It's still a lousy argument. It's a convenient lie that DoW III fans are all-to-ready to convince themselves of. It makes them feel better. Instead of trying to understand how other people have reasonable bases for their opinions, it's much easier to just say, "Oh they disagree with me because they're all unreasonable, stubborn and stuck in the past".
@Katitof said:
CoH series is the best made, most immersive and overall not a singular other WW2 RTS is even close to how good CoH series is, even Men of War series is faaaaaaaar behind.
That's exactly where DoW 3 failed to deliver the same experience. Of course you can argue that DoW 3 is a more competitive game. More balance, less unpredictable. Players are less frustrated by unfair situations. But should the main goal of the players not to be the best ranked player, they could be disappointed.
Most peeps that play RTS competetivly are realistic i think and go with brackets they know they wont be tge best players in the world not unless koreans go extinct lol. And believe it or not. For how competetive SC can get. Its also pretty fun especially when you win a game against a better opponent.
I also like the crap ton of variety that
game
What I like to mention is the immersion factor of the DoW series not to be underaestimated
All of the DoW games were immersive you are right. Every game with a rich universe is pretty immersive usually.
@Draconix said:
Even if doesn't have future as you say, I really apprecciate Relic for continuing supporting this game. In my opinion having more content isn't actually a bad thing. I would like to see even a single new race even if Relic might not have plans for it. Besides this game has a own fans too, even if it isn't a majority, but it still has.
When Rainbow Six Siege was released, the launch performance was underwhelming. However, through continued post-release support and updates, the player base has been massively grown since the game's launch. As long as Relic continues to support Dawn of War 3 it also has a future.
Indeed. Pity is, that most of dissapointed fans don't want to give the game second chance, mostly due to their stubborn love for nostalgia, even if this game has improved a bit after release.
Still I give you +1 for that post.
Wouldn't that also mean that dow3 fans dont want the changes to the gameplay because of their stubborn love for nostalgia ?
Go learn what nostalgia means.
I'll give you a hint:
It does not apply to something going on currently, but exclusively to the past, the longer time ago the better.
@Amoc said:
I explained why I won't give it a second chance. What was unclear about that? If they change the things I don't like about the game, I'll give it another look. Until then, I have no reason to.
As for having a different opinion, I have no problem with that. Just don't make up your own silly reasons for why we don't like the game. We each have our own reasons, and lumping us all together as stubborn nostalgists isn't remotely fair, or even reasonable.
Fact, nostalgia is weak argument for those who don't like this game, there are many reasons why they don't like it. But most people usually wants just Dow1 or Dow2 remake and it cannot be denied as well. Still, I don't bother with what bad they are saying about this game so much.
That is an ridicolous overstatement. Just because some people like this game to have more similarity to the predecessors doesn t mean they want exact copies. What most people criticised is sticking to an certain formula didn t happen. Things like squadleaders, better unit upgrades and the simplification of cover mechanics and armor types have left some bad impressions.
To really hope to regain parts of the old fanbase there would be an relaunch with some reworks of vDoW III and additions of some other stuff more relatable to the older games for PR needed
ImO. Relic should not work to hard to appease people that want the game to fail.
Relic can do a relaunch and people will get all smug and talk ++heresy redacted++. Most of the old fans are way past DoW 3 at this point. Some givin up others just keep trolling some never even tried it and wont stop hating until there is a magical DoW 1 or 2 copy with a V2 marked on the "new box" with crayons (no improvements or new content to the game) in their possession xD.
We are most likely gonna get another retardhammer video gloating and telling his brain dead followers with his annoying voice to not buy the game out of spite.
Relic doesnt need that. Sure they should make a few changed to the core mechanics but id not bend over backwards for a fanbase as toxic as the DoW fans.
@Nassir_Amit said:
So you say relic does not need their oldest, most reliable to love(or hate), and shouldn t listen to the community because it´s hard to manage sometimes? Computer games are art and worthless if not able to generate an brand or uphold it, sae for their ideal value!
Since when computer games are considered as a art?
True art lies in painting, statues, poem and music, but not in computer games. Any true artist, even in modern times wouldn't consider computer game as a art.
