WARCRAFT III: REFORGED PATCH NOTES

Level 16
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,137
I don't see how that's in opposition to anything that I've said :) If anything, it only proves my original point.

But the amount of word of mouth and possible work and sharing of good intent for a game is.
Doing something good is not an excuse for doing something bad - they could easily do everything that you said while at the same time having a legal copy of the game.

And not all non-paying fans are thieves.
The only instance where this is true is free-to-play, where by definition you're not expected to pay anything for the right to use the product.

That's free word of mouth and marketing in the underworld as I call it.
I'm going to ask you again - you own a shop, someone comes and steals your stuff. Would you consider that morally acceptable if you knew he praised your products to his friends and told them where your shop is?

When I said Reforged was bad due to running out of budget you disagreed with me and now you agree with an article that implies the very same thing... Nice :)
 
Level 9
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
347
@MasterBlaster @deepstrasz @Sparky123 I have a crazy story:
  • Reforged devs had a budget of 100$. (Just using an easy number, actual budget would be much higher)
  • They planned to have Reforged cutscenes and vivid graphics due to this 100$ budget.
  • Blizzcon 2018 happens.
  • After Con 2018 the Reforged devs now just have to fix readability issues and terrain but then...
  • J Allen Brack comes in and says: "Who will play our new games if this becomes successful?" or "This may force us to make Wc4 etc..."
  • Reduces that budget to 19.99$.
  • Due to the sadness, we get radio silence from Reforged devs for a year and the devs go on strike so don't do any work.
  • J Allen Brack allows that as he doesn't care about classic games. And he isn't the owner of the company so why care if money is being wasted by giving salary to Pete and his boys who are not doing any work?
  • Con 2019 is about to happen and devs don't want to participate due to the strike.
  • J Allen Brack promises them a delay and a plan for Reforged so the devs become happy and start doing the work. (It was a trap)
  • Due to this happiness: The devs break the silence by starting the beta.
  • Blizzcon 2019 happens and nothing new in the opening ceremony...Nothing big in the deep dive panel. But devs are very happy as they know about Brack's plan so tell us that we will have another great 16 years and more lies.
  • Now Con 2019 is over and devs ask Brack for the plan.
  • Brack tells them to wait.
  • Its the end of December and Brack's plan is revealed: delay the game to 28 Jan 2020 but don't increase the budget.
  • The devs become sad so radio silence continues.
TO BE CONCLUDED
 
Last edited:

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 52
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
15,446
Excuse me aren't they basically one company? Or, is it like shifting from one part of the company to another?
Doing something good is not an excuse for doing something bad
Two wrongs make a right - Wikipedia
I'm going to ask you again - you own a shop, someone comes and steals your stuff. Would you consider that morally acceptable if you knew he praised your products to his friends and told them where your shop is?
It's not completely comparable with intellectual property which by the way cannot be stolen with copyright as well.
 
Level 9
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
347
Excuse me aren't they basically one company? Or, is it like shifting from one part of the company to another?
Blizzard and Activision are different companies but they have the same parent company: Activision Blizzard. Activision Blizzard is not Activision+Blizzard but it is a merger of Activision and Vivendi Games. Its called Activision Blizzard as Morhaime wanted that name. How Vivendi fits into all this? It's a long story, if you want to know then feel free to ask.
 
Level 3
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
41
Activision is Turning Blizzard into Another Raven for pure spite and joy.
Spite for what i don't know, but they are having fun until they finally force blizzard to make a CoD game.

Also before someone quotes or asks it, raven software its in this situation nowadays, because Kotick hates the Altmans and the chair of command of Zenimax Media(bethesda) its said that Zenimax was also aiming at raven and the Hexen and Heretic Ip's along with the entire id pack, but Kotick cut at the last minute and Zenimax got only id Software.

Now Id is making more money than most blizzard games thanks to DOOM once again, and QC even with its missteps and small palyerbase became a solid game, and Activision can't do nothing because of it, also they still retain the rights of Hexen and Heretic, though Id can sell them at virtual stores, but they can't do or even reference the characters due to how bad the deal was.

Activision is pissed that they lost a pot of gold with Id, and later on with Valve because of Dota, and now they are desperate to the point of running blizzard to the ground in pursuit of more money.
 
Last edited:
Level 4
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
72
This article asks a question: "Now, Morhaime is gone, and Activision appears to have more influence on Blizzard than it ever has. Will Blizzard’s games-as-a-service, release-it-when-it’s-ready approach to development survive these new changes?"

After experiencing Reforged launch I can say the answer to this question is: "Reforged launch shows that Blizzard's release-it-when-its-ready approach to development is dead due to these changes."

Blessed Mother save Diablo 4

No. No it will not survive.
Instead we get diablo immortals and a great meme for the years of sadness.


I'm going to ask you again - you own a shop, someone comes and steals your stuff. Would you consider that morally acceptable if you knew he praised your products to his friends and told them where your shop is?

Digital products aren't like real time products you see. They aren't perishable or consumable...

Doing something good is not an excuse for doing something bad - they could easily do everything that you said while at the same time having a legal copy of the game.

Why don't you tell that to the company you so desperately try to defend here,
or its beyond shit practices with lame arguments like 'deadlines' and 'budgets'.

And then saying that crowd-funding is non-existent and all non-paying
people aren't and cannot and will never be fans and don't extend the game.

Are you a fanboy?

When I said Reforged was bad due to running out of budget you disagreed with me and now you agree with an article that implies the very same thing... Nice :)

I think you're tripping now, that article has nothing to do with you or your arguments.
I'm just enjoying how right that article was 2 years ago.

The problem I have with your budget and deadline arguments is
you use them to defend this company. For reforged???
This piece of shit? This? Do you even have the game?
Do you play it every day?

It barely works. And its a FAR CRY from everything promised.

Two wrongs make a right - Wikipedia

XD

Activision is pissed that they lost a pot of gold with Id, and later on with Valve because of Dota, and now they are desperate to the point of running blizzard to the ground in pursuit of more money.

