I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
Oh is somebody butthurt that people dont agree with his "game is dead" doomsaying? That is a pity. I hope that i dont hurt your safe-space.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
Oh is somebody butthurt that people dont agree with his "game is dead" doomsaying? That is a pity. I hope that i dont hurt your safe-space.
All he said was to go to the correct post. How does this seem like he is butt hurt?
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
Oh is somebody butthurt that people dont agree with his "game is dead" doomsaying? That is a pity. I hope that i dont hurt your safe-space.
All he said was to go to the correct post. How does this seem like he is butt hurt?
Its simple. When someone make a thread ablut to revive the game, they should also talk about the question "is a revive needet" nothing more.
Also Strangequark has a history in this forum as a doomsday prayer. He has his opinion that the game must be dead, reasoning some steam numbers, ignoring any comparison he dont like.
Its a fact that the game is far away from death. Just start the game and you find 5-10 open games ect ect, see my above post.
At the end he is just upsed that here are so many people who disagree with him.
@Nassir_Amit said:
I was long optimistic to the game, even when beta closed, but now I think, there needs to be drastic changes to make an fun game. If dev´s wanted to go for competitive, well, they won t have much audition for buying the game. I myself, don t care if the game is competitive or not, however I cae about if the game is fun, immersive and has an long time appeal. And this game has not ( at least for me, because, you know, I don t speak for everyone )
If they sacrifice(d) game fun for competitiveness it won t give them a lot of customers and clearly not and broader buyer audience
The thing is a game can be fun and competetive. Not sure why everyone thinks you can only have one or the other....
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
Oh is somebody butthurt that people dont agree with his "game is dead" doomsaying? That is a pity. I hope that i dont hurt your safe-space.
All he said was to go to the correct post. How does this seem like he is butt hurt?
Its simple. When someone make a thread ablut to revive the game, they should also talk about the question "is a revive needet" nothing more.
Also Strangequark has a history in this forum as a doomsday prayer. He has his opinion that the game must be dead, reasoning some steam numbers, ignoring any comparison he dont like.
Its a fact that the game is far away from death. Just start the game and you find 5-10 open games ect ect, see my above post.
At the end he is just upsed that here are so many people who disagree with him.
I'm not upset, I'm just trying to direct you to the proper thread to add to a discussion about numbers. This thread is about ideas to bring the community back that have left and abandoned the game, and to grow what has stuck around. If the terminology of revive is what is triggering you, then I'll use grow instead. I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic, and you aren't adding to the conversation, I've been more than polite in asking.
Dow 3 has hit a niche group in between the DoW1 &2, but that doesn't mean it is a good game, it doesn't mean it is a bad game either, at best Dow 3 is ok game.
The reason I say that is because:
( Stay with me here trust me a have a point)
I first learned about Dow when was after the dark crusade had just game out, I had never heard of Dow or Warhammer 40k the only I found it because I was looking for a game to get for my birthday and i was looking for new game and I found this cool rts. After getting and playing Dow dark crusade campaign and skirmishes for a long time, eventually I went back and played the O.G. Dow campaign, which got me hooked on Warhammer 40k, read most of the Horus heresy and read up on a bunch of lore.
See Dow 3 doesn't do that Dow 3 has made Warhammer 40k niche fanbase even smaller. Which is bad because it is never going to bring in new people into the Warhammer 40k world and Dow 3 certainly isn't bringing any new players to Dow universe, the first 2 games do a much better job at this even tho they pretty dated games (still fun tho).
that is a shame as I was hoping Warhammer 40k would get a little more popular, so we can get more games and movies based on Warhammer 40k lore and really isn't that what we all want ?
That is why this game feels dead is because it isn't drawing new players in it just drawing a small number of people between the DoW1 camp and dow 2 camp, it doesn't even bring the two camps closet together in fact it seems to drive every game further apart.
@PaztheLobster said:
Back on topic, I think it would be free stuff. Relic needs to add more free stuff. Modes, maps, races, etc. I don't think Relic would attract back all the players who stopped playing without free stuff.