@Nassir_Amit said:
So you say relic does not need their oldest, most reliable to love(or hate), and shouldn t listen to the community because it´s hard to manage sometimes? Computer games are art and worthless if not able to generate an brand or uphold it, sae for their ideal value!
Since when computer games are considered as a art?
True art lies in painting, statues, poem and music, but not in computer games. Any true artist, even in modern times wouldn't consider computer game as a art.
It is not essential to live or the development of human civilization
It is dependant onto people liking it and funding it
It is only there to pleasure peoples senses and has more ideal worth then real economic (at least for the buyer)
It is entirely envisioned by people subjectively
Whatever, I don't feel convinced even a bit. In the end it is matter of people's tastes. This game maybe wasn't a huge success, but it still found people who liked that game. And this make me glad, that this game isn't hated by everyone at all. Also what's satisfy me more that Relic didn't abandoned it yet.
@Nassir_Amit said:
That may all be sound and sweet for you and let no chance out of making that clear ( like in EVERY. SINGLE. POST!), but I want the game to do better then this and have its damaged name rebuilt.
People may like this game, but I don't, and I'm glad that there are other people like me willing to explain why! +1 to you Nassir!
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
Relic doesnt need that. Sure they should make a few changed to the core mechanics but id not bend over backwards for a fanbase as toxic as the DoW fans.
What Relic doesn't need is a worthlessly small fanbase shouting down critics on their forums 24/7.
The remaining fanbase is too insignificant to focus future design efforts on. That's not meant as an insult, it's a remark on the futility of spending money on a tiny niche of players that's too small to successfully monetize. With hundreds of thousands of disgruntled/uninterested players wanting nothing to do with the current design scheme, it's reasonable for Relic to be investigating ways to bring them back rather than cater to the trivial number that remain.
@Amoc said:
I explained why I won't give it a second chance. What was unclear about that? If they change the things I don't like about the game, I'll give it another look. Until then, I have no reason to.
As for having a different opinion, I have no problem with that. Just don't make up your own silly reasons for why we don't like the game. We each have our own reasons, and lumping us all together as stubborn nostalgists isn't remotely fair, or even reasonable.
Fact, nostalgia is weak argument for those who don't like this game, there are many reasons why they don't like it. But most people usually wants just Dow1 or Dow2 remake and it cannot be denied as well. Still, I don't bother with what bad they are saying about this game so much.
That is an ridicolous overstatement. Just because some people like this game to have more similarity to the predecessors doesn t mean they want exact copies. What most people criticised is sticking to an certain formula didn t happen. Things like squadleaders, better unit upgrades and the simplification of cover mechanics and armor types have left some bad impressions.
To really hope to regain parts of the old fanbase there would be an relaunch with some reworks of vDoW III and additions of some other stuff more relatable to the older games for PR needed
ImO. Relic should not work to hard to appease people that want the game to fail.
Relic can do a relaunch and people will get all smug and talk ++heresy redacted++. Most of the old fans are way past DoW 3 at this point. Some givin up others just keep trolling some never even tried it and wont stop hating until there is a magical DoW 1 or 2 copy with a V2 marked on the "new box" with crayons (no improvements or new content to the game) in their possession xD.
Not everybody, that dislikes the game wants it to fail! Those people will have a smug smile once it happens or they would gladly return if they see it fit as whole. And of course there are some a$$holes that try to make this game actively fail, just like in real life.
Yeah i know that not everybody wants DoW 3 to die off. But again. If you do googling. You will,see that its a majority of people. They are not coming back nassir. They rather die before tge play DoW 3
But why are you still implying everybody asking for features from older games wants an EXACT.SAME.COPY of said game, picturing them as mindless fanboys??? That´s nonsense and you know it, on top of collectivizing people.
Go on internet do some googeling every other hate comment on a DoW 3 vid and thread will have. A "wherez muh DoW 1 or 2 remastuur" I know there are people out there that dont want a carbon copy nassir. Its just that many do.
@Amoc said:
I explained why I won't give it a second chance. What was unclear about that? If they change the things I don't like about the game, I'll give it another look. Until then, I have no reason to.
