Deforged Borecraft 3

Not my best puns, sue me .

It can be the easiest job of paint between the lines, the most inspiring job of rebuilding the wheel or the most self sabotaging job of belly flopping several times over a mine field; to revisit a game you've made before. (Or that the company you're representing has made, as least) On one hand you have the memento of the trust and love built for the original game to propel you forward, the clear-cut vision of what the final product should at least resemble baked into the heart, and if you're lucky, the expert guiding hand of those original developers giving you the insight behind decisions made. Although on the flip-side, all of that attention and boosters make it so that fans have very little patience when you still manage to screw up fantastically. Bonus badwill points go for when you somehow, idiots that you are, find a way to ruin the original as well. That take special levels of moronic incompetence. Yet that's the story when it comes to Warcraft 3 Reforged.

Now I've talked about this before in a blog and I've mostly left the thing alone since then for the dual reasons that there's wasn't a great deal going on with it and that I don't really play games like the Warcraft titles anyway. I was only ever invested in the story side of things, which is fortunate, because this past week has delivered us one heck of a story to tell regarding this maligned murder mystery. Don't you want to know who killed Warcraft 3? The answer might shock you! If you're sleeping, because only in your deepest wildest dreams does this blame fall down on any other shoes than Activision Blizzard's. (I originally thought there was some underpaid licensor sharing some of the blame, but apparently the buck did stop with the right's holders) Still, reading a full report detailing the specific ways in which Blizzard defecated the bedsheets makes for interesting, if a touch hackneyed, storytelling.

So aside from the developing and mounting stories of misconduct running rampant across the company of late, there's another key ingredient that combines together to make up the winning formula of modern day Blizzard, mismanaged teams that exist from riding the coattails of past glories. Whether we're talking about the World of Warcraft team, if they even have enough developers to constitute being called a 'team' anymore, who have lived for years being the top dog of MMO's by default, and only now are slipping beneath the waves and wondering if the nearly 10 years of lackluster updates has anything to do with that. Or the Diablo team who underperformed with three until a surprise saviour swooped in and rebalanced everything for them, only to then go on and try to repeat the same cycle again with their Diablo Immortal Mobile game. (Which still hasn't hit markets, what's up with that?) But with Warcraft 3 Reforged they went even further than that, by digging up one of their most beloved games of yore past and overpromising whilst undelivering, alongside a little bit of 'spit in the face of those who loved you' mixed in for good measure.

First of all, and not surprisingly at all, the report details that the project suffered from a lack of vision. "But how is that possible?" I hear you ask, "Warcraft 3 was already a game, the vision was right there!" Well the confusion came from people not knowing if this was going to be a remaster or a remake, which is... just wow. Pathetically poor management right there, if people don't even know the type of game they're making on so much as a fundamental level you really need to start re-evaluating your role as a game director. Of course, all that really needed to be made clear was how little Activision Blizzard gave a crap about this project (The Blizzard employees interviewed predictably shift the lionshare of blame onto Activision, but as I say: If you share in the successes you share in the failures too.) If anyone in the team had even the slightest inkling of how infinitesimal the amount of care the executives had for this project was, they would have known they'd be lucky to get enough money to put a low-effort remaster together.

But why didn't anyone in the suits care? Simple- potential. Blizzard has gorged itself and bloated like a stuck pig before softening into sludge on it's successes, and now those who hold her reigns simply refuse to settle with anything less than the eye-watering profits of Blizzard's best. "Overwatch 2? Yeah, that first game made gangbusters, make us a sequel!" "Diablo 4? That franchise could be a Billion dollar- make it happen!" "Warcraft 3? Err, isn't that a twenty year old game? Who's going to buy that again? The niche fans?! Never mention the word 'niche' in this office ever again! If there's no way it's getting to a Billion profit, it's already dead to me. Get out of my sight." A dramatization perhaps, but I'll bet not too far off from the dirty truth itself. Blizzard isn't seen as a art developer (as a game developer should be) but a money printing machine, and Warcraft just didn't have that mint potential, and so a project like this was dog-food in the eyes of those gourmet-addled executives.

And then came the mismarketing. What we would originally categorise as 'overpromising' (And that which would still easily fit inside of those margins today) actually better fits into mismarketing to me because it comes down to a team being asked to sell a game that they didn't know the scope of throughout development. So yes, they thought they'd have the funds to reshoot all the cutscenes, rework the UI, blanket improve the look of everything, and they instead got stiffed on the support from head offices. However, that still doesn't excuse their refusal to update and tell fans about the changes to the plan until after release, thus literally selling this game under false pretences to those who were excited for it. For every negative that can traced back to the parent company's there's an equally as dark shadow on the direct developers and their roles.