That is a very interesting point there. I wonder if we can dig more articles about this.
 
Last edited:
Level 16
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,137
Sorry for the late reply - I was a bit busy and I wanted to make sure I phrase everything properly this time around, because it seems either I did a really bad job previously or you're prone to overinterpreting what I'm saying :)

---

@Power107 - I think your theory is a tad bit too dramatic, so here's mine:

1. The Classic team wants to make Reforged. They figure out what they want to do with the game and they come up with an initial plan.

2. The developers pitch their idea to the executives to get the funding. The executives are interested, the decision process begins. A market research is done, marketing and finance guys discuss the scope of the project with the devs and eventually both sides settle on making the game with a 100$ budget and 200$ estimated income.

3. The assigned budget isn't enough to do everything the developers wanted to do, so some plans are cut. Still, the devs get to work and prototype a version of the game that they think they will be able to do within that budget and show it to people at Blizzcon 2018. It's still good enough to make most people happy.

4. As the development progresses, some things go wrong and it becomes apparent that the 100$ budget is not enough to do everything they've promised at Blizzcon. The developers ask the executives for more money (i.e. time), but for whatever reason they get denied and thus they have to cut some corners (most likely).

5. It's also possible that at some point either Activision stepped in with their cost cutting and/or the preorder numbers didn't line-up with the original projections, making Blizzard not just refuse to increase the budget, but even cut what was already there. The results? Developers had to cut even more stuff.

---

And look, I'm not going to blame them for wanting to make a profit. As much as I'd love Blizzard to be some kind of a charity foundation that only cares about making good games and does so even at a loss, that's not feasible - they're a bussiness, they want to make money. That's fair. That said, do I think that they go too far in sacrificing quality for profit? Yes, I do and I really miss the old Blizzard that at least tried to offer their customers decent products in return for their money.

But that Blizzard is long gone.

That said, as easy it is to blame the obvious cause of such state, i.e. corporate greed, I think it's also partially the fault of the broader gaming community. Just think about it. The only reason why companies like Blizzard or EA or whatever are able to get away with releasing bad games is because there's enough people who don't care about quality and still keep giving them money. As I've said, this doesn't mean that the so called triple-A gaming industry isn't obnoxiously greedy - it is, but logically: if their goal is to make money and they can do it more efficiently by screwing their customers by making bad games at low costs, it kinda does make sense that it's exactly what they're doing, doesn't it?

Again, I'm not saying that it's moral, just that it's logical. And that's the Blizzard we have today - one that only cares about cold financial logic. And as much as it sucks for us, it does explain (NOT MORALLY JUSTIFY) what they're doing. Where am I going with this? I'm trying to explain that their actions are logical. From their perspective Reforged made sense. The game went over the budget they wanted to give it, be it because the budget was cut or something went wrong in the development process or the combination of both, and they didn't see a cold, financial reason to give the game a bigger budget, so that it can actually launch in a good shape.

And if they don't care about doing right by the customers or making good games, the lack of that financial incentive was a perfectly valid reason for releasing Reforged in the state it launched in. I'm not saying that it was the right or moral thing to do, I'm not saying I like it, I'm not using it to "defend" them. I'm just describing what I think is the cold, logical reality of this situation. And just because I don't include my personal judgement doesn't mean I'm automatically saying that Blizzard is good. Having a logical reason to do something is not the same as being morally justified to do it.

For example, if I said that "John hit his wife, because he was angry at her", I'm not saying that domestic violence is somehow good. It might be a bit of an extreme example, but I wanted to pick something really obvious. So, in that statement, I'm just describing the situation from a purely logical point of view - I'm not passing judgement, I'm not discussing morals, I'm not expressing my opinion on what happened. I'm just saying "X happened, because Y". That's all. And guess what, just because a certain action had a logical reason, i.e. wasn't irrational, doesn't mean that it was good. Come on.

That's what I was trying to do here - just describe what I think happened with Reforged and what I think what was the logical reasoning for that. I didn't say that either Blizzard or the game were good. And if I defended anything, it was their logic, because hell - I might think people running Blizzard are a bunch of cold, greedy bastards, but I don't think they're stupid. Being able to acknowledge that something isn't pure black isn't being a fanboy or an apologist, it's just not being a mindless hater.
I hope we're finally on the same page and I won't have to repeat this again.

---

Excuse me aren't they basically one company? Or, is it like shifting from one part of the company to another?
Subsidiary - Wikipedia. That's what Blizzard is to Activision-Blizzard.

Two wrongs make a right - Wikipedia
It was a nice read, but I only see one instance when this would apply to what I've said. In short, if you're trying to imply that I'm basically saying this: "it's okay that Reforged was bad, because some people would do a bad thing and pirate it" then no, I didn't do that. And here's why:

All I've said is that I don't think Blizzard should consider "pirates" when allocating a budget for their games. Now, let's consider Blizzard's "obligation" to deliver a quality product. This obviously exists in regards to people who buy or might buy that product, so... if Blizzard didn't deliver a good product and disappointed these people then that's a "wrong" on Blizzard's part, but then... These people aren't diehard pirates and considering the game was out for so long and was heavily discounted, they most likely bought it (as I've explained previously, outside of a small number of fringe cases, I don't see any valid justification for not doing so outside of just being a diehard pirate), so it can be argued that they didn't do anything "wrong", so there aren't "two wrongs that make a right" in this case.

Now, for pirates - if you accept the logic that Blizzard shouldn't consider them when allocating a budget for the game, then why should Blizzard have any obligation to please pirates? It's obvious they're not the target audience, the game "isn't made for them". By that logic, even if the pirates end up disappointed, that's not really a "wrong", because Blizzard wasn't trying to satisfy them in the first place. In such case, the only actual "wrong" is people pirating games, so once again we're not a situation where "two wrongs make a right".