I said the same thing and got flamed from the people that seem to not realize just how hurt the DoW brand is atm.
@Strangequark said:
We don't really need to dwell on those things though, it is what it is and moving forward from here is where we need to go. There has been enough discussion as to why in a lot of other threads, and you can join the discussion there, but this one is for ideas, suggestions, and content that can help grow the community, improve the game, and keep a stable player base interested.
To that same end, I would tell you that there are plenty of posts on that subject as well. Let people talk.
Maybe, but as I said true gamer doesn't judge the game by reviews or other's opinions, but by own experience through playing it. Of course this game has a mixed reviews, but I liked it eventually and this is what matter to me. I don't bother with other negative opinions, through sad part is, that there won't be probably new content. Still, Supcom2 also didn't gotted new content since Infinity War dlc and I enjoyed it. I have currently 166 hours with that game. So even if Dow3 won't have a new content or especially a expansion, well, but I will enjoy that game regardless. In the end, true gamer plays game he likes, regardless of others's opinion, isn't not?
Well said, but i really hope Dawn of War 3 is Successful enough for at least one Expansion.
I mean i will play it as Long as it makes fun for me. But it would be really nice if they release one. Maybe some Players will return or buy the game, after their favourite race is implemented.
The fact that for the first time in the franchise's history the idea of an expansion garners a giant question mark in the minds of the people who are playing the game essentially says everything about why these "doomsday" posts need to keep coming, why the people who are angry and frustrated need to not be silenced, and why we need to keep putting just about any suggestion we can think of out there for people to read.
@Larkis said:
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
You can' t compare copies sold and peak active players. They're apples and oranges. Also EA is a company that knows how to milk a franchise and they knew that to keep people on board for further releases under the battlefront brand, they'd have to pump a lot of resources into any battlefront title that underperformed on player satisfaction and activity. Why? Because they know that the brand is more important than any single release ( I posted on this concept and the thread got locked for absolutely no reason).
Why player numbers are important for DoW is really a better question and I can answer that. If Relic sees player numbers dying off far to quickly, they will take that as a sign that they might not be able to make as much money off of futher expansions/releases under the DoW brand. If that is the case, they have no reason to significantly invest in supporting the game. In fact, support for the game may just die off the second their PR people tell them they hit an acceptable period of time since release so they could fully abandon the project in lieu of better more profitable projects. This is particularly important for people who feel like the game is essentially incomplete until they get all the factions.
Why relic needs high peak players for the gameplay itself? Because yes, while you only need 5 people to fill a 3v3, the 6th person needs to wait 30 minutes for that game to finish to get in a game. Wait times between games will continue to grow and grow. Additionally, with skill levels being vastly different, if you don't have a large number of people playing, you are less likely to have games that are well balanced in terms of player skill (a system Relic has mentioned they want to implement). Having largely unbalanced games in terms of player skill is probably also a major driver with player dissatisfaction currently (albeit a much less frequently discussed one because no one wants to admit they're just not as good as other people).
@Nassir_Amit said:
I was long optimistic to the game, even when beta closed, but now I think, there needs to be drastic changes to make an fun game. If dev´s wanted to go for competitive, well, they won t have much audition for buying the game. I myself, don t care if the game is competitive or not, however I cae about if the game is fun, immersive and has an long time appeal. And this game has not ( at least for me, because, you know, I don t speak for everyone )
If they sacrifice(d) game fun for competitiveness it won t give them a lot of customers and clearly not and broader buyer audience
The thing is a game can be fun and competetive. Not sure why everyone thinks you can only have one or the other....
Yeah, but I´d rather exspect to go fun , if both stuffed together doesn t work that well......
It s a hard work to achieve an competitive game, that appeals to people, who don t care (that much) about balance and just play for the immersive, satisfying a broad variety of choices brought to them.
