Menu
Will there ever be Dark Crusade-like campaign?
2 years ago
Tilltech
I've been reading reviews of DoW3 on Steam and a lot of people are miffed that the campaign is so exceedingly linear and intermingling with other races.
I'm still super pissed off that we didn't get:
- faction coherency, you pick a race and conquer others, you don't play other races every other mission, that's moronic and immersion-breaking
- you have player agency, you are not led by a leash through a linear campaign, through events beyond your control
- you decide who to fight and when, based on which area you attack and the accumulative decisions you made
- story vs non-linearity is false dichotomy, every stronghold map in Dark Crusade had very strong story and cut-scenes for that time
Relic needs to expand and enrich the Dark Crusade concept, not completely dismiss it.
I can't believe people in this company are so clueless that a person even has to state that.
0
Comments
TOGgledShot
This was from another post of mine, but I feel it may still hold some weight here.
Tilltech
Frankly, I can't stand any RTS that doesn't have detailed, fluid, weighty animations. Even Starfract 2 turned me off because of this.
DoW series is the only one that always got it right every single time, minus the unsolvable problem of vehicle clipping.
Devs for RTS games don't seem to understand that people want to see detailed action that relays impact. Just look at Supreme Commander 2, they had this new system to combat vehicle clipping that relied on units just gliding all over the place, without any ingame mechanism for it whatsoever. It completely dissipated game's "physics".
Even if you don't notice it, your brain does. The concept of RTS was never in question, its execution was.
Razor
well the problem with the dark crusade campaign is that execpt for the fortress battles every other mission is just another skirmirsh against the ai which gets stale pretty fast. Linear campaigns can be very fun, thought out and allow for interessting twists each map. Just look at any of the starcraft 2 campaigns, every mission is different and interessting you cant have that with a risk style campaign. I agree tho that the first half of the dow 3 campaign is a drag,
Tilltech
Why did you post this?
Did you read nothing in the opening post?
What's going on here??
Wa2Magge
Sorry mate but he has completely right.
I would love such a campaign in DoW3 too, but i dont think that will ever happen. (i think it´s the same as for swbf2 2017)
Razor
because i dont agree with most of your points ?
HELLDRAGON
I really like DOW3 , i was afraid like you first but then when i played the SP and MP i was really impressed. the game is really good and the plot is engaging it doesnt make you bored
Erza321
If Relic does do another Dark Crusade style campaign I have a few suggestions to improve the campaign:
These 4 mission all had unique introduction dialogue and had unique objectives to beat the mission
1. The Hyperion Peaks
2. Ere Badlands
3. The Vandean Coast
4. Pavonis
EndgameOnyx
I think Relic has left the DC/SS style of campaign map in the past, and rightfully so. They explored that style of campaign to its fullest extent, and were careful not to overstay their welcome when it came time to ship out DoW2. DoW2 took a few elements from DoW1, DC, and SS, but I think we can all agree it was very much its own style of Dawn of War title. DoW3 has done the same. They took a few elements from the previous titles, but allowed the game to form its own identity.
Contrary to popular belief, this game was never supposed to, nor was it ever promised to be, a clone or revamp of the previous DoW titles. Frankly, I think they should continue to develop this game along the path they are already on and see where it takes them. I wasn't a huge fan of DoW2, but by Retribution they had done much to earn back my freetime. Right now, this game has a strong foundation and a promising direction. Let the past be the past.
Tilltech
Let me try to figure this out..
I post this...
Which, for a normal person, upon reading would completely invalidate what you posted, and prevent such post from existing in the first place.
And then you post your comment like I didn't post none of it...and then you pretend that it has to do with some "points" and objectivism...like wtf is wrong with you?
Are you so mentally decrepit that you don't understand that "expand and enrich" basically means every map being like a Stronghold map, why does that have to be explicitly stated...
Tilltech
Yes, not only stronghold maps were excellent, I thoroughly enjoyed all the maps with special objectives and starting conditions.
Tilltech
It's not engaging if every other mission is other race, there is no faction coherency in the slightest.
I don't understand from where does this mindset come from, how can something that has no coherency, and in which you have no agency, be engaging?