As for having a different opinion, I have no problem with that. Just don't make up your own silly reasons for why we don't like the game. We each have our own reasons, and lumping us all together as stubborn nostalgists isn't remotely fair, or even reasonable.
Fact, nostalgia is weak argument for those who don't like this game, there are many reasons why they don't like it. But most people usually wants just Dow1 or Dow2 remake and it cannot be denied as well. Still, I don't bother with what bad they are saying about this game so much.
That is an ridicolous overstatement. Just because some people like this game to have more similarity to the predecessors doesn t mean they want exact copies. What most people criticised is sticking to an certain formula didn t happen. Things like squadleaders, better unit upgrades and the simplification of cover mechanics and armor types have left some bad impressions.
To really hope to regain parts of the old fanbase there would be an relaunch with some reworks of vDoW III and additions of some other stuff more relatable to the older games for PR needed
We are most likely gonna get another retardhammer video gloating and telling his brain dead followers with his annoying voice to not buy the game out of spite.
You do seem to not like ArchWarhammer and it´s effecting your neutral statements. I watched his main video on DoW III release. He stated 2 things
a) He considers this game not to be an DoW game after 2 minutes and then takes the time to explain, why
b) if this game would have named anything other then DoW, he would have been fairer to it
It is his opinion on this matter an people can agree or disagree with his points. Just because they consider his opinion matching theirs in terms of dislike to the game they are collectivized as " the enemy". Nobody is so stupid an bases his opinion on buying an game on sololey one persons opinion and if they do, they have more serious problems than this game.
Also it is just plainly wrong for Arch beeing called out as this, as many other you tubers have done covers of the game with no buy recomendations based on different problems
exspecially that one : D
Reason why i dont like arch is that he speaks as if what he says is factual when really its only his oppinion. This he tries to force on others and his flock likes eating what he is dropping. Just like how he was pushing politics and 40k down peoples throats and some people started getting mad at him about it and started unsubbing. He than started a seperate channel for that. I dont have problem with people giving it a Do not buy review. Its cool. Arch isnt a good game reviewer though.
He flames and goes on rants and doesnt speak from a neutral point of view especially when it comes to video games. He is biased and if you watch his videos you can see that if you have half a brain. He doesnt like the game and he went out of his way to hate on it. He made several vids about it even a post mortem where he acts like it was him that caused DoW 3 to have such a bad start.
Arch is a piece of ++heresy redacted++ nassir. Quite simply put its sad that you are eating his dung too. ;]
@Amoc said:
I explained why I won't give it a second chance. What was unclear about that? If they change the things I don't like about the game, I'll give it another look. Until then, I have no reason to.
As for having a different opinion, I have no problem with that. Just don't make up your own silly reasons for why we don't like the game. We each have our own reasons, and lumping us all together as stubborn nostalgists isn't remotely fair, or even reasonable.
Fact, nostalgia is weak argument for those who don't like this game, there are many reasons why they don't like it. But most people usually wants just Dow1 or Dow2 remake and it cannot be denied as well. Still, I don't bother with what bad they are saying about this game so much.
That is an ridicolous overstatement. Just because some people like this game to have more similarity to the predecessors doesn t mean they want exact copies. What most people criticised is sticking to an certain formula didn t happen. Things like squadleaders, better unit upgrades and the simplification of cover mechanics and armor types have left some bad impressions.
To really hope to regain parts of the old fanbase there would be an relaunch with some reworks of vDoW III and additions of some other stuff more relatable to the older games for PR needed
Relic doesnt need that. Sure they should make a few changed to the core mechanics but id not bend over backwards for a fanbase as toxic as the DoW fans.
So you say relic does not need their oldest, most reliable to love(or hate), and shouldn t listen to the community because it´s hard to manage sometimes? Computer games are art and worthless if not able to generate an brand or uphold it, sae for their ideal value!
No relic does not need fans like that. Its one thing to be upset about the game. But being upset about a game and taking it personal than trying to trash it in every way possible that is a problem nassir.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
No relic does not need fans like that. Its one thing to be upset about the game. But being upset about a game and taking it personal than trying to trash it in every way possible that is a problem nassir.
It's like the critics are kicking your puppy or something, rather than expressing what we would have rather seen for DoW III.
