View Full Version : Warcraft III fans, quick question
Edmond Dantes
10-25-2014, 07:07 PM
So recently I thought of getting Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos, because Warcraft I and II are some of my favorite games of all time.
On Amazon, I see Warcraft III Battle Chest, and... Warcraft III: Gold Edition.
I've been googling and I can't find anyone that says what, if any, differences there are between the Battle Chest and the Gold Edition.
So, IS there a difference? If so, what is it?
Trebuken
10-25-2014, 08:56 PM
I believe the Battle Chest edition includes strategy guides.
Edmond Dantes
10-28-2014, 02:10 AM
Is that the only difference? Does the Gold Edition have anything that's not in the Battle Chest?
Is that the only difference? Does the Gold Edition have anything that's not in the Battle Chest?
If memory serves me correctly, there is indeed no difference between the two except for the printed strategy guide which is included in the Battle Chest.
Personally speaking, I still consider WarCraft II to be the best of the trilogy.
wizardofwor1975
11-05-2014, 05:07 PM
If memory serves me correctly, there is indeed no difference between the two except for the printed strategy guide which is included in the Battle Chest.
Personally speaking, I still consider WarCraft II to be the best of the trilogy.
Seconded, I love the Goblin Sappers!
"Ready to work."
Edmond Dantes
11-06-2014, 03:29 AM
I'm very likely to third that opinion. Warcraft II is one of my favorite games of all time, and everyone I've talked to says that III took a few steps backwards. Granted, it's hard to top something already so good. Heck, even Warcraft 1 was pretty good if you didn't mind the slightly wonk controls and the inability to build new town halls (and the whole "you have to build roads" thing)
I'm borrowing a friend's copy. If I like, I'll spring for the battle chest.
wizardofwor1975
11-20-2014, 06:09 PM
I'm very likely to third that opinion. Warcraft II is one of my favorite games of all time, and everyone I've talked to says that III took a few steps backwards. Granted, it's hard to top something already so good. Heck, even Warcraft 1 was pretty good if you didn't mind the slightly wonk controls and the inability to build new town halls (and the whole "you have to build roads" thing)
I'm borrowing a friend's copy. If I like, I'll spring for the battle chest.
Ed, You really should get the battle chest. As far as Warcraft III being a step backwards I can see why people would say that. Warcraft 2 pretty much set the bar into the stratosphere which could easily make Warcraft III seem backwards. However, Warcraft III is playable though and I've had my share of fun with it but its no Warcraft 2.
"Me not that kind of orc!"
-Nameless orc peon
Tanooki
11-20-2014, 07:21 PM
I'll third it so you can fourth it. WC3 is a big step back and a step forward in annoyance value too. I'd put it behind both the previous titles. It didn't add much of value other than special characters if I recall right but keeping them alive can be a burden and also some stages just seem unrealistically annoying where you eat it a lot through an excess of trail and much failure. It's not bad, it's just not the game it needed to live up to against WC2. As already said though the chest vs gold all comes down to liking having a beautiful enough printed guide to help through the stuff. I got it a few years back a couple times at the flea market out west and put time on it both times but it just never sat well with me so I dumped it.
Edmond Dantes
11-22-2014, 08:40 AM
For some reason Warcraft III isn't even working on my Mazinkaiser.
I don't understand why. The game says it runs in Windows 98, the comp is 98SE, with 512mb of Ram and 700mhz--twice the recommended. The only thing I can think is that my Voodoo 3 2000 is just a little too ancient for it since IIRC Warcraft III used Direct X9.
Specifically what happens is the opening FMV plays but when it gets to the main menu it gives me a memory address and says FATAL ERROR and something about memory that couldn't be "read" (it's quotemarks, not mine). Then I normally have to use ctrl-alt-del to close the program. And yes I installed the latest patch.
*shrug*
Jorpho
11-22-2014, 10:16 AM
I don't understand why. The game says it runs in Windows 98, the comp is 98SE, with 512mb of Ram and 700mhz--twice the recommended. The only thing I can think is that my Voodoo 3 2000 is just a little too ancient for it since IIRC Warcraft III used Direct X9.A moment of Googing suggests a Voodoo 3 should in fact be just barely adequate.
http://classic.battle.net/war3/faq/features.shtml
https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/warcraft-iii-system-requirements
The usual first step is to make sure you're not running anything in the background that might interfere. Otherwise, I'm kind of wary about running Windows 98 with that much RAM. Using HIMEMX (http://www.japheth.de/Jemm.html) in your config.sys is a quick and easy way to limit the amount of RAM Win9x can access so you can determine if that is a problem.