What I've yet to see a direct excuse for, however, is the butchering of Warcraft III classic. For the forgetful, the classic version of the game was wholesale replaced on the launcher by this rerelease and all old servers were expected to be depreciated to make way for the new netcode. The problem with this being that many didn't like the new game for one, and that the new version of the game had a clause in the online agreement specifically stating that anything created using the comprehensive creation tools in Warcraft III would automatically be Blizzard's property. A curious stipulation until you note that the creative community with Warcraft III original were so revolutionary and driven that they literally invented a new genre of game with the Warcraft custom game 'Defence of the Ancients' or DOTA. Blizzard were so scared of letting another group of fan developers make a game in their systems and go off to become successful developers, that they baked in a clause to sue. So was that a mandate from the higher-ups, despite the fact they could care less about this project? Maybe- but I suspect this comes from a lot closer to home and Blizzard doesn't want to say it. (Or else they'll obfuscate the lead by saying something like "Oh, everyone has those sort of clauses these days; therefore we aren't responsible for throwing it into our remaster")

There it is then, the reasons why the Warcraft III disaster happened, even though it's technically coming from the mouths of those who have a vested interest in shifting blame a little. One fellow waxed lyrical about plans they had which would have revolutionised the series and scored rave reviews with fans and newcomers alike, but paper airplane wishes don't fly far outside and given Blizzard's general state of late I see no evidence that they're capable of making any fans happy lately. (They even screwed with Overwatch team compositions for no reason whatsoever; they're in the business of solely pissing off fans) Of course, this is just a drop in the bucket compared to the apocalypse Blizzard is currently facing for it's other, much more serious, company failures, but perhaps this will serve as a material evidence that, should Blizzard be ground to dust by the coming storm, we won't have lost a lot for the Industry.

Merry Christmas; also, screw this whole year

Warning: No holiday cheer to be found here, just disappointment

Not really a fan of the season, but others are so I might as well come out and say 'Merry Christmas,' now can I just say that this has been the worst year ever. Yeah I know, not exactly a new take out of me, but I just really need an outlet and this is pretty much all I have available to me, so there it is. Now from the very first moment of this crappy year there has been every single possible kind of scare that it's feasible to have, oh and a pandemic thrown in there just to tap things off. General life has been difficult too, coming from a Caribbean family I understood exactly what it was like to be in the middle of a group of people who believe themselves patently too good not to still throw stupid parties in the middle of all this. The general public, who are already kinda standoffish over here anyway (being British) have become their true ornery selves in public. And the job market's a wasteland, but maybe I'm getting a bit too personal with that last one, there's just as much crap happening in the gaming world too. (And isn't that just the best? When my escapism needs an escapism!)

But where do you even start with the absolute mess that this year has been. And I mean that from the bottom of my heart. I mean the best gaming event that happened this year was probably the release of Demon Souls Remake. But that was PS5 so I can't really celebrate that one too hard. (There was also Ghost of Tsushima and FF7R but I don't have a PlayStation. Others can claim that victory.) I guess Doom Eternal was pretty tight, but from there things just seemed to go down hill. First there was the game that I highly anticipated for about an entire year, Resident Evil 3 Remake. Now I haven't really talked about this much because I wanted to enjoy as much of that game as there was to play, but there really wasn't all that much. The biggest problem with the original RE3 was the fact that it was essentially made from 80% recycled assets which really limited the scope of the game and resulted in a much smaller experience. The Remake didn't need to share that problem, and yet it did! The assets were new, some of the zombies were new, but the game was still unnecessarily truncated and sold for the same price as last year's Resident Evil 2! (The missed potential- It burns!)

Then there was the situation with Avengers the video game, and yeah- I pretty much saw straight through this game from the very get go- but gosh darn it I wanted to believe so bad! I've always been a huge fan of Marvel even before their recent spat of Movie success; I read the original Days of Future Past, I played the X-men Legends and Marvel Ultimate Alliance games; I was a Marvel fan. (I am a Marvel fan, I should say. The game wasn't that bad.) But somewhere along the way this game which should have been a bonafide Marvel swansong fell to the wayside and floundered. (Meanwhile Sony's Spiderman shot webs around Avengers and gloated their superiority.) Even having played the game myself I don't think is was quite worth the murdering it received from the community, I mean it didn't deserve it's price either, but for the £20 it's typically seen for around now I'd say it would be worth it. It's a little bit of fun. (If anyone actually played it anymore, which they kinda don't. Also I guess it's not optimized well either...)

Warcraft 3 Reforged- wait a minute, that whole thing happened this year? Wow, that was back in January... feels like a whole different world, doesn't it? Now to be fair, I didn't have the personal link towards this game that would make it really hit home, but I do consider myself somewhat in tune with the community so I understand the hurt it caused. The Original Warcraft 3 pretty much laid the groundworks for the archetypal community supported game. (Or at least got the ball rolling for Half Life to set the world of modding into motion.) It was a classic game, nurtured such creativity that a whole genre spawned out of it and prepared the scene for the Blizzard juggernaut that was WOW to rule the MMO landscape for the next decade. Thus it was heinous what was done to this game under the guise of 'making an upgrade', especially when considered alongside the rampant marketing lies and anti-community policies which were put into place. Why, if this was the way the gaming year started, imagine how sucky it would be if the year ended with a dark mirror of this exact situation?

