My first encounter with Warcraft was a LAN multiplayer session of Warcraft II at a friend’s house. Completely unaware of the franchise, and with limited RTS experience, I opted for the Orcs – they looked cool, had dragons, and, predictably, I lost every game. Years later, my World of Warcraft-obsessed friends dragged me into the WoW universe, followed by Warcraft III, which became a fixture in our gaming sessions. Eventually, curiosity led me to revisit the original Warcraft games, and I was struck by the sense of déjà vu – like revisiting old friends after a long absence. They’re familiar, yet undeniably changed.
Revisiting Blizzard’s remastered Warcraft I and II is a peculiar experience. It’s neither a pristine historical preservation nor a complete graphical overhaul, but a curious middle ground. Like other remasters (think EA’s Command & Conquer or Blizzard’s own StarCraft: Remastered), these versions allow switching between original and updated graphics. However, the modern visuals, particularly in Warcraft I, lack the visual cohesion of the original, opting for readability over aesthetic appeal. In Warcraft II, the updated graphics surprisingly fall short of the Battle.net edition. The overall visual refresh feels like a hastily made mobile port.
Thankfully, the remastered music is a significant improvement, offering a meaningful update beyond a simple sound quality boost. The true appeal of these remasters, however, lies in their quality-of-life improvements. Unlike StarCraft: Remastered, which preserved the core gameplay, Warcraft’s remasters have undergone fundamental changes. The unit selection limit has been dramatically increased – from four to nine in Warcraft I, and from six to twelve in Warcraft II – mirroring StarCraft’s limit. This alteration significantly impacts game balance, especially in Warcraft II’s online multiplayer.
These changes, while intended to enhance the modern experience, have unexpected consequences. The smaller maps feel cramped with the increased unit control, and combat feels less intricate. The addition of features like toggleable health bars and shift-clicking for unit grouping, while convenient, further distances the remasters from the original experience. Eliminating the need for DOSBox is a welcome change, but the decision to modify these fundamental aspects of gameplay is questionable. Why not address other outdated elements like the left-side menu (a design choice abandoned by Blizzard in later RTS titles) or the requirement for connecting buildings with roads in Warcraft I? Why not enhance the original cutscenes instead of simply increasing their resolution?
The remasters feel stuck between eras, failing to attract newcomers while disappointing long-time fans. The lack of comprehensive modernization makes them neither compelling modern games nor valuable historical artifacts. They stand as a testament to the series’ roots, yet simultaneously highlighting their irrelevance to the evolved Warcraft franchise.
The situation is drastically different with Warcraft III: Reforged version 2.0. The initial launch was disastrous, riddled with bugs and missing features. But Blizzard deserves credit for persisting. Reforged 2.0 is a massive improvement, adding new portraits, skins, music from Warcraft I and II, multiplayer leveling, and the critically important ability to mix and match the Reforged and Classic HD graphics. The ability to choose between visual styles is a crucial element, addressing a major criticism of the initial release. While bugs still exist, the effort is undeniable, and the resulting game is certainly worth playing.
In conclusion, these remasters are not perfect. They’re unlikely to win over many new fans and may even disappoint some veterans. They don’t wholly represent the current state of Warcraft. Yet, in an industry often characterized by the ruthless pursuit of profit over preservation, their existence is a testament to Blizzard’s acknowledgment of its past, its games, and the history they represent. They’re a reminder that despite the constant evolution of gaming, there’s still a place for appreciating, and even imperfectly preserving, the games that shaped the industry and our personal experiences. The remasters may not be perfect, but in their imperfection, they offer a glimpse into a past deserving of remembrance.