Yeah thats true it is a bit trickier to bind challenging and fun together. And if the formula aint right going fun is the way to go. But i think DoW 3 is on the right path to achieve it. I have alot more fun playing this than SC 2 (which is a chore to play)
I really just think the game needs cooperative game modes, more races, more maps, and a few balance iterations. If modding is improved/takes off, that will only help as well. Any massive overhauls that try to make the game more DoW 1/DoW 2-esque really seem like wishful thinking. I'm more in favor of taking what DoW 3 does and making it rock solid than trying to totally shift the foundation with the house already built on top in an attempt to appease a vocal crowd.
As far as growing the community, that's a tough one. Player retention often isn't just a matter of the game, but also whether you find other people to play with. I've played more WoW than I ever would have thought, and the one thing that actually keeps me playing an expansion beyond the leveling/nostalgia that hits from the get-go is having a group of friends to play with. I'm still playing Legion, for example, and that's unprecedented for me. It's solely because I have a group of 4 other people who roll around in Mythic+ dungeons and pop into pug raids when we have an opportunity.
There are plenty of games I really love that I don't play much, because I didn't find anyone to play with long-term. From a social perspective, I think the game could use clans/channels within the interface, so when you log in, you see other people playing that you can chat with in game, form groups with, hop into practice matches with, etc. Then, the forums can be used to "recruit" people into the in-game communities. Sure, Steam has communities and such, but I've always found those to be clunky/difficult to find/easy to ignore, personally. I think there's a better way to cultivate an in-game community.
proper mod support could help a lot, but it would have to be without all those restrictions relic put in place in coh2. Just look how many people play user made stuff in SC2.
@Strangequark said:
I'm not upset, I'm just trying to direct you to the proper thread to add to a discussion about numbers. This thread is about ideas to bring the community back that have left and abandoned the game, and to grow what has stuck around. If the terminology of revive is what is triggering you, then I'll use grow instead. I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic, and you aren't adding to the conversation, I've been more than polite in asking.
Hi,
ok sorry for my words. I think trully the word "revive" is triggering me. I will stop this part of the discussion here and maybe make an new thread were we could discuss the importance of player numbers for an rts.
@Bigamo said:
what really hurt the game release was the lack of a proper beta... not for coincidence all the stuff that really RUINED the gameplay came from Doctrines and elites not tested at all in the betas...
I hope Relic learn from the HUGE mistake that is having no proper beta in a RTS title and i hope the game recover with 31th patch, i had big hopes for the game.
Indead. In some areas it is questionable if they ever testet things like suicide bombaz doctrine more than saying "sounds like a fun idea, let us do it."
@Strangequark said:
We don't really need to dwell on those things though, it is what it is and moving forward from here is where we need to go. There has been enough discussion as to why in a lot of other threads, and you can join the discussion there, but this one is for ideas, suggestions, and content that can help grow the community, improve the game, and keep a stable player base interested.
To that same end, I would tell you that there are plenty of posts on that subject as well. Let people talk.
I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic, as soon as you open up the player numbers can of worms its going to bring people putting their foot right into their mouth. It's like bait for white knightery, and it tends to quickly unravel any coherent thought the thread might have had. I'm not stopping anyone from talking, just trying to make sure it goes to the right place.
@Strangequark said:
We don't really need to dwell on those things though, it is what it is and moving forward from here is where we need to go. There has been enough discussion as to why in a lot of other threads, and you can join the discussion there, but this one is for ideas, suggestions, and content that can help grow the community, improve the game, and keep a stable player base interested.
To that same end, I would tell you that there are plenty of posts on that subject as well. Let people talk.
I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic, as soon as you open up the player numbers can of worms its going to bring people putting their foot right into their mouth. It's like bait for white knightery, and it tends to quickly unravel any coherent thought the thread might have had. I'm not stopping anyone from talking, just trying to make sure it goes to the right place.