And there we come to the cap off for this year, the Anakin Skywalker on Mustafar moment of 2020. Cyberpunk 2077 was bought to us after 7 years of development to break the spell that this abysmal year held over us, and yet it was seduced by the allure of quick profits and lie-driven marketing. They were supposed to redeem the industry; not damn them! Bring balance to gaming, not leave it in ruins! Have you heard the tale of CDPR's fall? It's not a story the Jedi would tell you... But in all seriousness, I can't think of a worse possible blow to the gaming world than to have the literal paladins of the Industry, CD Projeckt, (As in the whole company, not just the 'Red' developers) turn out to be liars and oathbreakers. It's like having everyone you love slowly stick a knife in your gut and twist it, only for the final person to be the one you trusted the most, like a kindly parent or a kid who shot your girlfriend that one time. (Huh, that metaphor got stuck somewhere between Final Fantasy XV and Game of Thrones...) Point is, we were lied to and the betrayal is still very fresh for some of us. (Well it's been less than a month so I guess that makes sense.)

'Coming out: When it's ready'. Can you believe that was the first thing we saw regarding this game all the way at the end of that reveal trailer all those years back? What a total crock. 'When it's ready' was like the rallying cry of CD Projeckt fans over the years. Whenever a AAA game drove itself off a cliff because it rolled off the production line with faulty breaks, you'd hear the discordant chorus of "Should have come out when it was ready, that's what CDPR are doing!". I was never part of that crowd, to be honest, but I did share that feeling of safety that everyone of that ilk did when they considered Cyberpunk. CDPR would get it right, they understand how to treat gamers right. And somewhere I'd like to think that's still true, though that part is struggling with the realist who tells me I'm coping from the shock right now. Like finding out your older sibling sells ketamine for a living in order to pay for those lavish presents he always gets you for Christmas. (Okay, that one wasn't even a reference; my imagination is just running wild; no more Metaphors. That was a simile. No more of them either.)

And you want to know what the most messed up part is? The thing which makes this burn so much worse than the other gaming screw ups this year? I still want to play the game, it still looks good; only I don't have the hardware to run it. I would have been fine if CDPR had just cancelled the current gen versions, I mean it would have hurt being denied access after waiting so long, but it would have been better than handing off this deformed abomination and calling it an appropriate port! I was dragged along on the lie that Cyberpunk was within my grasp, and it's one that seems all the more incredulous when you account for both the absolute state of the game and the original release date. Remember how that was slated for April? Before the Series X or PS5 were even formally announced? (You know, the two consoles on which this game actually consistently runs like it should?) What in gods name did the game look like then and how did anyone think it was nearing completion as long as they did? At the time I remember remarking about how the delay was clearly long overdue as evidenced by the sheer length of it, but this is insane! The game should have been delayed by a year at least! (Maybe then it might actually be 'ready')

Sure, though we've seen their apologies and heard the crocodile tears of the bigwigs telling us how "We just weren't paying enough attention"; what a load. "We totally forgot about the console versions until they launched, our bad!" Really? Well that's funny considering that two trailers actually released dedicated to showing off those versions of the game, (albeit, rather pointedly not on the base last gen consoles but their suped-up cousins) and the footage was rather curiously free of all the bugs which the game launched with. Do they mean to tell us that this clearly curated footage just happened to be completely bug free and run fine, so they thought the game ran fine too? Is that the reason why they denied console review codes to reviewers before the release of the game too? It wasn't just done in the knowledge that the PC version was both more stable and came with the inbuilt excuse of "Well, the bugginess is because you're trying max settings without the hardware to back it up." (And yes, they did try that.)

So they purposefully obfuscated the shoddy performance and shipped the game on every platform, why exactly? This is the point that doesn't compute to me; why not just delay the consoles release? Is it because deepdown CDPR know that no amount of patching is going to solve the fact that previous gens just don't have the processing power to run Cyberpunk? (I certainly hope that's not the case, but I'm losing all trust in CDPR's abilities recently. I'd like to think rightly so.) But again, why did CDPR need to sell broken software to half it's customers? I mean what is the point? Bluepoint didn't need to sell a crappier version of Demon Souls in order to make that a success, so why did Cyberpunk need to release on everything? It smells like a classic case of corporate greed and the desire to make 'all the money' even when it's a desire that leads you off a cliff.

And this time it absolutely has, because as much as it pains me to say; it seems the industry is turning Cyberpunk into an example. Likely due to it's hype and the high-profile nature of this blunder, everyone is trying to make it known that regardless of the overall quality of the product (Which, again, seems decent) this was unacceptable and it won't be stood for. Memes have mocked CDPR relentlessly, stock drops have cost them a cool billion, (They made back Cyberpunk 2077 costs in pre-orders, don't cry for them just yet) and now, shock of all shocks, Playstation just removed Cyberpunk from it's digital store. A week before Christmas. Because apparently they built up enough heat for a level 3 action. (Yakuza reference, anybody?) Now these blogs are written a week before debut, so it's highly likely that something more has transpired which I don't know yet, but dems the breaks for now. And you know what? I'm still angry. (Admittedly, the Playsation store thing does take a lot of that anger off. There's a kick to the nuts I wish upon no game company) This should never have happened in the first place, and CDPR, more than anyone else, should have set the example that a rushed game is immediately bad whilst a delayed game is eventually good. (That's Shigeru Miyamoto, man; learn from the king himself!) 

Ownership of software

You think you own this? No you don't.