It's not completely comparable with intellectual property
You see, the problem is that we're not talking about selling an intellectual property or copyrights. If anything, the whole debate is about licencing rights and Blizzard selling licences to use the game. As far as I know, that's how the transaction is described in the EULA - as a side note, this has to be one of the things that I hate the most about modern gaming.

Anyway, I think for the purpose of my argument, this example was comparable enough as at the fundamental level whether you steal a physical object or a licence, then you're depriving the party that owns that object/licence financial compensation that is legally and morally owed to it. As such, whether you were selling physical goods, services or rights to use your property, if someone took that without paying or getting permission, I don't think anyone would consider this person "spreading the word of mouth" as sufficient compensation for the loss of income.

But fine, I'll give you that - this might not have been the most accurate example, so how about this one: you're organizing a paid event (like a concert of a boxing gala) and someone comes without buying a ticket, when you catch him, he says it's not a big deal, because he was going to praise the event to his friends and post some nice picture of it online with a link to your webpage. Technically, he didn't take anything physical from you or incur any extra costs for you, no IP or copyright was lost...

Digital products aren't like real time products you see. They aren't perishable or consumable...
...also nothing perished or was consumed.
So, would either of you factor people like him when organizing any future events, by for instance paying for a better band to get more people like him to come?

Digital products aren't like real time products you see. They aren't perishable or consumable...
I'm going to quote this again - you're effectively saying that if you use other people's stuff without their permission, that's "okay" as long as you don't damage it in any way? Because that seems to be the logical implication of what you said. For instance, if I came into your home, took your car keys and went on a ride in your car without you even knowing, would you be "okay" with that, as long as I returned your vehicle intact and refilled gasoline to the level it was on before I took your car? After all, nothing perished or was consumed, right? :)

//that's obviously a bit sarcastic, but the bottom line is the same - it doesn't matter if something perishes or gets consumed: as long as you take or use something that doesn't belong to you without the owner's consent, especially if in the process of doing so you deprive the owner of compensation that he was legally owed, you're commiting a theft. I know @deepstrasz will argue semantics again :p, so - it's often called "misappropriation", which is a type of "theft".

In criminal law, misappropriation is the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one's own use or other unauthorized purpose
And:
Since misappropriation is considered a form of theft
Source: Misappropriation - Wikipedia

---

Why don't you tell that to the company you so desperately try to defend here,
or its beyond shit practices with lame arguments like 'deadlines' and 'budgets'.
I've already explained this above, so I'm not going to repeat myself. Nowhere did I say that what Blizzard did was morally good, ergo I didn't defend them in that capacity. All I've said is their actions are logical and make sense, considering their priorities and point of view and I've explained how. The fact that I don't insert my negative feelings for Blizzard into everything I say, don't imply that I don't have them, you know...

P.S. You're referring to my arguments as lame... let's just that's not a good practice in a civilized discussion. If you don't agree with my point of view, provide arguments that disprove it. Calling what I've said "lame" does not in any way disprove it.

saying that crowd-funding is non-existent
all non-paying
people aren't and cannot and will never be fans and don't extend the game
I didn't say that - I'd really appreciate if you read my posts more carefully and didn't put words into my mouth.

Are you a fanboy?
I'm happy that in the profile comment you backed out of that question, because - you know, the way I see it - if instead of trying to refute your opponent's arguments, you're resorting to name-calling then that's basically an admission to having lost the discussion debate, so... while I I could take that line and walk away feeling that I've won our not-so-little discussion, I'd prefer to let it resolve naturally :)

But, just for the sake of clearing this up - I'll adress this one last time: if you go back through my post history, you'll see that I didn't abstain from criticizing Blizzard or Reforged. Heck, if you read between the lines of what I'm saying now, perhaps you'd even find an underlying critique of them as well? Anywho, I was adamant about not liking Reforged, I even refunded my purchase, refrained from buying Blizzard's products until I see positive reviews (I haven't backed out), uploaded a backup 1.31.1 version of W3 (plus returned to it myself) and actively tried to help people solve issues with using it. I think that's more than enough to prove I'm not a "fanboy".

I think you're tripping now, that article has nothing to do with you or your arguments.
As I've said before - my original argument was that Reforged went over its production budget. If that budget was cut then it is only more likely that they went over it. Like, even if you assume that the development went perfect (which is very unlikely considering they were working with an old engine) and they could have made "good" Reforged within the original budget, if that budget was cut then they obviously needed more money than that new budget allowed, i.e. they went over that budget.

If you need numbers to visualize this, let's say their original budget was 100$ and they needed exactly 100$ to turn Reforged into a good game. I'm assuming nothing went wrong and they didn't need the budget to be extended above 100$ (as I've said, it's unlikely, but for the sake of this argument - let's say that they for instance had a solid margin for unforseen problems). Now, Activision comes in and cuts the budget to 80$, the devs still need 100$ to make a good game... 100$ > 80$, isn't it? The last I've checked that's how math works. And if so, even if the problem was just the budget being cut, the logical implication of that is that this cut could have made the devs go over the budget, which was my initial argument.

The problem I have with your budget and deadline arguments is
you use them to defend this company.
That by itself is a fallacy - I'm fine with you not agreeing with what I say, but if the main reason why you disagree with my arguments is that you assume my intentions and you actually do not agree with them, then logically speaking you probably do not have an issue with my arguments, but with my reasons for using said arguments. And that's fine too, but... I think that had you specified that in the beginning, our discussion would be much more productive.

In other words - there's a huge difference between saying "I disagree with WHAT you say" and saying "I disagree with WHY you say it". And now that I know that your issue is the latter, I can properly adress that. First of all, you're assuming my intentions and from my perspective, your assumption is wrong. I don't like Reforged and I'm not a fan of Blizzard's business practices, but that doesn't mean that I will express that in every post or twist my every opinion about Blizzard to make them look bad. That's not my style. I'm all for being fair - I will criticize them when I feel they deserve it, I will "defend" them when I feel certain criticisms are unfair. And in that context, I criticized them for Reforged and a plethora other stuff, which clearly shows that at a moral level I disapprove what they're doing.

