, but nobody told me about it.

Oh, thank god. That's the version I have.

Still, it's obscene Blizzard ever let things get this bad and don't care enough to try to resolve it themselves in a meaningful way. I feel so bad for the entire community for all the crap everyone's had to put up with. The execs at Blizzard then and now have nothing but my contempt.

 

[Pekisa7]

It's okay if yall all against me. But I still prefer they do it . Create a classic patch 1.3.2. and patch it onwards. At least I would be gratefull to Blizzard.

 

[Retera]

Still, it's obscene Blizzard ever let things get this bad and don't care enough to try to resolve it themselves in a meaningful way.

How is it a matter of how much they care? Even if Brad Chan says he cares and wants to fix the game, what could he possibly do? He can't go back and publish 1.27.3 like I said without fixing the security vulnerabilities, which is maybe actually really time consuming. I linked a good summary how he could fix the "arbitrary code execution" vulnerability above in this thread, but I don't have a solution for him to fix the GDPR thing. He would have to find the code for the 1.30 / 1.31 servers and try to launch it again, which according to an insider is allegedly not possible.

So instead it becomes a game of just doctoring Reforged until it's "classic enough" for you, or whatever.

At what point will it be? How much is enough?

Edit:

How about this picture? is it enough to make it like a picture of frozen throne on the background instead?
Apparently not...

What do you want that he can actually do ???

 

[Homor]

It's okay if yall all against me. But I still prefer they do it . Create a classic patch 1.3.2. and patch it onwards. At least I would be gratefull to Blizzard.

I am definitely still for a classic client and even moreso now that I've learned all of this, if only for the safety of the userbase. Or even better: drop the source code and let people fix it themselves.

but I don't have a solution for him to fix the GDPR thing.

Probably just don't give it online servers and leave it LAN exclusive, if I had to guess.

 

[Pekisa7]

How is it a matter of how much they care? Even if Brad Chan says he cares and wants to fix the game, what could he possibly do? He can't go back and publish 1.27.3 like I said without fixing the security vulnerabilities, which is maybe actually really time consuming. I linked a good summary how he could fix the "arbitrary code execution" vulnerability above in this thread, but I don't have a solution for him to fix the GDPR thing. He would have to find the code for the 1.30 / 1.31 servers and try to launch it again, which according to an insider is allegedly not possible.

So instead it becomes a game of just doctoring Reforged until it's "classic enough" for you, or whatever.

At what point will it be? How much is enough?

I think he can find the code. I don't think its "too" much work for them.

 

[Retera]

I am definitely still for a classic client and even moreso now that I've learned all of this, if only for the safety of the userbase. Or even better: drop the source code and let people fix it themselves.

But it wouldn't be a classic client, it would be a Reforged client pretending to be classic. And that's already available.

What do you actually want the people managing this game to do?

Edit:

[Because Reforged is the only codebase that has the security fixes]
[and because 1.29 is considered reforged inside their office, since it was made by the reforged team]

 

[Homor]

[Because Reforged is the only codebase that has the security fixes]

I'm getting a bit confused now -- didn't you say 1.29 doesn't have the vulnerabilities? I wouldn't call 1.29 "Reforged" at all. It was pre-Reforged.

[and because 1.29 is considered reforged inside their office, since it was made by the reforged team]

That's pretty silly. It's like calling the Reign of Chaos patches they made during TFT "TFT patches." Could you access TFT content on them? No, so it isn't TFT. But I don't work in Blizzard's offices so I don't make the rules. Nor would I ever want to because it seems like hell.

 

[Pekisa7]

But it wouldn't be a classic client, it would be a Reforged client pretending to be classic. And that's already available.

What do you actually want the people managing this game to do?

Edit:

[Because Reforged is the only codebase that has the security fixes]

I think it would be classic. They took those backgrounds from the original Frozen Throne. Now it seems that reforged is pretending to be classic.

 

[Retera]

I'm getting a bit confused now -- didn't you say 1.29 doesn't have the vulnerabilities? I wouldn't call 1.29 "Reforged" at all. It was pre-Reforged.

Yeah whoever's managing the game probably is also confused too.

Is it possible that you could just highlight where in the Reforged codebase they should change something to make the game be how you want, then post that on their official forums or something?