As far as 'hot button' issues go, I'd like to think that this one takes some sort of precedent in the world of gaming at least. (There may be a slightly more pertinent 'hot button' on the world stage, but I wouldn't know. I don't go outside.) Although this is the sort of issue that, once raised, is quite likely to have people give you that look, you know the one; the look that quietly says, "You're being a paranoid weirdo again!" (Hmm? Only I get that look regularly? Oh...) But my patriotic British pessimism does taint my every thought so I cannot help but take a critical look at the direction the industry is heading when it comes to the ownership of software, specifically the ownership of games. (Although there's also a bit more to it than just that.)

If you've never looked into this before, you'll likely think that buying a game is similar to buying a movie. You access the shop, buy a copy of the movie and thus are free to indulge in perpetuity. And in truth that is exactly how it is, although I fear you may be slightly ignorant of the specifics of such a transaction. You see, when you purchase a movie you are actually acquiring a licence to watch that movie and signing a contract to do so. This contract comes equipped with a bevy of specific instructions that are meaningless to the everyday consumer but protect the distributor should someone decide to go burning and reselling their copy of this film; as that action would essentially be a breach of contract. With the world of gaming things are very much the same with a slight extra stipulation that video games are becoming increasingly online, to the point where some companies reserve the right to withdraw service of their title to you whenever them damn well feel like it. Of course, this is an idle clause which has never been significantly enacted, but it's existence is enough to set folk like me worrying.

Now in an ideal world someone would buy a game and have access to it until death, and that does seem like the model that a lot of companies wish to follow, but there are a few who like to test that relationship just a little. Most notably is, surprise surprise, EA who have at least once in their history used their position of superiority to withdraw their entire library of games from an individual. Now of course there was some special factors involved in this situation; namely the fact that EA own their own storefront and launcher through which their games are distributed, but this could theoretically be invoked by any company out there. Now I can't recall exactly what this specific user did to receive such a harsh punishment from EA but that doesn't even really matter, the point is that goods and services that have been paid for can be in risk of getting revoked at the sole discretion of the distributor at any time. And this is something that we should all be aware of, heck for some games we have to sign a contract which stipulates as such for the privilege to access that game in the first place.

Another situation in which software ownership laws are often invoked by games companies is in any situation involving mods. Now mods, as you likely know, are modifications to the base of any game that can do anything from adding new content, blocking old content, fixing bugs, or remodelling existing assets. Sometimes, such as with Bethesda games, this practice is almost entirely encouraged by the developer as they enjoy the creativity that goes into it and realise that it helps to bolster the community. Other times, however, the developers can be less than receptive such as was the case with Rockstar and their GTA games. You might not remember this, but in the early days of GTA V on the PC, Rockstar became notorious for hunting down mods for their game even on single player specific modes. They exploited their user agreement to bully and threaten mod developers and even today it's difficult to figure out why. It's not as though Rockstar had any plans for single player GTA, so the whole scenario is as confusing in hindsight as it was in the moment. But it was these iffy software ownership laws that paved the way for them to do that.

All of this has come to mind for me again in the wake of the rise of game streaming. Google Stadia specifically. That tech comes with the premise of running all of the game files in the background and streaming the results directly to one's device allowing for them to play games far beyond such systems' capabilities. Unfortunately this means that people who take part have none of the game files on their systems which means if something were to happen to the people who run the service like, for example, them shutting down a year into business because nobody's playing it, then players will be left potless. As far as the conversation goes regarding 'software ownership' I think that Stadia is one of the extremes that we should all be paying attention to. When we entrust a third party for literally all of the relevant files then we have given up the majority of control over what we play to an unknown party and that's just a perfect recipe for disaster.

To a much lesser, but still pertinent degree, I feel like this conversation touches on the way we should look at modding in the future too. That GTA example highlights a certain over-cautionary tone that a lot of developers take towards this concept, but what about those who straight up attempt to corral their audiences for financial gain? Such was the situation with Blizzard's 'Warcraft 3: Reforged' wherein their updated user agreement meant that any content developed through their custom tools was solely owned by Blizzard and not the creator. Those who made custom games were not due recompense for having their work appropriated, should Blizzard see fit, or even a mention of their work to inspire any of Blizzard's ideas. (As is indicated by the 'waiving of moral rights') Now, this is a rather transparent way to prevent a similar situation as to what happened with the original 'Warcraft 3' wherein that game's custom tools were used to create a popular custom game mode known as 'Defence of the Ancients' which then evolved into a standalone game called 'Defence of the Ancients 2'. (Otherwise known as the smash hit genre-creator; DOTA 2.) Say what you will about "protecting intellectual property" but that makes for a sobering example when it comes to how little the consumer actually owns their games and the things they do in said games.

And if you think that you may be safe from this just because you play on a console, or buy all your games from Steam, think again. Every single disc game nowadays has a customary install period that requires at least some the content to be installed online, meaning that somewhere along the way you need the permission of the publisher in order to install a game. Steam games will, whenever possible, run games directly through their client, meaning that you'll require their permission at some point in order to play your games. (Unless you plan to play everything offline forever.) Now, I know all of this reads like the delusions of an incredibly paranoid gentleman, (To which I thank you. No one ever calls me a 'gentleman.') but I feel disquiet in the knowledge that all it takes is for one link in that chain to be broken for us to be denied access to the software that we paid for, and I worry that in the future this divide between what we think we own and what we actually do is only going to expand.