I think DoW III sucks. I really don't think the design was well-conceived, even on a conceptual level, and that says nothing of the execution. DoW III's design scheme was something nobody was asking for, so it's hard to understand where it came from and the outcome was extremely disappointing.
Attacking the poster who makes these complaints is taking things personal.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
No relic does not need fans like that. Its one thing to be upset about the game. But being upset about a game and taking it personal than trying to trash it in every way possible that is a problem nassir.
It's like the critics are kicking your puppy or something, rather than expressing what we would have rather seen for DoW III.
I think DoW III sucks. I really don't think the design was well-conceived, even on a conceptual level, and that says nothing of the execution. DoW III's design scheme was something nobody was asking for, so it's hard to understand where it came from and the outcome was extremely disappointing.
Attacking the poster who makes these complaints is taking things personal.
Maybe sucks for most but not for everyone. I know that you dont like the game and you're not alone, true, but I personally like the game and I'm not alone at that too. Other people like Canned, Katitoff, TokyoDream and PhilthyPhil also like this game. Besides Relic is doing its best to help the game to improve. And I respect them for that.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
Relic doesnt need that. Sure they should make a few changed to the core mechanics but id not bend over backwards for a fanbase as toxic as the DoW fans.
What Relic doesn't need is a worthlessly small fanbase shouting down critics on their forums 24/7.
The remaining fanbase is too insignificant to focus future design efforts on. That's not meant as an insult, it's a remark on the futility of spending money on a tiny niche of players that's too small to successfully monetize. With hundreds of thousands of disgruntled/uninterested players wanting nothing to do with the current design scheme, it's reasonable for Relic to be investigating ways to bring them back rather than cater to the trivial number that remain.
You want me to be honest with you amoc. Relic isnt even particularly catering to me with this game yet. Do i like what im seeing yeah for the most part. Its a good game with a decent foundation and they have fixed alot of problems. Sure they should be further improving and change things and work to make people happy. I just think they shouldnt compromise the games integrity and break it all over again just to try and please 300k people that all expected something different and dont even see eye to eye amongst each other with a majority of em probably never going to play DoW 3 again.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
No relic does not need fans like that. Its one thing to be upset about the game. But being upset about a game and taking it personal than trying to trash it in every way possible that is a problem nassir.
It's like the critics are kicking your puppy or something, rather than expressing what we would have rather seen for DoW III.
I think DoW III sucks. I really don't think the design was well-conceived, even on a conceptual level, and that says nothing of the execution. DoW III's design scheme was something nobody was asking for, so it's hard to understand where it came from and the outcome was extremely disappointing.
Attacking the poster who makes these complaints is taking things personal.
There is nothing wrong with people complaining about the game they are either wrong or right or both. Im talkin about the avid haters out there.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
I think Relic should not give up on their vision.
Their vision was a poor one. If the game is going to go anywhere and last, it has to change. There aren't enough people left playing or caring about the game to allow for a long and healthy life cycle. For the precious few remaining fans, all you can reasonably expect are map packs, elites, skins and if you're really lucky maybe a half-assed new faction. There's not enough of a market to justify anything else. If you're happy with that, then fine, but I doubt Relic is. As it stands I suspect they made very little (if any) profit off the game. I'd guess they're sitting on a net loss in fact.
If Relic wants to reverse that position, major changes are required.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
I think Relic should not give up on their vision.
Their vision was a poor one. If the game is going to go anywhere and last, it has to change. There aren't enough people left playing or caring about the game to allow for a long and healthy life cycle. For the precious few remaining fans, all you can reasonably expect are map packs, elites, skins and if you're really lucky maybe a half-assed new faction. There's not enough of a market to justify anything else. If you're happy with that, then fine, but I doubt Relic is. As it stands I suspect they made very little (if any) profit off the game. I'd guess they're sitting on a net loss in fact.
If Relic wants to reverse that position, major changes are required.
The thing is many dont even know what relics trying to achieve with DoW 3. Maybe their vision was to make a good multiplayer game with responsive units and decent pathing and balance that achievable.,i dont know.