The fact that in this discussion I look at things from a different angle, which might sound defensive of Blizzard, doesn't invalidate any of the above.

---

Also, some things about @Sparky123 profile comment I'd like to adress:

Money is a driving force no doubt about it. But reputation, both bad and good is an even more powerful force.
These aren't mutually exclusive - the reason why any company might care about reputation (outside of company owner's ego) is that if your products have a good reputation, they will sell better, ergo you will get more money - i.e. the real driving force behind business.

Intentional or not, reputation bad equals reputation gone.
I'm going to quote this just to show that I can agree with something :D And yes, I agree - regaining people's faith and reputation is much, much harder than losing it.

That's why blizzard expanded elsewhere. Actually that's why Activision-Blizzard expanded.
Because it lost most of its audience. The mobile market and live service is all they have now.
The mobile/live service/microtransaction market is rapidly growing and is, in all honesty, probably worth significantly more than the market built on the good will of core gamers. At the end of the day, the two are in a lot of ways mutually exclusive, so it's ultimately a business decision which one you go with.

Some companies like CD Projekt RED choose the former, while others like Activision choose the latter. And in that context, I wouldn't say that they didn't just go to "mobile", because they lost reputation, but that the reputation loss is in some way a consequence of them going to the "mobile" market.

And yes, I'm saying the corporate higher-ups knew that many people won't like their new direction, but chose to go with it anyway, because it's financially viable.

Which from a moral point of view makes it even worse.
 
Last edited:

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 52
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
15,446
And look, I'm not going to blame them for wanting to make a profit. As much as I'd love Blizzard to be some kind of a charity foundation that only cares about making good games and does so even at a loss, that's not feasible - they're a bussiness, they want to make money. That's fair. That said, do I think that they go too far in sacrificing quality for profit? Yes, I do and I really miss the old Blizzard that at least tried to offer their customers decent products in return for their money.
Imagine what Blizzard would've become with properly "charity" funding Warcraft III. Much positive attention would have been drawn to them and future games would probably have gotten much more sales than they probably will. People might forget but they will not forgive (yeah, I know, paradoxically).
Also, with time, Reforged will get a potential customer base. But alas, they had to ruin it like the some of the worst people on this rock.
Having a logical reason to do something is not the same as being morally justified to do it.
Improper logic as if you risk losing your customers with time, the capital you gained will not stand and you'll have to shift investment to other things with a different name/brand.
Even "communism" ended ultimately. Not saying it didn't metamorphose but still, as mentioned above, different brand which also comes with some downsides to the prior actions.
Subsidiary - Wikipedia. That's what Blizzard is to Activision-Blizzard.
Well, the way I see it, subsidiaries aren't hydra heads but octopi limbs.
It was a nice read, but I only see one instance when this would apply to what I've said.
Was strengthening the idea.
But since you've mentioned it, Blizzard's been stepping like that ever since they announced Reforged.
But fine, I'll give you that - this might not have been the most accurate example, so how about this one: you're organizing a paid event (like a concert of a boxing gala) and someone comes without buying a ticket, when you catch him, he says it's not a big deal, because he was going to praise the event to his friends and post some nice picture of it online with a link to your webpage. Technically, he didn't take anything physical from you or incur any extra costs for you, no IP or copyright was lost...
This is a worse example. That person is an extra. To get in you need the tickets and the gala pays off with a certain number of tickets. A concert is "started" if there are enough tickets bought. If a fly gets on the stage, it matters little financially.
What you actually want to say is that if no one bought games the companies making them would go bankrupt, similarly any shop that doesn't have enough customers. However, there's a difference in that piracy in gaming is a little more complex than someone stealing chickens from your yard and telling friends about it so they can do it too. In digital/virtual sense, pirates might actually buy those games at a certain point or might attract enough attention from other people so they would buy it.
I'm going to quote this again - you're effectively saying that if you use other people's stuff without their permission, that's "okay" as long as you don't damage it in any way? Because that seems to be the logical implication of what you said. For instance, if I came into your home, took your car keys and went on a ride in your car without you even knowing, would you be "okay" with that, as long as I returned your vehicle intact and refilled gasoline to the level it was on before I took your car? After all, nothing perished or was consumed, right?
It's sensitive in that even if pirating a game doesn't imply physical damage, it obviously doesn't leave you without the game for the time the game is pirated unlike the forced burrowing of the car which by the way gets strain from the travel (even if the renegade is filling the used gas).
Funny thing about that is that if no one knows (e.g. not becoming a public matter), it's like being legal. There's a saying here: "the uncaught thief is an honest merchant".
All I've said is their actions are logical and make sense
But are they truly legal? The law is amoral especially when you have loads of money.
Figure this, they've been misappropriating the fans when the latter preordered the game only to find out it wasn't what it was declared to be. Basically, sham, they stole the fan base trust and the exactness of what they bought.

lol holy shit, you've officially taken this too far
You think? Just wait for what's coming.
 

pyf

pyf

Level 30
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,909
You seem quite adamant about someone being required to support the game financially in order to be considered a true fan. This seems plain silly to me, since there are other ways to support a product. Like I said earlier, word of mouth, but also keeping the game alive by increasing the size of the playerbase. In the case of wc3, some may also contribute to the community by making custom games, models, etc.
Is the WC3 World Editor a free full official and standalone download?

[...] And not all non-paying fans are thieves.
... because some only download and run the shareware version of the game?
:wink:

If the thing wasn't worth stealing, nobody would touch it.
If the thing stolen was bad after that, it would be deleted.
If the thing stolen wasn't fun or well designed, it would be abandonware.
If the thing pirated stopped being pirated, that means its not worth it.
No, no, no and no.

... and specifically about 'abandonware':
Abandonware - Wikipedia

If the thing wasn't worth stealing, nobody would touch it.
If companies make the thing better than the pirated version,
people would say it. And many pirates and thieves put disclaimers
that if people enjoy it, they should buy it and offer genuine links.
Does any pirated software need to be improved in order to get illegally redistributed?
As for those disclaimers, they are imho only here to make the uploaders and downloaders feel less guilty.