When you look at the modern film watching audience you'll note that the vast majority of it is taken up by folk who exclusively watch Netflix or some other streaming service. What they can watch is, as such, decided by the whim of whatever movies or shows that these services can get ahold of. Should gaming move into a similar situation, as services like Stadia seem adamant that we do, why wouldn't the exact same content accessibility scenario play out? Now I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a gaming ecosystem where what I can play is limited by whatever the populace seems most interested in, encouraging their service provider to secure the appropriate rights, cause I like a whole bunch of weird crap that no one else is probably playing. Right now I'm playing a long game of 'Stellaris', whilst cutting that up with bouts of 'Divinity Dragon Commander', and 'Star Wars Empire at War', with odd sessions of the 2015 remaster of the 2002 'Resident Evil remake', and back-and-forths between 'Oddworld: New 'N' Tasty' and 'Oddworld: Abe's Odyssey'. My taste is weird and eclectic and I love it for being so, and thus I lament for the day where my taste becomes forcibly limited due to software ownership conundrums. 

Reforged Tournaments

Putting the horse before the cart again, Blizzard?

Have a mentioned how I liked RTS' before? With all of these blogs it gets hard to pin down the little personal snippets that I have already shared, so I'll just drop that under the impression that I haven't before. But don't get me wrong, just as with any tactical game I'm absolutely terrible at the genre myself. I just can't get to grips with strategic match-ups and inevitably just start flooding my opposition with bodies until I win. A sound enough strat to get me through most RTS campaigns, (Except 'Army Men RTS', strangely) but I doubt it would fly against the top tournament professionals of the time. I'd imagine that's part of the reason why I will never join the Warcraft 3 Reforged tournaments, although after the mess of a show they had recently, it might be worth attending just to watch the fireworks. (Come on, that was a good segue-way!)

If I were the folk over at Blizzard's community department and thus responsible for cleaning up the mess that the development team left the community in, I would probably be handling things the exact same way they were. Basically, they've decided to ignore all the burning fires around them and continue on as though everything is business as usual. "Fans are upset about the fact that the new netcode completely destroys all the infrastructure of the old game? Well we'll just hold our ground and start a tournament with the new systems, let everyone see how good they are!" It makes absolute sense as far as I'm concerned, even if the majority of the community want nothing to do with you it behoves you to deliver to those who still do.

That is the reason why, despite everything that Blizzard messed up and wantonly lied about, I still held some begrudging respect for their conduct. (Or at least the conduct of those left holding the bag.) They weren't about to abandon this game just because the going got tough, and that's something I admire. (Even is this is a remaster that practically ruined an entire decades old community.) But Blizzard some how can never stop their spiral into vilification and even when trying to do something good for the community, through a live Warcraft tournament, their own ineptitude managed to screw everything up.

Now before I get into ripping this situation I feel the need to make something clear, purely because I'm not sure that I do often enough. Blizzard is a huge company with many different departments working on several different aspects of the game, so when something goes this spectacularly badly it isn't necessarily the fault of those most visible. The whole misleading marketing might have very well been an order from Activision to clamp down on communication for fear of hurting sales, and this story very much shows the Blizzard community managing team taking the brunt for the failings of the development team. (And that's never fun.) Although, do remember that all these people do fall under the Blizzard banner and in that environment the failures, as well as the successes, are shared.

Imagine the scene: You've signed up to be members of the first big tournament for 'Warcraft 3 Reforged', you're probably incredibly excited about Blizzard reviving the competitive scene for this title in such a big way and you're eager to start cutting through all the negativity that this title has accrued. What do you get for your endless optimism? A big fat disconnect right in the middle of your play session! If you don't remember, one of the more contentious aspects of the 'Reforged' controversy was the way in which this new title completely erased the online infrastructure that the old 2002 game had been using and replaced it with their own. Now fundamentally this meant that all the content released that had utilised appropriated assets could not be ported over (for copyright reasons) and that content creators had to sign a creatively stifling contract in order to use the custom tools. (But that's a subject for another blog.) In the immediate, however, this new online infrastructure was incredibly shoddy and built a reputation for crashing mid-match. Now obviously this was hardly the biggest issue with 'Reforged' as such issues could be theoretically fixed, but one would have thought the team would have done that before going ahead and hosting a tournament. (Seems I know nothing.)

The tournament was practically besieged with regular disconnects that forced many matches to be restarted. Seems the kinks of the online engine had not been exaggerated by a frustrated community, like some had suggested, and were actually bad enough to the point where I'm surprised that this was the released build of the game. Remember that these folk were playing in the same room as each other and still disconnecting; there's no other reason for that than fundamentally poor infrastructure. But perhaps the most notorious of the disconnects happened during one of the biggest matches of the event; that of Swedish player ThorZain against a Korean player named Moon. Now, Moon is widely considered to be one of the best RTS players in the world, so when ThorZain started showing potential as challenger in their best-out-of-three bout, things began to get interesting. Long story short, their match suffered from two disconnects in a short time, both time when it looked like Thor was getting the upperhand. (According to people who know more about RTS' then I do, personally I had no idea who was looking better.) Folks are now saying that the forced restarts allowed Moon to learn from the strategy and beat Thor in the third match-up, leading to what some would call an unfair win.