On topic would be anything that lends itself to the goal of reviving the game, correct? Doesn't revival of the game encompass discussion about player numbers practically by definition? Being realistic and open about the problem is the first step to solving it.> @PrimaGoosa said:
I really just think the game needs cooperative game modes, more races, more maps, and a few balance iterations. If modding is improved/takes off, that will only help as well. Any massive overhauls that try to make the game more DoW 1/DoW 2-esque really seem like wishful thinking. I'm more in favor of taking what DoW 3 does and making it rock solid than trying to totally shift the foundation with the house already built on top in an attempt to appease a vocal crowd.
As far as growing the community, that's a tough one. Player retention often isn't just a matter of the game, but also whether you find other people to play with. I've played more WoW than I ever would have thought, and the one thing that actually keeps me playing an expansion beyond the leveling/nostalgia that hits from the get-go is having a group of friends to play with. I'm still playing Legion, for example, and that's unprecedented for me. It's solely because I have a group of 4 other people who roll around in Mythic+ dungeons and pop into pug raids when we have an opportunity.
There are plenty of games I really love that I don't play much, because I didn't find anyone to play with long-term. From a social perspective, I think the game could use clans/channels within the interface, so when you log in, you see other people playing that you can chat with in game, form groups with, hop into practice matches with, etc. Then, the forums can be used to "recruit" people into the in-game communities. Sure, Steam has communities and such, but I've always found those to be clunky/difficult to find/easy to ignore, personally. I think there's a better way to cultivate an in-game community.
More maps I think would be the highest impact, lowest cost action (leaving aside obvious balance issues) that Relic could take to breath some life into the game and keep the people that are playing currently from falling off. SC2 was released with 35+ maps. With the success of that franchise, I'm not sure why relic didn't use that as an example for what people are looking for in a release. Additionally having open maps that don't feel like hard lanes would be a great change of pace. Having only 3 entrances to a lane, 2 of them being the respective bases of the teams, really makes things feel stale in terms of tactics.
To further emphasize how cheap this could be, Relic could open up unofficial maps in the game, find the ones people tend to like the best, review them for balance, then give them the official seal of approval.
Another thing that I think should be added when you queue a game is your vote on whether globals should be banned or not (globals being orbital bombardment et al.). For me, globals in their current form are one of the most toxic game mechanics they added to the game. They also mask a massive underlying problem of how quickly onesided a game can become by allowing teams that are behind to stall out games longer despite the fact that they are losing decisively and thus giving them a false sense of fairness/balance.
Your idea about putting in specific modalities to facilitate clan centered communication is strong though. I hadn't thought of that.
After a sale the number will be significantly higher. There are lots of decent streams so the game will be popular eventually. Last stand mode is decent but till the game got more popular it wont be happening soon. U ppl have to stop complaining DOW 2 started the same way as this and look where it has gotten since then:))
Oh this game is dead as a door nail....they tried to go MOBA hoping to bring in vast amount of players....after less than a month its not even top 100 played games on steam....Flopped like a dead fish this game. I genuinely hope they make a master piece of an expansion and revive this game.
Different game modes would be an excellent start wtf were they thinking 1 moba inspired mode...yah okay that worked great ;/
I doubt this would happen but, rework the art style a bit i cant stand the art style it looks exactly like a Bliz game, even down to Gabriels skipping instead of walking animations.
Add an actual fleshed out building system with defensive structures for god's sake.
@GiggleHz said:
Oh this game is dead as a door nail....they tried to go MOBA hoping to bring in vast amount of players....after less than a month its not even top 100 played games on steam....Flopped like a dead fish this game. I genuinely hope they make a master piece of an expansion and revive this game.
Different game modes would be an excellent start wtf were they thinking 1 moba inspired mode...yah okay that worked great ;/
I doubt this would happen but, rework the art style a bit i cant stand the art style it looks exactly like a Bliz game, even down to Gabriels skipping instead of walking animations.
Add an actual fleshed out building system with defensive structures for god's sake.
Yes, its sad that game is dead. However I will buy it regardless.
