![Warcraft_-_Orcs_%26_Humans_Coverart[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/E40g9bK.png "Warcraft_-_Orcs_%26_Humans_Coverart[1].png")
Are Warcraft I+II worth playing for the story?
No video game is worth playing for the story. If you want a good story read a fucking book, or at the minimum the transcript to a video game.
It'll save you hours and have the exact same impact.
>>3198986
Asking because I want to get into the Warcraft lore and never played anything before 3, and that had great story and lore.
Wanted to know if it's anywhere near the same quality.
>>3198978
>Are Warcraft I+II worth playing for the story?
Warcraft 2's manual is worth reading for the story.
>>3199015
So the games don't get the same amount of story exposition as the third one?
>>3199021
I played the hell out of 2 and the answer is a resounding no. What you get is some cool pre-rendered cut-scenes here and there before/after the missions.
On some missions you get a named hero unit who has a tiny amount more HP than regular units and a different color and definitely no story cut-scenes (just units moving along a scripted path at the beginning sometimes and that's it IIRC). I don't think the heroes are even individually voiced but it's been a long time, someone else might remember it better.
You can see where it all began but if you go from 3 to 2 for the story, you'll be left thinking "Is that it?". W2 is like the embryo, Starcraft is a lot closer to 3's level of exposition DURING gameplay.
>>3199039
Guess I'll read up on the synopsis and maybe watch the cutscenes on youtube, thanks.
>>3198992
Warcraft 2 doesn't have the kind of storytelling that Warcraft 3 has, but it certainly has its own charm.
If you've been following the series then playing Warcraft 2 might feel a bit like the lore-equivalent of looking at an old photo album of your ancestors 100 years ago. It's interesting in its own way.
Plus it's a great game with neat cartoony 2D graphics and extremely good music.
Isn't a lot of WCII's story/backstory explained in the manual? It has been quite some time since I looked at the manual, so I don't really remember.
The art style is much more appealing than III.
>>3199067
There's a metric shitton of stuff in there. Amazing read.
There's the backstory segment with the Orcs before they came through the Dark Portal, a lot of named ones so you know who did what. At the end of that it felt they'd planted seeds for them to explore in future games (most of which I think they jettisoned though). The art style really is great too.
There's also the part where they detail every single Human and Orc faction rather concisely which helped a lot when I was playing it. They're all color-coded so when you see Azeroth or Lordaeron or Alterac, you know who they are and what they're up to.
>>3199067
That's because 3 was a shit tier game overall. 2 was fucking awesome!
Also, the manual for Diablo had some epic narrative in it.
Literally half of the story mode is made obsolete by the other half in both games.
If you're purely interested in story...
(ignore the philosophy book; it's not my photo)
>>3198978
The story of 1 has been retconned, 2 has been distorted, to fit in WoW.
If anything, play them because they're good games
>>3199190
I'm not sure if I can call WC1 a good game. It's an important piece of history but it's very archaic.
The controls are complicated, game design has a lot of rough edges like roads or the restriction to four units per group and the AI (both for units and opponents) is a joke.
You have to micro manage everything if you want to get anywhere until you can spam greater summons.
WC2 made things a lot more comfortable, particularly with the BNE.
>>3199039
Beyond the Dark Portal should be mentioned as the link between WC2 and SC1. It made heroes far more important than the ones in the basic game.
>>3199363
>Beyond the Dark Portal should be mentioned as the link between WC2 and SC1. It made heroes far more important than the ones in the basic game.
You don't know how much I wanted to buy the exp pack but I could never find it in stores. It's good to know they improved on that.
>>3199183
Do those sum up the story of the games?
That would indeed be what I'm looking for.
>>3199363
>The controls are complicated
keyboard. The ui is just for decoration
>roads
naive, but it looked pretty
>restriction to four units per group
they were learning, and it beats 1 units per group
>AI
multiplayer. In RTSes, with very few exceptions, it's best to treat the single player campaign as a very lengthy tutorial. Multiplayer is the meat of the game
>You have to micro manage everything
Welcome to the world of RTS. Not much S in there, but they're called that anyway
>WC2 made things a lot more comfortable
I don't think "comfort" is a good yard stick for games
I'm far from a Warcraft fan, but I think you're being a bit unfair to the game, blaming it for being an evolutional step in the RTS genre. It may have been primitive, but within its primitive level it was consistent, and playable to the best knowledge and practice of developers and players alike. It's certainly worth the time to learn a bit how things came together. Whether one actually pulls through and then plays both campaigns to their end, is a different question altogether
>>3199397
>>keyboard. The ui is just for decoration
Of course the keyboard but you need an extra element for simple commands.
