[Campaign] Reforging the Classic Campaign

[Graesholt]

Hey everyone!

I recently did some work extracting models from Reforged and tried my hand at some simple models edits using Retera’s Model Studio. That turned out to be an absolute blast.
It got me thinking what I would personally have wanted from a Reforged campaign, which is basically the classic campaign with updated graphics. No one seem to be doing that (people seem to be working to fix blizzard’s updated campaign instead), so I think I am going to try my hand at it.
This thread is not intended to be an announcement as much as a discussion of what different people would envision for a project like this (I have the full intention of following through, but I am attending school full time. Any release is very far off, and would only follow the official re-implementation of custom campaigns).

I have a few objectives, a few of which I would like to hear people’s opinions on (opinion’s are welcome all around, but some objectives are less set in stone than others.):

Upgrade to HD while keeping original balancing:
Probably most importantly of all, I would like to take the original campaign (I have recently been successful in installing classic warcraft and aim to extract the maps from that, instead of using the classic campaign from reforged. Not sure if there is any difference, but older is better, in my opinion) and change the supported mode of all the maps from SD to HD.
Ideally I would like mouths to move in cutscenes as well, which most of them do in the limited test I have conducted. We will see how that works out.

Recreation\reimplementation of lost Reign of Chaos units:
Units like the steam tank, ballista, catapult, gyrocoptor, as well as Furion’s various skins (used to have three, now only has one, although a second was included in the beta files).
These will be challenging but necessary to do.

Minor changes to units in some maps to fix lore inconsistencies:
For example the troll headhunters in Blackrock and Roll, and Blackrock and Roll, too.
It makes no real sense for them to be in Lordaeron, and changing them into forest troll axe throwers for example, as you are fighting remnants of the horde from Warcraft 2, just makes sense.
I am hoping to gather community thoughts and feedback on changes like this as I go.

Minor animation tweaks to some cutscenes:
Models have a lot more animations now and it would be a shame not to use some of them.
As an example, Mannoroth has a great new animation for spilling his blood in the pool in Ashenvale.
Other than this, I aim to keep cutscenes as original as possible, camera angles and all.

Minor editing of some unique models:
Simply to make models resemble classic more.
Good examples in the prologue campaign are Thrall and Medivh, both of whom have got facial hair that does not resemble their classic portraits at all, and Grom, who’s jaw tattoo has been changed dramatically from classic.

ALL Unique heroes & units - NO colour tinting:
I would like all heroes encountered in the campaign to be unique, as I would like it to be a little bit exciting every time you see a new one. I have counted them and some there are a lot of (21 generic Archmages (not counting the Ghostly Archmages who will reuse earlier models)) but I feel up to the challenge of making them feel unique.
Furthermore, I would like all units that have unique names to be unique as well. Colour tinting will not be accepted as a means of making units stand out. At the very least, If nothing else makes sense or pans out for a unit, I would like it to have a unique texture.

Adjustment of unit size (opinions welcome):
In SD 2002 graphics it is fine that Arthas is a towering behemoth of a man. In the more realistic art style of Reforged, not so much.
I made test of this with the Defense of Strahnbrad mission, where I rescaled all units in relation to the footman, Arthas an Uther standing a little bit taller than the regular foot soldier, orcs starting out a little taller, the heroes among than standing a little taller still.
Just to clarify, I am only suggesting tweaks to the Art - Scaling Value of units, not the Art - Selection Scale. Thus it is my hope that pathfinding and general unit behaviour will remain unaltered.
I would very much like to hear the community’s opinion on this. Personally, in the limited test I have run, it only heightened my experience.

Remove hero glow during cutscenes (opinions welcome):
A simple idea, really.
The thing with hero glow is that it helps people identify their own and the enemies’ heroes on the battlefield at a glance, but in cutscenes I personally find that it gets in the way and looks out of place.
Pretty sure removing it will require me to make custom models of every single hero that appears in a cutscene, as I understand the glow to be locked to the model. That is a lot of work.
Opinions wanted.