Also I don't mind over moba inspired mode, because I already got used to it. Also since June 2015 I'm playing one MOBA called Heroes of the Storm. Also don't mind about Dow3 aesthethics, because it is thing that doesn't bothers me much.
Overall, I'm sad that the game is dead, but I don't mind it at all. I'll gladly buy it and play it regardless. Heh Supcom2 also was dissapointment for fans and didn't gotted new content expect single DLC, yet I have currently 166 hours in that game. So I will play Dow 3 a lot too.
The Emperor rewards his faithful... Just keep the game alive till its got balanced appropriately and some exposures to the public. RTS is a fkin dead genre and reviving it will take lots more than hope and excuses. Hopefully after things settle they will put the game on sale cuz its horribly overpriced (dem greedy SEGA jerks) and the lacks of content doesnt help much either:((
Menu
Comments
Larkis
I think dow3 sold very well for an rts roday. And as long there are enough players to fill a match it wont die.
Also look on SW Battlefront. Sold 13 Million copies. Dropped to 2000 peak in 1-3 months. Still allive ant get a lot expansions, a lot free stuff and this year a battlefront 2 will be released.
Maybe im to old abd i dont underdtand the hype around playernumbers. This is not an mmorpg where i need full servers.
I only need 5 perdons to fill a 3vs3. For me there is no difference between 100, 1000 or 10.000 at the same time. I only can face max. 5 of them.
Also relic dont need high peaks of player. Havinc 250.000 who never play online but buy dlcs are bether then 5000 who play permanent online and buy dlcs.
Hell, RTS was successfull in a time where multiplayer mean connect pcs in the same room via lan.
Strangequark
This is a thread on how to revive the game, and ideas for that. There are plenty of threads talking about numbers, and player drop, if you don't have anything to add ideas wise, go hang out in the numbers thread and continue that discussion there.
Larkis
Oh is somebody butthurt that people dont agree with his "game is dead" doomsaying? That is a pity. I hope that i dont hurt your safe-space.
Cankat
Obvious troll is obvious.
Draconix
Maybe Larkis trolled Strangequark, but at least he is more optimistic than the latter.
Shas_02
All he said was to go to the correct post. How does this seem like he is butt hurt?
Larkis
Its simple. When someone make a thread ablut to revive the game, they should also talk about the question "is a revive needet" nothing more.
Also Strangequark has a history in this forum as a doomsday prayer. He has his opinion that the game must be dead, reasoning some steam numbers, ignoring any comparison he dont like.
Its a fact that the game is far away from death. Just start the game and you find 5-10 open games ect ect, see my above post.
At the end he is just upsed that here are so many people who disagree with him.
CANNED_F3TUS
The thing is a game can be fun and competetive. Not sure why everyone thinks you can only have one or the other....
Strangequark
I'm not upset, I'm just trying to direct you to the proper thread to add to a discussion about numbers. This thread is about ideas to bring the community back that have left and abandoned the game, and to grow what has stuck around. If the terminology of revive is what is triggering you, then I'll use grow instead. I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic, and you aren't adding to the conversation, I've been more than polite in asking.
Strangequark
Back on topic, ideas to grow and stabilize the player base, whether those ideas be game mechanic related, or community related.
Alchemist13
The reason I feel this game is dead because:
Dow 3 has hit a niche group in between the DoW1 &2, but that doesn't mean it is a good game, it doesn't mean it is a bad game either, at best Dow 3 is ok game.
The reason I say that is because:
( Stay with me here trust me a have a point)
I first learned about Dow when was after the dark crusade had just game out, I had never heard of Dow or Warhammer 40k the only I found it because I was looking for a game to get for my birthday and i was looking for new game and I found this cool rts. After getting and playing Dow dark crusade campaign and skirmishes for a long time, eventually I went back and played the O.G. Dow campaign, which got me hooked on Warhammer 40k, read most of the Horus heresy and read up on a bunch of lore.