Like you can simply drag a rectangle to select multiple units, you have to hold CTR. There's no context based commands like in 2 where the unit will move, attack or whatever with a right click.
Anybody interested in the history of RTS should play it but not somebody just looking for some quick fun.
>>3199045
He's kind of right you know. Video games are supposed to be games not interactive movies or "deep" stories.
>>3198986
What is it with the gaming boards and hating game story lines?
They let you play as DEATHWING in orc campaing of warcraft2:beyond dark portal
>>3200095
>DEATHWING
Sounds like a big guy
>>3200059
You don't need to be shitty and come into a video game board and say that, though.
>>3198986
Realms of the Haunting would like a word with you
literally written by a horror writer and story-boarded, with FMV scenes up the wazoo
>>3198986
No movie is ever worth watching for the story. If you want a good story read a fucking book.
No comic is ever worth reading for the visuals. If you want visuals go look at a fucking panting.
No porn is ever worth watching for sexual arousal. If you want sexual arousal, go fuck a real person.
Also: No video game is worth playing for the story, visuals, mood, music, katharsis, discovery, adrenaline. All those things will be better experienced by living. The last good video game was Pong, everything after that was shit.
Pic related, it's crib where me and my homies hang out.TLDR: You might the most retarded person I have met in my life.
>>3200635
>see warcraft 2 thread back on page 1
>read latest post
>mfw
>>3200114
Douglas Adams and Clive Barker - both well known novelists - have also written couple games, but I guess that doesn't count either?
>>3200114
>>3200646
how does the writer responsible affect the statement? Novelists can work on games, just like painters or musicians or even programmers can work on games. Still, a game is a distinct form of entertainment, interactive. Stories aren't. If you want a story, there are plenty of ways to deliver one, a game being one of the worst. Writing for a game requires a different skill set than writing for a novel, a different form of writing, so it's new ground for these three (and many other novelists) anyway
>>3199384
well yes and no. I cant say for sure but those books cover things in the lore.
if you want a synopsis of the games your best bet is to read a wiki page or wait for the warcraft chronicle books to finish publishing. Right now volume 1 is out and it covers basically the biblical book of Genesis ch.1 and 2. and ends the last page to just before the dark portal opens for WC1.
The lore of both games was already retconed. I think the last canon is the novels
>>3200671
>The lore of both games was already retconed
somewhat. I am not too interested in Warcraft lore, but I played World of Warcraft a couple years ago. Some key locations from battles in Warcraft 2, and even Warcraft 1, have been put into the game, and referenced. Many details have been altered/retconned, but World of Warcraft does acknowledge that something like Warcraft 1 and 2 existed.
Frankly, (re)visiting these locations, and reading about the battles fought there, has been one of my biggest joys playing World of Warcraft
>>3200679
>reading about the battles fought there
in in-game books and libraries, I should add. I don't do wikis or novels
>>3200635
>No porn is ever worth watching for sexual arousal. If you want sexual arousal, go fuck a real person.
3Dfag spotted.
>>3200691
Forgot to add, it was only mentioned in the WC2 manual and it should still be in the official map.
>>3200691
WC2 lacked dungeon missions.
>>3200719
Im tired so my writing sux but I meant if it's explorable in WoW, do they do it justice or was it raped?
>>3198978
Both games have you playing one faction or the other. Start with Tides of Darkness and then the expansion. Made you think more than WC3. Had ships and oil as a resource! I thought it added a nice level of depth to your strategy.
>>3198986
Never played Myth I guess?
>>3200725
In WC2, there's a mission where you kill Gul'dan and Cho'gall in a volcano, and that volcano is supposed to represent the tomb.
In WC3 I'm pretty sure you spend a bunch of time inside it when Maiev is chasing Illidan who's after the Eye of Sargeras.
So far I don't think it's in WoW, which makes sense since the last you see of it in WC3 is Illidan causing it to collapse and sink.
They're worth playing for the soundtrack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGl4slGxY8U
Want a good Blizzard story? Play Starcraft and Brood Wars.
Pretend Starcraft 2 never happened. The Starraft story is forever ruined because of SC2.