Relic have made their vision clear in interviews. The stated goal was a dawn of war that combined elements of 1 and 2 that would be accessible to newcomers. I'd say those boxes were ticked, but the resulting mix of ideas doesn't result in a game as engaging as it's predecessors. I still enjoyed it, clearly a lot more than many, but I cannot deny some disappointment.
Who asked for it? I can only gather that there was the hope and intention that by combining elements from both (entirely different) games they could appeal to both parts of their fractured community, and the accessibility because they wanted broader market appeal.
As for Arch warhammer, I loathed that initial video because it set out definitions of what makes a Dawn of War game a Dawn of War game, the majority of which were only applicable to one or the other of the two preceding games. Honestly I disliked his presentation as an ersatz Total-Biscuit moreso and that could be the main issue. But later I came to realise that whatever the trappings and semi-applicable rationalisations, the design just flat out didn't appeal, and even if thousands watched that video and were turned off, thousands still bought and played the game despite it only to stop shortly thereafter. Now it could be well be that early negativity and the anchoring effect harmed reception, but enough people have given it a shot only to leave en masse for it to demonstrate a deeper issue. Even after the spike of players following the endless war update, the CCU returned quickly to previous figures.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
I think Relic should not give up on their vision.
Their vision was a poor one. If the game is going to go anywhere and last, it has to change. There aren't enough people left playing or caring about the game to allow for a long and healthy life cycle. For the precious few remaining fans, all you can reasonably expect are map packs, elites, skins and if you're really lucky maybe a half-assed new faction. There's not enough of a market to justify anything else. If you're happy with that, then fine, but I doubt Relic is. As it stands I suspect they made very little (if any) profit off the game. I'd guess they're sitting on a net loss in fact.
If Relic wants to reverse that position, major changes are required.
The thing is many dont even know what relics trying to achieve with DoW 3. Maybe their vision was to make a good multiplayer game with responsive units and decent pathing and balance that achievable.,i dont know. > @WorlockOrk said:
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
I think Relic should not give up on their vision.
Their vision was a poor one. If the game is going to go anywhere and last, it has to change. There aren't enough people left playing or caring about the game to allow for a long and healthy life cycle. For the precious few remaining fans, all you can reasonably expect are map packs, elites, skins and if you're really lucky maybe a half-assed new faction. There's not enough of a market to justify anything else. If you're happy with that, then fine, but I doubt Relic is. As it stands I suspect they made very little (if any) profit off the game. I'd guess they're sitting on a net loss in fact.
If Relic wants to reverse that position, major changes are required.
The thing is many dont even know what relics trying to achieve with DoW 3. Maybe their vision was to make a good multiplayer game with responsive units and decent pathing and balance that achievable.,i dont know.
Maybe the main goal was to enable all those who have shitty outdated comps to play it...
Oh look how the game runs smoothly . For sure, they removed almost everything from it.
Thats not true at all. But ok.
Graphics are good for the scale of the game. Would even,say they are better than dow 2. The more people can play it on their rig the better. I remember alot of people,trying to play DoW 2 with their shitty rigs and just laag the game.
@Jazz_Sandwich said:
So, looks like when it comes to content or rework, Relic are aiming for both, judging by Bens recent post. He also spoke of certain "obstacles". So, speculation hats on, I'm assuming that obstacles from a programming end of things means new systems. What do we think that could be? Cover, veterancy, wargear, none of the above?
I'm afraid, it's destribution obstacles. Vancestubbs is quite right: I see rear hits, directional covers, those very "retreat" (wow, just look at those Wraithguards and Wriathblades: make them skip the phase when they are shifting to another unit, and you will have those very withdraw), RNG on WhrillWinds (btw by Mortar's CoH1 pattern, when shell are disappearing in the skies and reappearing above the target, creating infamous animation "feature"), scarce on Bigtrakks and their mines, accuracy (in a different capacity, maybe) on HBD + positive, negative knockback, shot absorbers and a bunch of status effects - Havoc.
So, I'm afraid the issue is in the distribution method: there is no skulls anymore, so no micro DLC's as well. They have to deliver content in some other state. I won't be specullating with how Relic is going to perform it though.