See Dow 3 doesn't do that Dow 3 has made Warhammer 40k niche fanbase even smaller. Which is bad because it is never going to bring in new people into the Warhammer 40k world and Dow 3 certainly isn't bringing any new players to Dow universe, the first 2 games do a much better job at this even tho they pretty dated games (still fun tho).
that is a shame as I was hoping Warhammer 40k would get a little more popular, so we can get more games and movies based on Warhammer 40k lore and really isn't that what we all want ?
That is why this game feels dead is because it isn't drawing new players in it just drawing a small number of people between the DoW1 camp and dow 2 camp, it doesn't even bring the two camps closet together in fact it seems to drive every game further apart.
CourtJester
I said the same thing and got flamed from the people that seem to not realize just how hurt the DoW brand is atm.
CourtJester
To that same end, I would tell you that there are plenty of posts on that subject as well. Let people talk.
CourtJester
The fact that for the first time in the franchise's history the idea of an expansion garners a giant question mark in the minds of the people who are playing the game essentially says everything about why these "doomsday" posts need to keep coming, why the people who are angry and frustrated need to not be silenced, and why we need to keep putting just about any suggestion we can think of out there for people to read.
CourtJester
You can' t compare copies sold and peak active players. They're apples and oranges. Also EA is a company that knows how to milk a franchise and they knew that to keep people on board for further releases under the battlefront brand, they'd have to pump a lot of resources into any battlefront title that underperformed on player satisfaction and activity. Why? Because they know that the brand is more important than any single release ( I posted on this concept and the thread got locked for absolutely no reason).
Why player numbers are important for DoW is really a better question and I can answer that. If Relic sees player numbers dying off far to quickly, they will take that as a sign that they might not be able to make as much money off of futher expansions/releases under the DoW brand. If that is the case, they have no reason to significantly invest in supporting the game. In fact, support for the game may just die off the second their PR people tell them they hit an acceptable period of time since release so they could fully abandon the project in lieu of better more profitable projects. This is particularly important for people who feel like the game is essentially incomplete until they get all the factions.
Why relic needs high peak players for the gameplay itself? Because yes, while you only need 5 people to fill a 3v3, the 6th person needs to wait 30 minutes for that game to finish to get in a game. Wait times between games will continue to grow and grow. Additionally, with skill levels being vastly different, if you don't have a large number of people playing, you are less likely to have games that are well balanced in terms of player skill (a system Relic has mentioned they want to implement). Having largely unbalanced games in terms of player skill is probably also a major driver with player dissatisfaction currently (albeit a much less frequently discussed one because no one wants to admit they're just not as good as other people).
CANNED_F3TUS
Yeah thats true it is a bit trickier to bind challenging and fun together. And if the formula aint right going fun is the way to go. But i think DoW 3 is on the right path to achieve it. I have alot more fun playing this than SC 2 (which is a chore to play)
PrimaGoosa
I really just think the game needs cooperative game modes, more races, more maps, and a few balance iterations. If modding is improved/takes off, that will only help as well. Any massive overhauls that try to make the game more DoW 1/DoW 2-esque really seem like wishful thinking. I'm more in favor of taking what DoW 3 does and making it rock solid than trying to totally shift the foundation with the house already built on top in an attempt to appease a vocal crowd.
As far as growing the community, that's a tough one. Player retention often isn't just a matter of the game, but also whether you find other people to play with. I've played more WoW than I ever would have thought, and the one thing that actually keeps me playing an expansion beyond the leveling/nostalgia that hits from the get-go is having a group of friends to play with. I'm still playing Legion, for example, and that's unprecedented for me. It's solely because I have a group of 4 other people who roll around in Mythic+ dungeons and pop into pug raids when we have an opportunity.
There are plenty of games I really love that I don't play much, because I didn't find anyone to play with long-term. From a social perspective, I think the game could use clans/channels within the interface, so when you log in, you see other people playing that you can chat with in game, form groups with, hop into practice matches with, etc. Then, the forums can be used to "recruit" people into the in-game communities. Sure, Steam has communities and such, but I've always found those to be clunky/difficult to find/easy to ignore, personally. I think there's a better way to cultivate an in-game community.
nachocheese
proper mod support could help a lot, but it would have to be without all those restrictions relic put in place in coh2. Just look how many people play user made stuff in SC2.