Whatever your position on the 'fairness' of it all, such a situation undoubtedly casts a shadow upon the whole tournament that will stay in the community's minds. Remember that 'For Honor' Tournament a couple years back that was decided due to an animation glitch that allowed one player to bypass through another's block? That little incident was enough to entirely kill all the competitive hype for that game and is arguably one of the reasons why that game in now almost completely dead. (Which sucks cause I really liked it.) Now I wouldn't say this will have as drastic of a reaction, it's impossible to say, but when half of the active community of your game is claiming that the poor mechanics of the title itself meddled with the results of the competition, that's going to harm your overall optics for future events.

After significant troubles the event organisers ended up switching back to 'Warcraft 3 original' graphics in the settings menu and that cleared up the crashes, (For some inexplicable reason.) and isn't that just the perfect irony to cap off this situation? Blizzard have managed to pull a Bethesda in despoiling their own brand in everything from high quality game creation to consumer friendly practises and now even event organising, they haven't got much reputation left at this point. The question is whether all of this negativity has the legs to last until the launch of Blizzard's next big title; Overwatch 2. (Which is already garnering it's own stable-full of backlash due to claims of it being a copy-past cash grab.) For their part, I hope Blizzard can get their act together long before that comes as Overwatch is actually a brand I'm somewhat invested in. (I used to spend a lot of nights jamming to some OW.) What I'm basically saying is; please come back to the way you used to be, Blizzard; we all miss you!

The Ballad of Blizzard

(feat. Gay Tony)

Blizzard have had a tough month, heck a tough year, and I'm not yet sure how far this hole is gonna get dug. Things started getting rough for the legendary company all the way back in 2018 with the announcement of 'Diablo Immortal' (Which still isn't out yet) and the situation seems to have only progressively worsened since then. This seems to be the way of once beloved studios like Bungie, Ubisoft, Bioware and Bethesda but somehow it seemed to hurt the public even more so when Blizzard turned to the corporate side. They were supposed to be the chosen ones. They were meant to bring balance to gaming, not leave it ruins. And this coming storm of public dissent was pushed to tipping point with the release, and butchering, of Blizzard's classic title; Warcraft 3.

One of the biggest problems with Warcraft 3 is the one issue that Blizzard can never solve for it's audience, and that is the way that they gutted the online infrastructure of the original title and replaced it with the new one. It's an incredibly transparent and cynical way to encourage everyone to hop to your new release whereupon players are subject to their meticulously penned litigation. These are the terms and conditions which prohibit the use of borrowed assets, (killing some of the most beloved mods), and forces all custom game creators to relinquish monetary and moral rights for anything they create for no other reason than to allow Blizzard full creative control the next time someone makes a 'DOTA' using their tools. (Real classy, Blizzard)

This in particular was seen as an active attack aimed at the creative community of Warcraft and they have responded in kind. If Blizzard were so eager to take ownership of everything that their fans had made, than those same fans would put their efforts to putting together the kinds of games that Blizzard really don't want on their resume. For the past week there have been a whole slew of custom Warcraft 3 games that feature very... edgy objectives. The kind of games that I don't even feel comfortable naming on this blog, and the kind that I'm sure Blizzard are even more uncomfortable to see circling around their community. It's a very crass and crude way of protesting against oppressive rules but I'd be lying if I said that I didn't find it to be particularly amusing. This sort of toxicity (Yes, I hate that word too) that is bubbling around the community today is entirely Blizzard's fault and it's up to them to try to mend that wound. (If they can even be bothered.)

But that isn't the only way that the community have been lashing out against their former heroes, and this other method is a lot more family friendly. You see, another big point of contention amidst the fans is the way that the advertisements and marketing for 'Warcraft 3: Reforged' straight-up lied about the content the game would hold. There were promises of cinematic cut scenes, improved story elements and improved graphics, but only that last bullet-point was adhered to and in such a way that the improvements aren't even noticeable in active play. These misleading marketing points lasted on their official 'Warcraft 3: Reforged' website all the way up to, and beyond, the full launch, so past the point where fans could prove beyond a doubt that the cinematic cutscenes trailer (which was embedded on the website) is entirely false.

Incensed and aggrieved, it was only a matter of time before Warcraft fans got together to pull of some sort of grand gesture to Blizzard and, short of a lawsuit, a parody website seemed like the best idea. The 'Warcraft 3: Refunded' website shamelessly mimicked the official site and systematically tore down all of the marketing falsehoods with prejudice, ensuring that anyone who happened upon this page looking for information would leave knowing exactly what kind of trick Blizzard was trying to pull. This method even managed to get a reaction from Blizzard as, if you check today, you can find that they have removed their embedded video teasing the 'cinematic cutscenes' and are trying to pretend that it never happened. (It's a good thing, then, that the internet is known for forgetting things.)