Razor
i dont expect you to get or figure out anything, seeing you are clearly operating on a higher intellectual plane than normal people......
i understood exactly what you where getting at by the way, i still disagree. Why you ask ? because what you are asking requires so much work to get it right that it will be a unfinished campaign if attempted.
Tilltech
It requires less work than the current campaign, each (stronghold)map would be the same for every race in terms of event triggers. Just the reactions from every race would be different, which is a question of voiceover, and that is the most easily produced content.
PrimaGoosa
The DoW 3 campaign plays like you're reading a book, only instead of just reading the book you're interacting with all the fun parts. You get perspectives from multiple characters, and you play out those perspectives.
I don't really understand the mania involved with people wanting some sort of non-linear storytelling. I can certainly understand preferring one mode over the other, but to get "super pissed" and attempt to belittle a developer because they didn't give you exactly what you want?
Personally, I think I prefer a book-style progression through a narrative over an amorphic territory control campaign a la DC. I the furthest my interest could ever take me in DC was to a single enemy Stronghold. After that, it felt like I was just slogging through the same "fully load out every territory when I take it over so it basically can't be taken back" pattern. Dynamically generated stories that emerge from gameplay are only interesting to me when other people are involved. I would have loved a multiplayer version of the DC campaign in some form, but I become disinterested in AI very quickly.
I only go into that detail because it seems the OP can't imagine someone not being ++heresy redacted++ over teakettles in love with the DC style of single player campaign.
Tilltech
You mean a style where you actually feel like you lead a faction and have control, instead of being led around in a campaign where every other mission is another race, so there is no sense of faction coherency and player agency at all?
PrimaGoosa
Right, that style. That's one of multiple styles, and in absolutely no way is it objectively better.
Maybe it's because I have a history of enjoying books, but Choose Your Own Adventure was only one style of book. Most led you on an adventure of someone else's design, and it's still enjoyable despite not being able to have any impact on the narrative. Just because video games have the potential to better allow player agency doesn't mean it should be a requirement.
In the Song of Ice and Fire, do you skip all of the non-Stark chapters in order to maintain faction coherency? No, because then you miss out on all the other perspectives that build a more interesting and complex world. I didn't enjoy the Eldar missions as much because I simply don't like the Eldar as a WH40k race, but in general I enjoyed seeing the story evolve from their perspective as well.
Do you understand how someone could enjoy storybook-style campaigns yet? Just say "yes" and I'll stop. I am already aware that some people prefer the DC-style campaign, and that's fine. But this campaign elitism is ridiculous.
tritol
Id like DS/SS campaign at least as a solo custom or some sort of skirmish, it doesnt have to directly expand the story.
In Command and conquer zero hour, they added for every faction a special subfactions, 3 factions and 3 sub each, making 12 playable factions/races (90% of units were same just few added abilities focused on either stealth, tanks, aircraft etc). You could go play regular you vs. AI fights or you could start fights against these subfactions. That went similar to DC/SS, you chose one of the 12 races and went into fight against the remaining 11, every faction you faced had map made exactly for them giving them higher ground and choke points if they lacked defenses etc, similar to strongholds in DC/SS.
My point is that it wasnt campaign, there was still 10 mission campaign for 3 factions and there was still this added. Id like to see it in DoW3 again, that divided map, fighting strongholds and other races, collecting gear and upgrading abilities for your commanders etc.
Tilltech
What a stupid, condescending way to frame it, I read 4 books per month. What the hell does that have to do with anything...
AKaTTACK
Guys, please dont feed the trolls, it just makes them more obnoxious.
PrimaGoosa
Tilltech reads 4 books per month. No one reads more books or enjoys books more than him. The amount he reads is tremendous.
That wasn't even my point. Some people don't enjoy books, and that's fine. But I like being taken through a multi-perspective story of someone else's design without having to impact it personally.
That was my point.
HELLDRAGON
i think its better to progress in the story from all 3 races point of views , gives u a bigger picture how events are connected
AKaTTACK
Agreed. Tired of the same old, you play one race campaign, then switch sides, but its the same maps, same story, etc..