The only instance where this is true is free-to-play, where by definition you're not expected to pay anything for the right to use the product.
Also applies to any shareware / demo version of any software.
 
Level 16
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,137
Imagine what Blizzard would've become with properly "charity" funding Warcraft III. Much positive attention would have been drawn to them and future games would probably have gotten much more sales than they probably will.
In this day and age sales =/= profit, in a sense that if you attract enough whales and construct a decently profitable monetization scheme (lootboxes, season passes, DLC pyramids, macrotransactions, etc.), you will probably earn a lot more from that than from the actual sales.

Also, I have my doubts whether making Reforged actually good would make that much of a difference... Sure, some good will would be regained and they might be able to sell some more stuff, but - is Warcraft 3 still that big to counter all other missteps? Perhaps if it was a part of a broader strategy, but on its own - I don't think so.

Also, with time, Reforged will get a potential customer base.
Probably. I can only speak for myself - as I've said before, if they add back custom campaigns and proper singleplayer, I might re-purchase Reforged and use it, because while I dislike many things about the game, there are also some that I either like or don't mind.

Improper logic as if you risk losing your customers with time, the capital you gained will not stand and you'll have to shift investment to other things with a different name/brand.
I don't see your point. Moral =/= logical - yes, sometimes the moral thing might be logical or vice-wersa, but they're not equal. That's what I wanted to highlight. But as for your actual point - I've already said that in my opinion there's more money to be made in mobile/microtransaction space than in the we-sell-good-games one, so yes, they might be losing their customers, but at least so far they're not losing money. Will this change in time? Perhaps, I surely hope so.

Blizzard's been stepping like that ever since they announced Reforged.
Stepping like what?

That person is an extra. To get in you need the tickets and the gala pays off with a certain number of tickets. A concert is "started" if there are enough tickets bought. If a fly gets on the stage, it matters little financially.
Uhm... The game pays off when enough people buy "the licence" ("ticket") to use it, a person that pirates it is also an extra. Also, in regards to galas - you have to pay for accomodation, food, the band and everything else in advance. At least I can't imagine someone selling tickets first and then getting to organize everything. In that sense, it's similar to games, where the company also has to pay the dev cost upfront (well, that's partially countered by crowdfunding or preorders, but you get my point).

In digital/virtual sense, pirates might actually buy those games at a certain point or might attract enough attention from other people so they would buy it.
That's why I made the distinction between people who might potentially buy the game and diehard pirates. I realize that there's a certain subset of people who might for instance download a pirate copy first and if they like it buy the game later. I'm not talking about them - I'm talking about people who at best extremely unlikely to buy anything and in my opinion, a person that didn't buy the original W3 despite it being out for 15+ years and being heavily discounted is likely to fall into that category.

But I'll give you that - it's a fair point, in regards to galas, I mean. They have a clearly defined end point, so they don't have a luxury of people being able to pay for the "ticket" later. Okay. I guess it's really hard to compare virtual goods to anything, but still - I don't feel that telling your friends about a game or spreading positive word of mouth is enough to morally justify piracy. I just don't.

it obviously doesn't leave you without the game for the time the game is pirated unlike the forced burrowing of the car which by the way gets strain from the travel (even if the renegade is filling the used gas)
Yeah, but for the sake of this argument - if the joyride was short enough, the strain is negligible and if it happened for instance at night, when you were sleeping, then you wouldn't realistically be deprived of being able to use the car. Again, you're right about the difference - all I'm saying is that even under such specific conditions, I'd still not like the idea of someone just using my car like that.

Funny thing about that is that if no one knows (e.g. not becoming a public matter), it's like being legal. There's a saying here: "the uncaught thief is an honest merchant".
Heh, I guess so - yeah :)

But are they truly legal? The law is amoral especially when you have loads of money.
I'm not aware of any law that forbids anyone from releasing a bad product. I think some girl sold her bath water :D The way I see it, legally you're allowed to sell what you want, regardless whether it's good or not by some arbitrary standards - if someone wants to buy it, there shouldn't be an issue.

That said, what they did with Reforged wasn't completely legal in my opinion - like, heck, even when the game was already out, the old trailer that showed these new cutscenes was still up on the site as advertisement for the product. Obviously, it was labeled as "work-in-progress", so they'd probably be able to get away with it in court, but still - a case, even if not legal then moral, could be made that Reforged's advertisement was misleading.

Figure this, they've been misappropriating the fans when the latter preordered the game only to find out it wasn't what it was declared to be. Basically, sham, they stole the fan base trust and the exactness of what they bought.
Like I've said above - this is one of my problems with Reforged. I imagine they'd be able to weasel out of this at court, but morally their actons sucked. The loss of trust is the result of that. I think that ultimately things would have gone a lot better if they properly updated people on what they were buying.

You think? Just wait for what's coming.
You're good at baiting, you know that? :p