Larkis
Hi,
ok sorry for my words. I think trully the word "revive" is triggering me. I will stop this part of the discussion here and maybe make an new thread were we could discuss the importance of player numbers for an rts.
Larkis
Indead. In some areas it is questionable if they ever testet things like suicide bombaz doctrine more than saying "sounds like a fun idea, let us do it."
Strangequark
I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic, as soon as you open up the player numbers can of worms its going to bring people putting their foot right into their mouth. It's like bait for white knightery, and it tends to quickly unravel any coherent thought the thread might have had. I'm not stopping anyone from talking, just trying to make sure it goes to the right place.
CourtJester
On topic would be anything that lends itself to the goal of reviving the game, correct? Doesn't revival of the game encompass discussion about player numbers practically by definition? Being realistic and open about the problem is the first step to solving it.> @PrimaGoosa said:
More maps I think would be the highest impact, lowest cost action (leaving aside obvious balance issues) that Relic could take to breath some life into the game and keep the people that are playing currently from falling off. SC2 was released with 35+ maps. With the success of that franchise, I'm not sure why relic didn't use that as an example for what people are looking for in a release. Additionally having open maps that don't feel like hard lanes would be a great change of pace. Having only 3 entrances to a lane, 2 of them being the respective bases of the teams, really makes things feel stale in terms of tactics.
To further emphasize how cheap this could be, Relic could open up unofficial maps in the game, find the ones people tend to like the best, review them for balance, then give them the official seal of approval.
Another thing that I think should be added when you queue a game is your vote on whether globals should be banned or not (globals being orbital bombardment et al.). For me, globals in their current form are one of the most toxic game mechanics they added to the game. They also mask a massive underlying problem of how quickly onesided a game can become by allowing teams that are behind to stall out games longer despite the fact that they are losing decisively and thus giving them a false sense of fairness/balance.
Your idea about putting in specific modalities to facilitate clan centered communication is strong though. I hadn't thought of that.
DmonBlu
After a sale the number will be significantly higher. There are lots of decent streams so the game will be popular eventually. Last stand mode is decent but till the game got more popular it wont be happening soon. U ppl have to stop complaining DOW 2 started the same way as this and look where it has gotten since then:))
GiggleHz
Oh this game is dead as a door nail....they tried to go MOBA hoping to bring in vast amount of players....after less than a month its not even top 100 played games on steam....Flopped like a dead fish this game. I genuinely hope they make a master piece of an expansion and revive this game.
Different game modes would be an excellent start wtf were they thinking 1 moba inspired mode...yah okay that worked great ;/
I doubt this would happen but, rework the art style a bit i cant stand the art style it looks exactly like a Bliz game, even down to Gabriels skipping instead of walking animations.
Add an actual fleshed out building system with defensive structures for god's sake.
Draconix
Yes, its sad that game is dead.
However I will buy it regardless. 
Also I don't mind over moba inspired mode, because I already got used to it. Also since June 2015 I'm playing one MOBA called Heroes of the Storm. Also don't mind about Dow3 aesthethics, because it is thing that doesn't bothers me much.
Overall, I'm sad that the game is dead, but I don't mind it at all. I'll gladly buy it and play it regardless. Heh Supcom2 also was dissapointment for fans and didn't gotted new content expect single DLC, yet I have currently 166 hours in that game. So I will play Dow 3 a lot too.
DmonBlu
The Emperor rewards his faithful... Just keep the game alive till its got balanced appropriately and some exposures to the public. RTS is a fkin dead genre and reviving it will take lots more than hope and excuses. Hopefully after things settle they will put the game on sale cuz its horribly overpriced (dem greedy SEGA jerks) and the lacks of content doesnt help much either:((