Finally there was the big anti-consumer move where Blizzard attempted to kill any attempts at getting a refund despite failing to live up to promises. They threw up roadblocks around those who attempted to ask for a refund, ran appeals around in circles with particularly condescending arguments and straight up banned anyone on the official forums who advised folk on how to get around their draconian systems. In the end, however, the backlash was too virulent and Blizzard were forced to concede defeat. Refunds are now being automatically issued and fans are taking full advantage of this, most basic of boons.

With all this vitriol churning around the community, you would have thought it would absolutely behove Blizzard to get ahead of everything with a carefully measured response on the matter, and that is exactly what they did not too long ago. Although if you were looking for a statement in which they owned their mistakes and committed to improvements, you may be a little disappointed. Instead, Blizzard gave the old "I'm sorry that you're upset" argument whilst playing up the absolutely insane line that "We stand by the quality of our games". Yep, Blizzard stands by the quality of their poor remake with crappy online infrastructure, oppressive terms and conditioning and obsolete models that were outsourced anyway. This is the hill the Blizzard wants to die on. (Well, okay then.) Even J. Allen Brack, Mr CEO himself, echoed a similar sentiment in an earnings call, proving that Blizzard have absolutely no shame in the modern age.

I'd imagine for some it must be heartbreaking to see an institution like Blizzard trip themselves up time and time again, but the rest of us saw this coming the second that their board shook blood-covered hands with Activision. I see this as proof that you can't share the same table with the devil without picking up some of his dining habits and hope this is warning to all those who still look at EA's subsidiaries and say "Well you can still trust 'insert company here', EA won't ever change them." I suspect that the Blizzard debacle is still yet to reach it's zenith and that we'll really get an idea of where that is with the launch of Overwatch 2 later this year. Finger crossed that I'm wrong, I still actually kinda like that game.

Here comes the Blizzard of our miscontent

Living long enough to become the villain...

Now that's a bit more like it. After coming across a whole generation of remakes and remasters that threatened to change my mind on the prospect of revisiting past projects, there's finally one to break that dangerous illusion before it set. On one hand, it's incredibly lazy and speaks to a certain lack of creativity on the part of the imaginers who spearhead these projects, but on the otherhand if you can take something great and make it even better, then why wouldn't you? (Heck, if this kept up I might have even forced myself to give those new Disney movies a shot.) Thankfully, one burning turd in the pile has come crashing at our feet to remind us all that good remakes are the exception, not the rule, and that far too often their conception is drawn by corporate greed and likely a little active disdain for an audience always asking for the envelope to be pushed.

So if you've spent anytime around the internet gaming community forums in the past week, you'd have been made aware of the fact that Blizzard is trending in the news once again, and it hasn't even been 6 months since the whole 'Chinese toadies' debacle. Do you remember during the Blizzcon right after that whole mess, when Blizzard Entertainment's President, J. Allen Brack, descended from his ivory tower to let everyone know an important message; "We're sorry!". J, (Who's first name I literally cannot find after a 3 minute google search) relayed how Blizzard had let the community and themselves down, but it would be okay because they were committing to making things right from here on in. "We will do better going forward," the man promised with all the sincerity of the Monkey and the Buzzard "But our actions are going to matter more than any words". Why, how very true Bracky-boy, you can make all the crocodile tears that you want but until we see a marked improvement from your office and the way you do business, ain't no one sane going to be cozying up to you guys anytime soon. That was a self imposed test that Blizzard ultimately failed with their very next game release, the remake of 'Warcraft 3: Reign of Choas': 'Warcraft 3: Reforged'.

For the uninitiated, Warcraft 3 is the last real-time strategy title out of the Warcraft franchise and, incidentally, one of the most influential video games ever made. This title defined RTS for many games going forward, established the popularity of a brand that would then go on to found the biggest MMO of all time: 'World of Warcraft, and built the archetype for a dedicated & creative modding community. Skyrim may boast the biggest modding community of all time, (or at least it did at one point, not sure now) but 'Warcraft 3' likely had the most ambitious. 'Reign of Choas' was a bastion for custom games that completely rewrote the rules of play, total conversion mods that were send-ups to franchises like DBZ and loving attempts touch-ups of the UI interface. (Which I'm told was garbage. I never played the game so I'll just have to take their word for it.) In fact, one such custom game for Warcraft proved so popular that is spawned a little spin-off title called 'Defence of the Ancients 2'. That's right, 'DOTA 2' and by transitive property, 'League of Legends' and the entire MOBA genre, own their entire existence to 'Warcraft 3: Reforged' and it's passionate community of minds. (So you can blame old-school Blizzard next time you see that same god-damn LOL advert by Nevercake. "Take that, rich guy, go buy an island somewhere and afford stuff; I'm trying to play League here with my many friends, who exist!")

It was with some fanfare then, that Blizzard announced back in 2018 how they planned to completely remake Warcraft 3 from the groundup in 'Warcraft 3: Reforged'. (And it was only 'some' fanfare, considering that was the same year that they announced 'Diablo: Immortal'. That particular travesty seemed to suck a lot of the air out of the room.) This was heralded with a long list of promises that was sure to set fan's hearts a-racing; there would be a remodeled UI, various narrative tweaks to bring the storyline in line with WoW's lore and, most exciting of all, brand new cinematic cutscenes for the various campaigns. These cutscenes were the star of their trailer, showcasing a decently rendered back and forth between pre-Lich Arthas and pre-dead Uther. Whilst this animation wasn't anywhere as good as Blizzard's irregular expansion announcement vids, (Which makes sense. Those probably take a couple of years to put together each.) it was still a grand step-up from the original game and had fans pumped for what other improvements the remake might have. Promise after promise leaked from Blizzard's chalice and the thirsty masses drank it up, never even tasting the healthy heap of arsenic mixed in.