Is the WC3 World Editor a free full official and standalone download?
For the sake of being fair - you can also make icons or models, perhaps even by using legally aquired software. That's also some benefit to the game, because others might use your work to make something that can potentially make someone else interested in buying the game. And that's cool, but still - to me it's just not enough to excuse piracy. That's my problem here - I'm of an opinion that if you want to use something made or owned by somebody else, you have to have his permission and it's not your prerogative to determine what the conditions of obtaining said permission are.
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 52
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
15,446
In this day and age sales =/= profit, in a sense that if you attract enough whales and construct a decently profitable monetization scheme (lootboxes, season passes, DLC pyramids, macrotransactions, etc.), you will probably earn a lot more from that than from the actual sales.
That's still sales. You get something in return for money. It's not a donation sham.
It's like going into a gas station and the employees there ask you if you don't want to buy that or that when you only want to pay for the fuel.
Probably. I can only speak for myself - as I've said before, if they add back custom campaigns and proper singleplayer, I might re-purchase Reforged and use it, because while I dislike many things about the game, there are also some that I either like or don't mind.
Fixing a "problem" voluntarily done will not get you more customers. People will be more reluctant.
I don't see your point. Moral =/= logical
I'm saying applying morality to logic will have better results in the long run.
Stepping like what?
From wrong to wronger.
Games are risky business compared to concerts. You can expect but you can't foresee the actual outcome of the sales. Microtransactions are a means to thin the unforeseeable. However, for a company as renowned as Blizzard, there would be only to gain, sadly by any means necessary, it seems.
I don't feel that telling your friends about a game or spreading positive word of mouth is enough to morally justify piracy. I just don't.
It's not about justifying a wrong as a good deed if the end result is positive. Nuking Nagasaki and Hiroshima was murder no matter if it had been a factor in ending WWII.
It's about not being the same thing.
I think some girl sold her bath water
Memes and jokes aside, I think selling anything, especially something like water, would require proper quality/safety control and whatnot beforehand as well as a contract for added value tax (not to avoid giving a share to the state).
Even with games, you can't just put what ever you want out there. There's a rating, a filter if you will, to be given before the game can be directed to the proper audiences or to any at all.
That said, what they did with Reforged wasn't completely legal in my opinion
I think the law on media and whatnot works much like with bank contracts that can dynamically change without you needing to consent. That is a problem, big one actually.
Like I've said above - this is one of my problems with Reforged. I imagine they'd be able to weasel out of this at court, but morally their actons sucked. The loss of trust is the result of that. I think that ultimately things would have gone a lot better if they properly updated people on what they were buying.
Their scapegoat was the massive refunding possibility afterwards.
For the sake of being fair - you can also make icons or models, perhaps even by using legally aquired software
Yeah but they'd be totally (well, maybe not?) useless outside the thing they're designed for.
Even external map/model/whatnot editors work on the game, needing few or more files from it.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
72
...also nothing perished or was consumed.
So, would either of you factor people like him when organizing any future events, by for instance paying for a better band to get more people like him to come?

it doesn't matter if something perishes or gets consumed: as long as you take or use something that doesn't belong to you without the owner's consent, especially if in the process of doing so you deprive the owner of compensation that he was legally owed, you're commiting a theft.

Okay, let's agree. But lets also look at the fact that the game has always existed in pirated form.
Committing theft by use when you have no other means to obtain it?
It takes a very honorable person to reject that deal, especially in the early internet days.
Copy the CD, friend gives you his key, you play LAN no problem.

These are also fans. They didn't pay for the game, but they stayed committed to give it positive word of mouth
for the years to come. Some modded, others played a lot.. and who says they didn't buy the game afterwards?
We don't have those facts. Nobody does.


Wikipedia isn't a very reputable source for information.

I didn't say that - I'd really appreciate if you read my posts more carefully and didn't put words into my mouth.

Well you have said a lot of things, so at this point I'm kind of lost at what.
Sure, don't write in huge walls of text and your posts will be more recognizable :)

I'm happy that in the profile comment you backed out of that question, because - you know, the way I see it - if instead of trying to refute your opponent's arguments, you're resorting to name-calling then that's basically an admission to having lost the discussion debate, so... while I I could take that line and walk away feeling that I've won our not-so-little discussion, I'd prefer to let it resolve naturally :)

But, just for the sake of clearing this up - I'll adress this one last time: if you go back through my post history, you'll see that I didn't abstain from criticizing Blizzard or Reforged. Heck, if you read between the lines of what I'm saying now, perhaps you'd even find an underlying critique of them as well? Anywho, I was adamant about not liking Reforged, I even refunded my purchase, refrained from buying Blizzard's products until I see positive reviews (I haven't backed out), uploaded a backup 1.31.1 version of W3 (plus returned to it myself) and actively tried to help people solve issues with using it. I think that's more than enough to prove I'm not a "fanboy".

And I'm sort of intrigued why you would mix profile and the thread. But my words are the same so I don't mind.

Refunding reforged makes you have sense, you may still be a fanboy, that's an on-going investigation.

As I've said before - my original argument was that Reforged went over its production budget. If that budget was cut then it is only more likely that they went over it. Like, even if you assume that the development went perfect (which is very unlikely considering they were working with an old engine) and they could have made "good" Reforged within the original budget, if that budget was cut then they obviously needed more money than that new budget allowed, i.e. they went over that budget.

If you need numbers to visualize this, let's say their original budget was 100$ and they needed exactly 100$ to turn Reforged into a good game. I'm assuming nothing went wrong and they didn't need the budget to be extended above 100$ (as I've said, it's unlikely, but for the sake of this argument - let's say that they for instance had a solid margin for unforseen problems). Now, Activision comes in and cuts the budget to 80$, the devs still need 100$ to make a good game... 100$ > 80$, isn't it? The last I've checked that's how math works. And if so, even if the problem was just the budget being cut, the logical implication of that is that this cut could have made the devs go over the budget, which was my initial argument.

That's fine. As scenarios go, that logic is solid. They didn't have the budget. That's common sense.

But there are a lot of things we don't also know, some of which I've already mentioned in posts before.
What happened to pre-order money for one? Cuz, pre-orders are sort of kickstarters for publishers you see.
The companies you have said before that don't crowd-fund their work. What is pre-order then?

These aren't mutually exclusive - the reason why any company might care about reputation (outside of company owner's ego) is that if your products have a good reputation, they will sell better, ergo you will get more money - i.e. the real driving force behind business.

However, more money could also be made on lies and deception.
That's also a reputation to obtain. And one that doesn't make you money.
And its kind of hard to ditch... like a bad habit.

I'm going to quote this just to show that I can agree with something :D And yes, I agree - regaining people's faith and reputation is much, much harder than losing it.

And far more damaging than making little money.