Named heroes (opinions welcome):
The last topic I am eager to discuss; back in 1.0 I have found out that most heroes in the campaign were named. This was for the most part reverted in an early patch in favour of random names.
What are people’s feelings on bringing back named heroes?
I am asking specifically with the unique skins I am going to make for each hero in mind; being able to match that up with their name would strengthen that aspect in my opinion (as you can imagine that a Shal Lightbinder would look different to a Tenn Flamecaster, although both in the Archmage naming pool).
What do you think?

 

[tulee]

I think what hiveworkshop needs is new stories, and not rehashing the same story multiple times.
If you are doing this for yourself though, go ahead.
But maybe check out the substandard section for campaigns, and see what this idea has in common with many of the campaigns there.
Maps | HIVE
I don't say this to be rude or anything, just trying to point out that even if you are doing this for yourself, it is unlikely your efforts will be recognised by the community, since substandard category is basically invisible to most people and campaigns that focus on edits of Blizzard's campaign have almost all found themselves there (with a few exceptions).

I definitely do not mean to discourage you. If this is something you enjoy doing, I'm sure you will have fun with it.

 

[Graesholt]

I think what hiveworkshop needs is new stories, and not rehashing the same story multiple times.
If you are doing this for yourself though, go ahead.
But maybe check out the substandard section for campaigns, and see what this idea has in common with many of the campaigns there.
Maps | HIVE
I don't say this to be rude or anything, just trying to point out that even if you are doing this for yourself, it is unlikely your efforts will be recognised by the community, since substandard category is basically invisible to most people and campaigns that focus on edits of Blizzard's campaign have almost all found themselves there (with a few exceptions).

I definitely do not mean to discourage you. If this is something you enjoy doing, I'm sure you will have fun with it.

You were not rude at all, thank you for your impression of the mindset of the community. That is very helpful as I am, as you can tell from my 'messages' count, very much an outsider.

If you wouldn't mind elaborating; What causes a campaign to end up in the substandard section?
If I were to see this idea through, would I be doomed to end up in the substandard section, as the edits I want to make are not drastic enough to lift the project as a whole?
Do you have any specific advice on how one might avoid ending up in the substandard section?

I would not say that you have discouraged me, however, the idea of ending up in the substandard section no matter the amount of work I put into this vision, I would say I find that a bit discouraging.
Hoping to hear back from you...

 

[tulee]

If you wouldn't mind elaborating; What causes a campaign to end up in the substandard section?

I am not a reviewer, so I can only speculate. Hive does not want to encourage an environment where people are editing other maps, as posed to making new stuff.
Map submission rules can be found here:
Map Submission Rules


One good example of modifying the original campaign and getting approved is the 2p campaign.
2 Player Campaign 2020 - Reforged & Classic
It brought great value by allowing it to be played in coop mode, so it was able to avoid substandard. But if you check that list I linked in the earlier post, the substandard section is basically filled with edits of the original campaigns, since they just tweaked stuff/made edits.

Do you have any specific advice on how one might avoid ending up in the substandard section?

Making a new campaign. If you are talking about how to get a blizzard edit into approval, I do not know how to achieve that.

 

[cleavinghammer]

What causes a campaign to end up in the substandard section?

Short version: Aside from the technical aspect (buggy spells, cutscene and language errors, etc.), original and well-made content is much more interesting to play, for the same reason that a new book is often preferable to an adaptation.

While some campaigns do retread well-known stories (e.g. the WC1 and WC2 campaigns or the Warcraft novels, remade in WC3), they usually add things that weren't possible at the time like sidequests and cutscenes, making for a more interesting story than "kill all enemies to advance to the next level". However, a cohesive plot is most important, you can't just stick a bunch of new stuff in and expect it to work.

 

[tulee]

Take the poster above's word for it. He has experience trying to get campaign edits into the approved section.

Hidden

 

[Med. MapGuy]

As someone that's worked on both original content and major edits of existing campaigns on-and-off for years, do whatever you feel like. Just make sure to add your unique spin so that it feels fresh. I myself have been wanting to work on a Warcraft I/II remake for the longest time, but seeing how many have already have been released (or are currently in the works!) I chose to work on something else.