>>3202975
How bad is the story of SC2?
>>3200689
That was sarcasm, anon.
>>3203003
[Spoiler]Kerrigan was never evil because she was always under control of Xelnaga but she's also the hero of the universe prophecy to save the universe and kill evil Xelnaga. Which she does. Also she turns back into a human at the end and her and Raynor get back together and run away never to be seen again.
>>3203192
Holy shit, I want to kill myself now. Starcraft and Broodwar I consider to be some of the best games in existence for their story alone. I still play Broodwar online to this day.
Thanks for the spoilers, I will never buy SC2 lol, and I was actually going to soon.
>>3198978
At the time they came they were great, but nowadays you'll waste your time, outdated mechanics and annoying gameplay that will make you drop the game in a matter of hours at most.
I tried to play WII for the nostalgic value and I couldn't get through the first campaigns
>>3203192
>Raynor prefers human Kerrigan to the delicious infested version
Homo
>>3203245
It's a fine example of a game which is a fine piece of history but didn't age well
>>3203245
>I couldn't get through the first campaigns
why?
>>3203252
I got bored and annoyed by the controls
>>3203254
again, why? What about them bothered you? What bored you?
>>3203192
There used to be a very old GameFAQs meme which became a meme precisely because it was the dumbest prediction of what the plotline of Starcraft 2 would be. Like "no one would ever speculate that this is how it would turn out unless they were being completely facetious" level of silly
And then Metzen actually went and did it.
Sort of off topic but have any of you played Tzar Burden of the Crown? Just asking if you think that game holds up as well as WarCraft.
>Age of Empires still feels fresh
>Warcrafts 1-2 are too clunky and limited
>Starcraft is a weird case where the game was good in part BECAUSE of its clunkiness and the complex meta that it fostered
How good is WC3 doing these days? I haven't played since years ago, but for me it was the one truly timeless Blizzard game.
>>3200635
Underrated post
>>3200654
I dont think so, if you play the whole franchise you may encouter some old characters in e.g. WoW, you know from wc2/3 or other way round, which was always cool for me(like rexxar in desolace).
You cal also read the wiki for more loreinformation.
This thread is trash.
"Warcraft 1 and 2 haven't aged well because they don't control like modern games"
It's almost like they're 25 year old DOS games or something.
Why are you people on /vr/?
>>3205295
>haven't aged well
Said nobody.
>>3205295
Oh boy, the autists have arrived. There goes the thread.
>>3198978
Honestly no
The gameplay feels really stilted compared to Starcraft. I played WC, 2 and even had Battle.Net Edition. Loved them all and going back from Starcraft was pretty jarring even after only a few months. Even small stuff like unit selection, being able to que building new units, UI improvements, etc add up to make playing WC2 kind of annoying.
Also both factions being identical outside of 4 spells and 1 archer upgrade is really shit.
>>3198978
The story was pretty simple. Orcs invaded the human world and them they fought back. It's cool to see where characters like Zul'Jin come from. I actually enjoy the demonic influenced orcs more in war2 than this whole "we're not really evil" orc version they made on war3.
The truth is warcraft wanted to be a licensed game for the warhammer universe but it didn't happen.
What I like is the graphics. Drawn sprites have such a charm no 3d models with ragdoll will ever achieve. Dead ogres are so cute.
>>3206282
>Drawn sprites have such a charm no 3d models
Wasn't WC2 pre-rendered?
>>3206293
What do you mean, the cutscenes?
I probably talked shit since I'm not into technical aspects and just assumed it was as I thought.
>>3206308
The sprites as well, think Donkey Kong Country.
It was more effective to design them as 3D models and then render the animation than to draw things by hand.
Nowadays computing power has reached the point that it's easier to calculate everything in real time.
>>3206293
Starcraft used pre rendered 3d, and wc2 used sprites
>>3206316
WC2 used prerendered sprites, just like Starcraft
>>3206313
Damn, dude. My mind is blown.
Whatever they did it doesn't have that plastic feel of ultima online, diablo or even starcraft, though.
>>3206398
look closer. The pre-rendered look is well hidden/done, but you can actually see it in some of the idle animations. It's not so much plastic (phong shading) but generally smooth (gouraud shading and no textures)
>>3206398
original C&C is also completely prerendered.