The mobile/live service/microtransaction market is rapidly growing and is, in all honesty, probably worth significantly more than the market built on the good will of core gamers. At the end of the day, the two are in a lot of ways mutually exclusive, so it's ultimately a business decision which one you go with.

Totally. 100% agree. They must pay the bills, they have costs...
And in today's world, its not 20 years ago. They have to adapt.

In my mind, and in many people's mind, the way they adapted was shit.
Or maybe they were never able to fix the cock-up-cascade of errors ever
since the first blight of world of warcraft stepped in. Maybe this shit show
was a circus trick and the studio always had problems keeping up.

But are they truly legal? The law is amoral especially when you have loads of money.
Figure this, they've been misappropriating the fans when the latter preordered the game only to find out it wasn't what it was declared to be. Basically, sham, they stole the fan base trust and the exactness of what they bought.

Truth.

This is the sort of argument I make to @MasterBlaster, so I'm glad I didn't make it.
They are crowd-funding work you see, and using lies, deception and fan nostalgia for it.
And they have been disappointing fans for so long its normalized now that it took
a really big piece of shit like reforged to really stir that up.

... because some only download and run the shareware version of the game?

Casualties of making a great game. Pirating is the least of its problems if you see it that way.
Take a look at how many hacked and modded engines of wc3 go around.
Your argument might have more meat there.

No, no, no and no.

... and specifically about 'abandonware':
Abandonware - Wikipedia

Wikipedia isn't a good source of information.

And warcraft 3 is abandonware at this point. Overwritten by reforged.

Does any pirated software need to be improved in order to get illegally redistributed?
As for those disclaimers, they are imho only here to make the uploaders and downloaders feel less guilty.

Not really, but often is vastly improved because of said greedy publishers and the stupid business decisions they make.
And to genuinely say hey - if you really like this game, why not buy it and support the developers?

Pirates try the games before they buy and only buy those that are truly worth their time.
And that's why game industry doesn't like pirates. Because they don't buy shit.

And far more people use the pirated game just to see if its good.
Then they go and legit buy it. And if publishers didn't abuse the way
money lets you abuse the law to get away with horrible inhumane decisions,
maybe their reputation would make their games sell to the point of no piracy.

You know, like an actual game studio should and can, and really CAN!
 
Last edited:

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 52
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
15,446
Committing theft by use when you have no other means to obtain it?
It's not food or medication, darn it, it's a luxury.
Wikipedia isn't a very reputable source for information.
Let's not be too judgemental. It's not about war crimes.
However, I'm sure you can find that in your country's or the EU's legal sites.
What happened to pre-order money for one? Cuz, pre-orders are sort of kickstarters for publishers you see.
Maybe there were just not enough pre-orders as they foresaw.
Wikipedia isn't a good source of information.

And warcraft 3 is abandonware at this point. Overwritten by reforged.
You have yet to show us proper sources and arguments.
Warcraft III is not at all abandonware if you'd less ignorant to read that article. Your sentence can't be taken as a joke for it would be a bad one.
Also, wikipedia articles have footnotes.
 
Level 11
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
580
Everyone should watch ToD's stream now with B2Warcraft and pro players, they are explaining what happened at Dreamhack tournament, developers just pick up and leave without a comment after the second desynch, they did not meet with players or casters and did not communicate at all in the whole tournament.
 
Level 3
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
41
Everyone should watch ToD's stream now with B2Warcraft and pro players, they are explaining what happened at Dreamhack tournament, developers just pick up and leave without a comment after the second desynch, they did not meet with players or casters and did not communicate at all in the whole tournament.
Jesus...
 

pyf

pyf

Level 30
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,909
Wikipedia isn't a good source of information. [...]
The overall quality of the articles found on Wikipedia vary from language to language. The English pages are imho well documented, informative, and are almost always written in conformance to their *many* writing guides (note: it is mentioned otherwise). Some pages in a specific language may have extra information not found elsewhere if the subject is specific to the country in which said language is spoken.

[...] And warcraft 3 is abandonware at this point. Overwritten by reforged.
:razz:
No, definitively not.

Casualties of making a great game. Pirating is the least of its problems if you see it that way.
Take a look at how many hacked and modded engines of wc3 go around.
Your argument might have more meat there.
This is not what I was talking about.

My point was that the only legal way to download and play the game is by using the shareware / demo version of it.

Not really, but often is vastly improved because of said greedy publishers and the stupid business decisions they make.
And to genuinely say hey - if you really like this game, why not buy it and support the developers?

Pirates try the games before they buy and only buy those that are truly worth their time.
And that's why game industry doesn't like pirates. Because they don't buy shit.

And far more people use the pirated game just to see if its good.
Then they go and legit buy it. And if publishers didn't abuse the way
money lets you abuse the law to get away with horrible inhumane decisions,
maybe their reputation would make their games sell to the point of no piracy.

You know, like an actual game studio should and can, and really CAN!
Pirate releases are about illegal redistribution. Please do not try to mix it up with decisions made by the developers / publishers. What is theirs, is theirs. Period.

The shareware / demo versions of video games are there for anyone who wants to give any software product a try, before buying it (or not).
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
72
It's not food or medication, darn it, it's a luxury.

Good point.

Let's not be too judgemental. It's not about war crimes.
However, I'm sure you can find that in your country's or the EU's legal sites.

Okay. Wikipedia is still not a very 'accurate' information place.

Maybe there were just not enough pre-orders as they foresaw.

Maybe. That doesn't change what pre-orders are.

You have yet to show us proper sources and arguments.
Warcraft III is not at all abandonware if you'd less ignorant to read that article. Your sentence can't be taken as a joke for it would be a bad one.
Also, wikipedia articles have footnotes.

Wikipedia can be edited by anyone.

And I don't mean abandonware as a bad thing.

Everyone should watch ToD's stream now with B2Warcraft and pro players, they are explaining what happened at Dreamhack tournament, developers just pick up and leave without a comment after the second desynch, they did not meet with players or casters and did not communicate at all in the whole tournament.

Link to yours?