From what Ben said, there are two conclusions I can make:
1. They have absolutely no idea what to do with DOW III yet, and more importantly they have no time till somewhere around February, because they are deeply tied up with AoE4, and maybe by Feb they'll come up with something, which would explain a lot.
2. If they really have some ideas, and it will take so much time to implement, then I don't see one single reason why they don't even give us a hint of what it is exactly, considering it is aimed at gameplay? I mean who in his right mind can trust that new mechanics (or the like) they're working on isn't another disaster about to happen? And considering how it is worded, they'll just let us test it out before going live, so they can't have any insight of it being bad idea to start working on in the first place. They'll just push it out and we'll have to deal with it. And if it appears to be a disaster, than ~2 months of work down the drain?
Wouldn't it be smarter to ask community about something they think of implementing have any appeal at all instead of "behind-the-scenes" work till February?
Sometimes I wonder who Relic thinks they making this game for...
@Nassir_Amit said:
So you say relic does not need their oldest, most reliable to love(or hate), and shouldn t listen to the community because it´s hard to manage sometimes? Computer games are art and worthless if not able to generate an brand or uphold it, sae for their ideal value!
Since when computer games are considered as a art?
True art lies in painting, statues, poem and music, but not in computer games. Any true artist, even in modern times wouldn't consider computer game as a art.
sorry, but a single videogame can uphold a LOT of art, from art style, to music, to storytelling, sorry but this time you are WRONG.
Maybe. But if the making games should be a passion, then wouldn't be a passion to support a game, even if it doesn't do well as well? I think it even should be a passion to give a game more love though content and updates regardless of how bad is its situation just like Relic does to this game.
@Jazz_Sandwich said:
Relic have made their vision clear in interviews. The stated goal was a dawn of war that combined elements of 1 and 2 that would be accessible to newcomers. I'd say those boxes were ticked, but the resulting mix of ideas doesn't result in a game as engaging as it's predecessors. I still enjoyed it, clearly a lot more than many, but I cannot deny some disappointment.
This is what I've been saying for a long time. A lot of the features in DoW III seem to have been implemented as a box-ticking exercise. The problem is that it ended up being a design-by-compromise and they failed to understand the how and why certain features were things people wanted. The larger-scale battles are a prime example of this. That was probably one of the biggest "asks" from the DoW 1 fanbase. Well Relic ticked that box but never seemed to understand WHY we wanted bigger armies. We didn't want larger paper armies that got evaporated by elites and abilities. It seems like it was just an increase in the unit count for the sake of bigger unit counts. They didn't seem to consider how that would play out on the constrained maps they delivered, with the elite/ability focused gameplay. The result was a mess.
Menu
Comments
Amoc
It's still a lousy argument. It's a convenient lie that DoW III fans are all-to-ready to convince themselves of. It makes them feel better. Instead of trying to understand how other people have reasonable bases for their opinions, it's much easier to just say, "Oh they disagree with me because they're all unreasonable, stubborn and stuck in the past".
CANNED_F3TUS
All of the DoW games were immersive you are right. Every game with a rich universe is pretty immersive usually.
SC is pretty immersive too.
CANNED_F3TUS
Haha im not sure if he purposly fails so hard.
CANNED_F3TUS
ImO. Relic should not work to hard to appease people that want the game to fail.
Relic can do a relaunch and people will get all smug and talk ++heresy redacted++. Most of the old fans are way past DoW 3 at this point. Some givin up others just keep trolling some never even tried it and wont stop hating until there is a magical DoW 1 or 2 copy with a V2 marked on the "new box" with crayons (no improvements or new content to the game) in their possession xD.
We are most likely gonna get another retardhammer video gloating and telling his brain dead followers with his annoying voice to not buy the game out of spite.
Relic doesnt need that. Sure they should make a few changed to the core mechanics but id not bend over backwards for a fanbase as toxic as the DoW fans.
Draconix
Since when computer games are considered as a art?
True art lies in painting, statues, poem and music, but not in computer games. Any true artist, even in modern times wouldn't consider computer game as a art.
Draconix
Whatever, I don't feel convinced even a bit. In the end it is matter of people's tastes. This game maybe wasn't a huge success, but it still found people who liked that game. And this make me glad, that this game isn't hated by everyone at all. Also what's satisfy me more that Relic didn't abandoned it yet.