But in the words of every adulterer ever; Promises are made to be broken, and so one could have guessed that Blizzard would break theirs, However, I don't think anyone could have imagined the extent to which this would reach. It started innocently enough, with the team sending corrections to news outlets that were calling this a 'remake'. Whilst that label was accurate to some degree, this title would have more in common with a 'remaster' with updated models, features and content, but the same basic beloved experience behind it all. Fair enough, it was good of them to clear it up. Then came a straight up walk-back. This one was, again, quietly announced by Blizzard to the necessary news outlets, and was concerning the narrative tweaks that fans were dubious about. They wouldn't be going through with it, just bringing everyone the same great story as before. It was around about this time that they began detailing how they wanted this game to feel like the original as much as possible because that was already such a strong foundation. Strong words, team. Speechcraft 100.

So some folk who didn't go the distance of setting up a Google alert for this title might be a little disappointed when the release date came, not everything was as promised. But again. Blizzard's incompetence overshadowed even the most pessimistic predictions. Once the game launched it became clear, not much love and attention had really gone towards this title. The biggest issue, off the bat, was the gutting of the online features that made the original title so enduring. There were no profiles, clans, competitive play or even custom games at launch due to a brand new online infrastructure that was established for this title. (A seemingly incomplete infrastructure.) Although, even folk who prefer the single player may have found themselves disappointed. The UI was unchanged, the updated visuals are practically unnoticeable unless you zoom into the character models (which no one does in an RTS) and do you remember those cinematic cutscenes? You know, the ones that Blizzard sold this concept on the back off? Those ones that are still up on their YouTube channel and which are linked on their official website promoting this game? Gone. Completely no-existent in this title.

There are a bevy of bugs and other missing features that afflict this title, but the only other big change in this game was Blizzard's approach to custom content. Firstly, they strictly laid out their rules for using custom assets on their map creator, which prohibits some of the best overhauls for the game from being ported to the new title, and they specifically changed their privacy notice to future-proof their game. Eagle eyed readers noted how Blizzard's new rules meant that anything created within their game would be the sole property of Blizzard, and fans had to waive away their moral rights in order to get access to these tools. That means that Blizzard could take ownership of anything cool built using their engine and they wouldn't be obligated to pay the original maker so much as a credit. (Way to treat the community that made your game so big, guys! what's the encore? You going to go around kicking over strollers?) All of this is done, rather transparently, to avoid another situation like DOTA 2 arising, which cost Blizzard millions, perhaps even billions, in potential revenue. (Just nipping all creativity right in the bud, hey guys?) 

And the icing ontop of all of this? The updated online infrastructure which rips away so many features, eliminates custom games (for now, at least) and enforces draconic copyright measures, has been implemented across the board. Meaning that all these systems aren't just present on 'Warcraft 3: Reforged', but on the original 'Warcraft 3' as well. All those 18 years worth of custom community content that kept this title alive, gone overnight, sacrificed to the Blizzard corporate puppet with Activision playing with the stings, in a theatre showing exclusively to the Chinese government. Blizzard haven't just ruined the legacy of one of their classic games, but the classic game itself. (Even EA couldn't manage that with Battlefront 2.)

So Warcraft fans were sold a lie, kicked in the nuts and left to fester, what's their next course of action? Well, get a refund of course! There's only the lingering problem that might make that difficult; and that would be Blizzard's particularly unfriendly refund policy. (Yep, the hole gets deeper.) In Blizzard's eyes, the second someone opens their software the company is completely relieved of all refund-responsibilities and will not cede to negotiations on that matter. This was something that was heavily put to the test in the wake of Reforged's release, as folk battled against Blizzard's systems to get their money back. Things got so messed up, that people on the official Blizzard forums were giving fellow consumers guides on how to force a refund out of Blizzard. Although these samaritans were then promptly banned for their troubles. (Because Blizzard are bringing their pneumatic digger for this hole.)

And that's where things currently are with Blizzard's latest disaster. Fans have review bombed this title's Metacritic to a 0.7 consumer score as of the writing of this blog. (which is only bottomed by 'Day One: Gary's incident'.) The bastions of consumer friendliness that once was has been transformed by Frostmourne and now stand as a lifeless shell of their former selves. (Get it? I replaced 'Activision' with Frostmourne- making it into a Warcraft 3 reference... well, I thought it was funny.) J. Allen Brack has straight up proved that his promises don't mean jack and now it's up to the audience to decided if enough-is-enough or if they have to wait for the next disaster to hit their wallets before they do something. Do they need to wait until Blizzard resell Overwatch to us and call it a new game? Or until Diablo 4 launches as a predictable buggy mess? When will the final shoe drop off this hydra-esque monstrosity and what exactly are the consumers ready to do about it? I guess this coming month will tell.