:razz:
No, definitively not.

I think we misunderstand each other. Abandonware as in, disconnected as of now.
Proof is in the pudding. I do not mean that the community abandoned it. Oh no no.
Just that Blizzard is treating wc3 as abandonware as of reforged's release.

This is not what I was talking about.

My point was that the only legal way to download and play the game is by using the shareware / demo version of it.

I guess so.

Pirate releases are about illegal redistribution. Please do not try to mix it up with decisions made by the developers / publishers. What is theirs, is theirs. Period.

The shareware / demo versions of video games are there for anyone who wants to give any software product a try, before buying it (or not).

Unless you've got a time machine demos and sharewares are a legacy method at this point.
I haven't seen a demo since the PSX days...
 

pyf

pyf

Level 30
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,909
Okay. Wikipedia is still not a very 'accurate' information place.
Wikipedia can be edited by anyone.
You may contribute to improve it if you wish to.
:wink:

I think we misunderstand each other. Abandonware as in, disconnected as of now.
[...] Blizzard is treating wc3 as abandonware as of reforged's release.
Previous versions of WC3 are unsupported and are not available anymore for download (note: this may include the latest PTR version as well). However, some of the downloadable standalone offline patches up to and including v1.27b, unofficially still are available. Blizzard retains full Intellectual Property (IP) rights on their creations, whether they choose to make their IP available or not.

Maybe you should re-read what the word 'abandonware' refers to, and how it may be tied to software piracy, which is itself related to unauthorized redistribution?

Unless you've got a time machine demos and sharewares are a legacy method at this point. [...]
I've got a flyi... err... oops, excuse me, I mean I've got a Wayback Machine (and you have, too). But I myself generally do not need it to find any demo/shareware releases of what I am personally interested in.

[...] I haven't seen a demo since the PSX days...
As an example, care for the demo version of Game Dev Tycoon?

Maybe it all depends on what one is interested in?
 
Level 7
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
240
All the whine and venting aside, is there ANY realistic plan that could make all this work out in the end? They put in several massive patches or even do something controversial apologizing and pull the whole thing back and re release it in 1 year or something crazy like that?

Greetings a returning hopeful map maker
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
72
You may contribute to improve it if you wish to.

That will solve everything.

Previous versions of WC3 are unsupported and are not available anymore for download (note: this may include the latest PTR version as well). However, some of the downloadable standalone offline patches up to and including v1.27b, unofficially still are available. Blizzard retains full Intellectual Property (IP) rights on their creations, whether they choose to make their IP available or not.

Maybe you should re-read what the word 'abandonware' refers to, and how it may be tied to software piracy, which is itself related to unauthorized redistribution?

At this point it doesn't matter what I consider abandonware or not.
Its about the future of this game. I mean, relative future.
To each their own.

I've got a flyi... err... oops, excuse me, I mean I've got a Wayback Machine (and you have, too). But I myself generally do not need it to find any demo/shareware releases of what I am personally interested in.

I still prefer a Chronosphe... I mean, time machine.

As an example, care for the demo version of Game Dev Tycoon?

Maybe it all depends on what one is interested in?

Duh.
I love how they dealt with pirates. That's a brilliant way kudos!
didn't know they had a demo.

All the whine and venting aside, is there ANY realistic plan that could make all this work out in the end? They put in several massive patches or even do something controversial apologizing and pull the whole thing back and re release it in 1 year or something crazy like that?

Greetings a returning hopeful map maker

Greetings and salutations.

Expect that from the 'early access' or 'live service' or 'release it now, patch it later' culture.
Exactly that. Give or take a couple of years and the second coming of Jesus.

Sure. If you don't mind your intellectual property and 'moral rights' being used without limit, go wild in reforged and hope for the best. While I do intend to install the game in the near future, I will never
develop a serious map in reforged and I don't see why anyone would. I mean, besides for making dota clones.
Cuz I'm all for making dota clones. Or just host fun maps you enjoy and find others that do.

Reforged is like a malware and any hope you have
for using legacy editor whilst having reforged WITHOUT having deleted the hack from the registry
and WITHOUT having made BACKUPS of all of your custom maps is modding suicide at this point.
And then there's the HACK you have to USE to make reforged work for you... and it involves deleting
your maps and setting fps to specific numbers...

If you can live with all of the above, all in. IMO, its a cringe-fest.

Otherwise stick to your legacy copy if you have it, if not... I'm not gonna suggest how you can obtain it.
But old warcraft is dead. DEAD. DEADER THAN DEAD. The cake is a lie. #firebobbykotick

But I mean, stick to this community. It gives a damn more than Blizzard did.
 
Last edited:
Level 16
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,137
I'm not going to go back to that old discussion - let's just agree to disagree on that front, but there's one thing I'd like to quote before I drop that topic:
And I'm sort of intrigued why you would mix profile and the thread.
I mixed them, because the profile post was in my opinion significantly different than what you said in the topic and since both were public, I thought there wouldn't be any harm in bringing up what I've considered to be your "updated" view point. If this offended you, I apologize.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
72
I'm not going to go back to that old discussion - let's just agree to disagree on that front, but there's one thing I'd like to quote before I drop that topic:

I mixed them, because the profile post was in my opinion significantly different than what you said in the topic and since both were public, I thought there wouldn't be any harm in bringing up what I've considered to be your "updated" view point. If this offended you, I apologize.

Just let bygones be bygones.
I've already forgotten.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
74
Blizzard always hated us The abandonment of the game then bots took over and it was for the best till you pricks wanted SJW baloney to be placed into the game banning of bots Destroying everything... I warned everyone of this but Noooooooooooooo no one ever listens..
 
Level 3
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
41
at least the reforged Night Elf textures serves for one thing
hgfULN0.png


though the head meshes are a complete mess and idk how to use 3ds or blender to look good

Also before someone asks it, its Hyperion's Night elf mod on nexus, the headmesh is a mess even to uvmap on nifskope
 
Last edited:
Top