Calling something a bad game isn't an opinion, so not providing a reason is being uninformed.

Well, the main complaint I see there is graphics, with which I guess I agree. Too blocky and cartoonish. Custom games I disagree, since there are a lot of different games - unique defenses, battle tanks, different AoSes, Worms, etc that populate WCIII. Yes, they lack some innovativity present in SC, but that's innovativity brought about by need. WCIII has equivalents to pretty much all major SC maps, and more besides. Oh, and the melee is horrendous, completely agreement there. As I said before, though, the hero/item system makes many things possible and more easily achieved then they would otherwise be, and I want to see it as an option in SCII maps - an EXP and inventory system.

Out of interest, which map is that?

Ouch. I have only two versions of dota on my computer, each played once, and I host only to check if my host is working. Dota -ap ca/us brings people running and leaves no wondering about whether no one cares about the map or if no one can join. I play.. BATTLE TANKS. And Elimination Tournament. And occasionally other random maps.

Definitely the style of the game. Warcraft 3 had less units, and the units and gameplay did not have the same zing as SC did. The other thing is that custom maps in SC felt better for some reason with the way the text was displayed and the way triggers worked. For some reason triggering in W3 didn't feel as natural as it did with SC. Something as simple as a map with units constantly spawning under like a science vessel, the W3 equivalent felt awkward. It's difficult to explain entirely.

Well, unless you can provide us with a non-subjective definition for "bad game," it most certainly is an opinion.
Also, until you can prove that not saying something is equal to not knowing something, "uninformed" will remain uniquely applicable to those who can't give reasons, not those whom merely don't.

olololol "has a lot of explosions"
Seriously, that's part of why I like SC more. ;P People will throw in triggers for using cloaked units to create distortion effects, create/kill units to provide explosions, units casting spells, etc., as fancy effects; in WC3, I hardly see any of that.
Aside from the horrendous graphics is the slow game...
It takes a while to join a good game, it takes longer for the game to start, and then... you get to sit in the briefing room-equivelant for like, five minutes before everyone's loaded. ... and then there's the everpresent lagwall that hits about five seconds after the game starts. The game responds painfully slow to commands, making 1-6 unit micro painful and boring, and I'm rarely concerned with rapidly placing spells within pixels of given areas to avoid splashing allies, like I have to do in SC maps involving Psionic Storm and/or plague/etc. Instead, I'm just looking for a mob of enemies and using my best splashrape attack on 'em, bashing 'till my hero's nearly dead. Tower defenses are lame, since the unit pathfinding makes mazing pointless, and if I want offensive defense, then there's always Income or Binary on SC. All of the defense maps look essentially the same, as far as unit choices go, also; sure, they have different numbers, spells and enemies might be different, but there's never anything interesting, like in Hellfire defense, or Choose Your Defense.
Furthermore, the "lack of innovation" is much more than is justified by the more capable engine. Just about all the maps I can find are essentially clones and remakes of others, or else are hard to get anyone to play in without serious lag ( any open RPG's, etc... ) , even worse than in StarCraft.
And then there's the fact that, in playing Hero Line Defense ( or whatever it was called ) seven times... I ended up with, guess, seven different versions of the map in my downloads folder. The fock?

All this stuff makes me wonder if SCII map making will be as cool as SCI one, or if a limitless editor or a way too complex one is simply not a good idea...

Okay, whether it's an opinion or a fact (stupid phrases, I think) is debatable, I'll admit that - however, saying 'I don't like the playstyle' is much more opinionish then 'It's a bad game' is.

I already said the melee sucks. Stop using that as an argument against me .

I'm not completely certain why you're citing 'choose your defense', a map with pretty much only three offensive structures, as something WCIII map makers lack. The best WCIII defenses have widely different towers with different abilities and strategies ranging from focusing on one race or expanding to multiple races. Innovative playstyles in these defenses exist, such as the Arcane race in Skibi's TD. This also has minigames and such - I'd say Skibi's was much higher quality and entertaining to play in a group then choose your defense. Never played Hellfire, so can't comment on that. I will admit, though, that defenses like line tower wars for WCIII are pretty horribly made and I'll take Spawn D any day.

The number of units argument is also true - however, I've had more units on the screen then possible with Starcraft via collision size modifiers, and it didn't really lag. It started lagging a bit after that, but.. yeah.