Amoc
People may like this game, but I don't, and I'm glad that there are other people like me willing to explain why! +1 to you Nassir!
+1
+1
+1
Amoc
What Relic doesn't need is a worthlessly small fanbase shouting down critics on their forums 24/7.
The remaining fanbase is too insignificant to focus future design efforts on. That's not meant as an insult, it's a remark on the futility of spending money on a tiny niche of players that's too small to successfully monetize. With hundreds of thousands of disgruntled/uninterested players wanting nothing to do with the current design scheme, it's reasonable for Relic to be investigating ways to bring them back rather than cater to the trivial number that remain.
CANNED_F3TUS
Yeah i know that not everybody wants DoW 3 to die off. But again. If you do googling. You will,see that its a majority of people. They are not coming back nassir. They rather die before tge play DoW 3
Go on internet do some googeling every other hate comment on a DoW 3 vid and thread will have. A "wherez muh DoW 1 or 2 remastuur" I know there are people out there that dont want a carbon copy nassir. Its just that many do.
Reason why i dont like arch is that he speaks as if what he says is factual when really its only his oppinion. This he tries to force on others and his flock likes eating what he is dropping. Just like how he was pushing politics and 40k down peoples throats and some people started getting mad at him about it and started unsubbing. He than started a seperate channel for that. I dont have problem with people giving it a Do not buy review. Its cool. Arch isnt a good game reviewer though.
He flames and goes on rants and doesnt speak from a neutral point of view especially when it comes to video games. He is biased and if you watch his videos you can see that if you have half a brain. He doesnt like the game and he went out of his way to hate on it. He made several vids about it even a post mortem where he acts like it was him that caused DoW 3 to have such a bad start.
Arch is a piece of ++heresy redacted++ nassir. Quite simply put its sad that you are eating his dung too. ;]
No relic does not need fans like that. Its one thing to be upset about the game. But being upset about a game and taking it personal than trying to trash it in every way possible that is a problem nassir.
Amoc
It's like the critics are kicking your puppy or something, rather than expressing what we would have rather seen for DoW III.
I think DoW III sucks. I really don't think the design was well-conceived, even on a conceptual level, and that says nothing of the execution. DoW III's design scheme was something nobody was asking for, so it's hard to understand where it came from and the outcome was extremely disappointing.
Attacking the poster who makes these complaints is taking things personal.
Draconix
Maybe sucks for most but not for everyone. I know that you dont like the game and you're not alone, true, but I personally like the game and I'm not alone at that too. Other people like Canned, Katitoff, TokyoDream and PhilthyPhil also like this game. Besides Relic is doing its best to help the game to improve. And I respect them for that.
CANNED_F3TUS
You want me to be honest with you amoc. Relic isnt even particularly catering to me with this game yet. Do i like what im seeing yeah for the most part. Its a good game with a decent foundation and they have fixed alot of problems. Sure they should be further improving and change things and work to make people happy. I just think they shouldnt compromise the games integrity and break it all over again just to try and please 300k people that all expected something different and dont even see eye to eye amongst each other with a majority of em probably never going to play DoW 3 again.
I think Relic should not give up on their vision.
CANNED_F3TUS
There is nothing wrong with people complaining about the game they are either wrong or right or both. Im talkin about the avid haters out there.
Amoc
Their vision was a poor one. If the game is going to go anywhere and last, it has to change. There aren't enough people left playing or caring about the game to allow for a long and healthy life cycle. For the precious few remaining fans, all you can reasonably expect are map packs, elites, skins and if you're really lucky maybe a half-assed new faction. There's not enough of a market to justify anything else. If you're happy with that, then fine, but I doubt Relic is. As it stands I suspect they made very little (if any) profit off the game. I'd guess they're sitting on a net loss in fact.
If Relic wants to reverse that position, major changes are required.
CANNED_F3TUS
The thing is many dont even know what relics trying to achieve with DoW 3. Maybe their vision was to make a good multiplayer game with responsive units and decent pathing and balance that achievable.,i dont know.