Some later C&C, forgot which, went in an interesting direction by using voxels for the units. So the units are 3D models, which is awesome for the developer (no need to draw a dozen angles or other variants), but they don't rely on polygons, as hardware at the time just couldn't push many of those well.
>>3206412
Yes, you're right. I cannot unsee it now. Specially some buildings have that feel (unless you tell me they were actually drawn) lol
>>3206453
Buildings are all prerendered. And you're right, you can indeed see it on some of the buildings. Blizzard did a pretty good job regardless. Prerendering made a lot of sense at the time.
If you want to see how far you can push that stuff, like a look at Knights and Merchants. It's a fairly average RTS with a strong economic component, like Settlers. All the buildings have complex animations for the worker in the building producing the goods, and the buildings themselves. You can actually tell how many raw materials and produced goods are in a building, because the building has individually rendered items.
Take a look at this screenshot, for example. Near top edge is a pub. Two units are currently eating there. One is eating a bread, the other a sausage. That particular pub has two loafs of bread and two sausages remaining in stock. You can see them on the counter and hanging from the striped roof. Directly below the pub a worker is idling, by resting against his building. At the windmill near the bottom you can see that the windmill has two bundles of grain on the side. That is, it's well stocked with raw materials. There's light inside the mill, because the miller is working. When he's done, he'll come out of the front door and put a sack of flour there.
If you love that kind of whimsical shit, do give Knights and Merchants a try.
>>3206478
It looks pretty fun. Just bought it on gog and I will play it tonight.
>>3206419
Tiberian Sun and RA2 were voxel based. RA2 got rid of 3D terrain to speed up gameplay.
Holy shit did this thing go off-topic
>>3200114
Man I should see about getting that game running again. Played it years ago but got stuck partway through due to a bug or glitch. Really nice and atmospheric.
>>3199397
Wow, I've never seen such a hardcore Blizzard apologist before. How's that cool aide champ?
>>3201483
yes man the soundtrack is great.
>story
Nothing is worth playing for the story. If you want a story, read a goddamn book.
Holy fuck, kids.
>>3205254
no... bitter whiny post by gay loser. video game stories are for failed adults
>>3208569
Read the goddamn thread, kid.
>>3208203
>How's that cool aide champ?
And he stumbles on the 5 yard line, burn incomplete.
>>3200094
Because no game with a good story has good gameplay, and vice versa. The two mediums conflict.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqIVxEpQEms
This is the greatest sound effect ever put in a videogame.
>>3204938
War 3 still handles great. I think my biggest problem is just how big the UI is. It takes up so much of the screen.
Ok, history lesson. Warcraft 1 is kind of a simplistic mess if you played any RTS past warcraft 2. BUT if you like looking at game history, it's really fantastic as far as seeing things that were later expanded on in retcons. In warcraft 1, it's particularly interesting that the missions basically go human 1 > orc 1 > human 2 > etc. up until the last 3 or so missions, which are basically the victory campaign. If you've played WoW, it's worth it just to see "oh, the dead mines were conceptualized back in the 90's". The game play is ass, but once you realize the first 10 missions are about formations and baiting the AI while the last two are about spamming water elementals/demons, it becomes tolerable enough to play through.
Warcraft 2 is a much better game, although the campaigns are a bit muddled in that it's basically orc 1-11> orc 13 > orc 12 > human 1-14, and then Beyond the Dark Portal being all over the place as far as mission chronology. Still, it's much more satisfying than WC1 and is definitely worth a playthrough. Also, definitely read the manuals, if only for the fluff and history. Really great pieces there.
>>3206282
The whole dindu-nothin retcon kind of sucks. WC 1 & 2 both paint the orcs as assholes by nature. Would have been more impactful for Thrall to really push them against what they were instead of "we wuz shamans!" Which is also bizarre because later WoW went back to Orcs: Assholes by Nature.
>>3208721
stories in vidya often suck.
loved the story in wc2, good stuff
>>3206362
WC2 sprites are pixel art with solid line work and coloring. Starcraft's were 3d models flattened to make sprites. They don't look as good, honestly, but they are grittier and fit the rednecks in space aesthetic.
>My liege?
>My lord?
>Your bidding?
>Your will, sire?
>What?
>What do you want?
>Why do you keep touching me?!
>>3209437
>Why do you keep touching me?!
What did he mean by this?
>You never touch the other elves like that.
>Do that again and you'll pull back a stump.
Why was Alleria so badass?
bampu