I actually tried the demo, it was awsome.
I would play it, but I'm poor.

Personally, I enjoy Starcraft more because the game play feels more crisp and it's nice a simple.

For those who say that Warcraft III lacks creativity, all I can tell them is that they don't play enough.

I haven't once touched melee, outside of the campaign. My experience is derived purely from UMS.
...
So... lolwut.

eh? There are three defense types. D: Splash, bunker, and unit... each of which has several options.

Could have gotten the name wrong, but it involved dropping nukes on enemies, doing damage as they fell, rather than on explosion.

For the most part the reason I hate WC3 is because of the cartoony art and the limitations of the graphics engine harm UMS. Besides no one plays anything but DOTA so why bother making a map anyway.

I have to agree with HolySin the most, actually.. the game play feels more crisp and it's nice and simple. When I feel like I want to do something in my head, I can quickly make my men do that on the screen, and it happens. It seems as though in Warcraft III there is always that graphics engine, lag, and general slow atmosphere that makes it not as exciting to play. This, of course, leads to me not wanting to always come back and play again like I have for starcraft for the last 10 years.

Because of this, I believe that an ultra-powerful editor will actually work for SC2 the way it did not work for Warcraft III. I absolutely loved worldedit for all the possibilities it had, but a lot of things did just seem un-intuitive and roundabout in a way staredit wasn't. If SC2 is built in a crisp manner (I love that word choice) just like SC1 was AND the editor is both powerful and simple, then it will certainly be a great mapping and playing experience. Now, who thinks it will actually happen?

Oh. So it's not that map with photon cannons/sunkens/bunkers? Oh. Well, my point still stands. The uniqueness of certain WCIII TD games and the variety greatly exceeds any SC defense. Simply because so much more is possible.

.. You've been playing some certainly meleeish games. I recommend Battle Tanks, Elimination Tournament and Element TD. Most WCIII map makers like the WCIII melee style, so they implement it in their maps. Stick to non-meleeish maps.
Usually, at least 1/2 of the maps hosted list isn't Dota. Certainly, other maps are playable. The Cartoony art and all that isn't really harmful in some games - again, I recommend the ones I listed above. Battle Tanks and Elimination Tournament in particular keep you too busy (for the most part) to notice how that wooden contraption is standing up to a demon tank.

Here's why WC3 sucks:
It's not Starcraft.

I am not entirely if I will still live after I say this, but I don't think DotA is so bad at all. One thing I do have to agree on is that's it's a shame that at least half the game list is covered with DotA games.

However, DotA itself is still a good game I think. I've played for months if not years (with a lot of breaks) and witnessed a lot of versions. Especially the heroes which are added later have a rather unique gameplay. It really does depend on your skill and knowledge of the game wether you'll live or die. You have to make the right decissions within split seconds. It's one of the few games of that type in which you actually need your team (unless everyone on the other teams sucks, of couse). They have done a terrific job to accomplish that.

There are however downsides. First of all the previously listed spam of DotA games which slowly kills any other attempt at map making, though I have seen quite a lot of maps which were a bit similair to DotA and still got hosted. Another major drawback is that in public games you have a too big chance to get screwed over by leavers/feeders or lamers. Playing in-house games solves this completely though, and then the games get really exciting.

I would appreciate it if I wouldn't get bashed to death for liking DotA.

WC3 and StarCraft is a completely different game. Just cause' they are made by Blizzard, it doesn't mean something should be played and something shouldn't. But in my opinion, starcraft beats wc3 outright (It's obvious you'd get this from a STARCRAFT MAP EDITTING SITE NOT A WARCRAFT EDITTING SITE) K THX BYE THIS IS STUPID OK?

Well, i hope y'all realize that SC2 mapping/modding will resemble WCIII alot more than it does SC.

That won't be a problem, at least everyone won't play DoTA.

Adding to the above post, we'll also have much of the SC community that never moved over to WC3 going to SC2 which means a whole set of different style of maps. (I, of course, realize WC3 has all the standard ones - defense, bound, rpg, etc; I'm talking about the original or abstract ideas that never made it over)

This.

Also the fact that I never got really into the game, since I purchased it during my big "SC Phase" aka where basically the only game I really spent much time with was SC - for three years.