Jazz_Sandwich
Relic have made their vision clear in interviews. The stated goal was a dawn of war that combined elements of 1 and 2 that would be accessible to newcomers. I'd say those boxes were ticked, but the resulting mix of ideas doesn't result in a game as engaging as it's predecessors. I still enjoyed it, clearly a lot more than many, but I cannot deny some disappointment.
Who asked for it? I can only gather that there was the hope and intention that by combining elements from both (entirely different) games they could appeal to both parts of their fractured community, and the accessibility because they wanted broader market appeal.
As for Arch warhammer, I loathed that initial video because it set out definitions of what makes a Dawn of War game a Dawn of War game, the majority of which were only applicable to one or the other of the two preceding games. Honestly I disliked his presentation as an ersatz Total-Biscuit moreso and that could be the main issue. But later I came to realise that whatever the trappings and semi-applicable rationalisations, the design just flat out didn't appeal, and even if thousands watched that video and were turned off, thousands still bought and played the game despite it only to stop shortly thereafter. Now it could be well be that early negativity and the anchoring effect harmed reception, but enough people have given it a shot only to leave en masse for it to demonstrate a deeper issue. Even after the spike of players following the endless war update, the CCU returned quickly to previous figures.
CANNED_F3TUS
The thing is many dont even know what relics trying to achieve with DoW 3. Maybe their vision was to make a good multiplayer game with responsive units and decent pathing and balance that achievable.,i dont know. > @WorlockOrk said:
Thats not true at all. But ok.
Graphics are good for the scale of the game. Would even,say they are better than dow 2. The more people can play it on their rig the better. I remember alot of people,trying to play DoW 2 with their shitty rigs and just laag the game.
Ololo111
I'm afraid, it's destribution obstacles. Vancestubbs is quite right: I see rear hits, directional covers, those very "retreat" (wow, just look at those Wraithguards and Wriathblades: make them skip the phase when they are shifting to another unit, and you will have those very withdraw), RNG on WhrillWinds (btw by Mortar's CoH1 pattern, when shell are disappearing in the skies and reappearing above the target, creating infamous animation "feature"), scarce on Bigtrakks and their mines, accuracy (in a different capacity, maybe) on HBD + positive, negative knockback, shot absorbers and a bunch of status effects - Havoc.
So, I'm afraid the issue is in the distribution method: there is no skulls anymore, so no micro DLC's as well. They have to deliver content in some other state. I won't be specullating with how Relic is going to perform it though.
Stoner
From what Ben said, there are two conclusions I can make:
1. They have absolutely no idea what to do with DOW III yet, and more importantly they have no time till somewhere around February, because they are deeply tied up with AoE4, and maybe by Feb they'll come up with something, which would explain a lot.
2. If they really have some ideas, and it will take so much time to implement, then I don't see one single reason why they don't even give us a hint of what it is exactly, considering it is aimed at gameplay? I mean who in his right mind can trust that new mechanics (or the like) they're working on isn't another disaster about to happen? And considering how it is worded, they'll just let us test it out before going live, so they can't have any insight of it being bad idea to start working on in the first place. They'll just push it out and we'll have to deal with it. And if it appears to be a disaster, than ~2 months of work down the drain?
Wouldn't it be smarter to ask community about something they think of implementing have any appeal at all instead of "behind-the-scenes" work till February?
Sometimes I wonder who Relic thinks they making this game for...
Draconix
Maybe. But if the making games should be a passion, then wouldn't be a passion to support a game, even if it doesn't do well as well? I think it even should be a passion to give a game more love though content and updates regardless of how bad is its situation just like Relic does to this game.
Amoc
This is what I've been saying for a long time. A lot of the features in DoW III seem to have been implemented as a box-ticking exercise. The problem is that it ended up being a design-by-compromise and they failed to understand the how and why certain features were things people wanted. The larger-scale battles are a prime example of this. That was probably one of the biggest "asks" from the DoW 1 fanbase. Well Relic ticked that box but never seemed to understand WHY we wanted bigger armies. We didn't want larger paper armies that got evaporated by elites and abilities. It seems like it was just an increase in the unit count for the sake of bigger unit counts. They didn't seem to consider how that would play out on the constrained maps they delivered, with the elite/ability focused gameplay. The result was a mess.