Frankly, this is embarrassing when a literal who dev can put out a game that looks like this in pre-alpha. You guys should really be ashamed of yourselves.
LoL! Watched the trailer. Not really that impressed. I might as well play CoH.
Why should they be ashamed of themselves? Iron harvest could be total clunky garbage with heavy emphasize on mechs (being your heros) with hardly any base building. If they copy paste everything from CoH (because it looks heavily inspired by it.) In the end its not gonna be a RTS but a RTT game. Probably the reason why the units and mechs are a whole lot more polished and everything. Its gonna be small scale. Just looking at it i know for a fact its gonna be a gpu hog and the devs will have no choice but to keep it small scale.
@grndmrshlgando said:
Frankly, this is embarrassing when a literal who dev can put out a game that looks like this in pre-alpha. You guys should really be ashamed of yourselves.
Can we stop with the moronic statements yet? Every time I check back here there's always something to make my eyes roll.
looks more like a relic game than dow 3 every will. Also, base building only adds something to a game when the resource system is like in SC, with gathering units and multiple resource spots. with a resource system like relic is using since dow 1, it only takes up space and requires clicks without adding any depth.
@nachocheese said:
looks more like a relic game than dow 3 every will. Also, base building only adds something to a game when the resource system is like in SC, with gathering units and multiple resource spots. with a resource system like relic is using since dow 1, it only takes up space and requires clicks without adding any depth.
That is complete utter ++heresy redacted++. How does base building resource managment (which you do by fighting for map control), unit production and timings not provide depth.
Edit. It adds depth to gameplay you just dont see it or mistake it as a extra thing to do.
the way basebuilding is in relic RTS games, could be done with upgrades as well. since you dont need to place your buildings based on where resource nodes are, base building has no depth in that case.
@nachocheese said:
the way basebuilding is in relic RTS games, could be done with upgrades as well. since you dont need to place your buildings based on where resource nodes are, base building has no depth in that case.
Positioning production structures as proxies has depth to it and is a strategic decision. Also with the way resources are gained you still gotta decide if you want to gain more power initially or more rec and how much resources you want to spend to get an economic advantage. Cause rec and power cost money and depending what way u go will determine what you can do early game. Rec costs power and power costs req.
i'll be honest, anims dont look bad and the destructible environment is great, too. however, game looks goofy as hell. ugly walking tin cans shooting at each other? seriously? at least that's the impression i got...
also, dont give your hopes up! i remember people's reactions on seeing the first Act of Aggression trailers praising the game as the revival of modern RTS and a true candidate to a C&C Generals sequel. what happened several months after? game died a miserable death (despite being quite solid) and everyone jumped ship.
moral of the story? anything new on the market looks great and fresh, but what it finally comes down to is longevity and consistency. i am very very cautious when it comes to new RTS game IPs because they usually fail horribly. now look at DoW in comparison: the series has been in existence for over a decade with many copies sold, highly praised and loved worldwide. now tell me, who should be ashamed of what again?
DoW III isn't particularly large scale. There are lots more unit models, but you're not exactly experiencing huge spread out armies on sprawling battlefields. You're smashing blobs against each other on small, constrictive maps and playing MOBA with them.
DoW III isn't particularly large scale. There are lots more unit models, but you're not exactly experiencing huge spread out armies on sprawling battlefields. You're smashing blobs against each other on small, constrictive maps and playing MOBA with them.
Still gonna be bigger than iron harvest though. I just dont see many units being controlled in this iron harvest game and will be just as moba esque with heavy emphasize on winning the battles with powerful robots. The maps will also be pretty small bout the same size as DoW 2 maps. I also dont buy the graphics and insane physics this game will bring to the table. Something is gonna get dialed down i know this much.
Edit. About the small constrictive maps. The maps have been getting bigger. Work shop maps are quite expansive too.
@TripSin said:
This actually does look really good.
It does but i aint getting super stoked about it. Looks like its gonna be a CoH Moba hybrid :DDDDDDD But people probably aint gonna ++heresy redacted++ about that.
It looks vaguely interesting, but I'm always skeptical of cross-platform RTS' as it tends to mean they're somewhat lowest common denominator in nature so as to appeal to console gamers (and hardware/controls), and it usually also means far less mod support.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
Edit. About the small constrictive maps. The maps have been getting bigger. Work shop maps are quite expansive too.
Yeah I know. Map size is sort of a complaint-within-other-complaints with DoW III. The game is designed so that large, sprawling maps don't really "work" the same way as they could in other games, but then the resulting small maps make the game feel even more constricted.
@CANNED_F3TUS said:
Edit. About the small constrictive maps. The maps have been getting bigger. Work shop maps are quite expansive too.
Yeah I know. Map size is sort of a complaint-within-other-complaints with DoW III. The game is designed so that large, sprawling maps don't really "work" the same way as they could in other games, but then the resulting small maps make the game feel even more constricted.
Not sure about that. Maps should not be humongues regardless maps the size of some DoW 1 or SC 2 maps are good enough imo.
@Amoc said:
I'm talking about the lane-based map criticism, but also acknowledging why it exists with DoW III's current mechanics.
Not a fan of lane maps but they are as old as RTS games themselves. Im sure they gonna release laneless maps that are balanced. Some already are not so bad.
It's not necessarily the lanes themselves that are the problem. It's part and parcel with the overall design concept. Because combat is so MOBA-oriented (ability spam), there is less opportunity for multi-front combat. Units are far less effective without attentive player input in this game than others, so the inclination is to keep almost all of them together. This removes a lot of the need for interesting maps, at least compared to other RTS games.
Comments
CANNED_F3TUS
LoL! Watched the trailer. Not really that impressed. I might as well play CoH.
Why should they be ashamed of themselves? Iron harvest could be total clunky garbage with heavy emphasize on mechs (being your heros) with hardly any base building. If they copy paste everything from CoH (because it looks heavily inspired by it.) In the end its not gonna be a RTS but a RTT game. Probably the reason why the units and mechs are a whole lot more polished and everything. Its gonna be small scale. Just looking at it i know for a fact its gonna be a gpu hog and the devs will have no choice but to keep it small scale.
Krakza
Can we stop with the moronic statements yet? Every time I check back here there's always something to make my eyes roll.
tritol
I remember having this one DoW back in 2009 ... you forgot to get of the hate train
nachocheese
looks more like a relic game than dow 3 every will. Also, base building only adds something to a game when the resource system is like in SC, with gathering units and multiple resource spots. with a resource system like relic is using since dow 1, it only takes up space and requires clicks without adding any depth.
CANNED_F3TUS
That is complete utter ++heresy redacted++. How does base building resource managment (which you do by fighting for map control), unit production and timings not provide depth.
Edit. It adds depth to gameplay you just dont see it or mistake it as a extra thing to do.
nachocheese
the way basebuilding is in relic RTS games, could be done with upgrades as well. since you dont need to place your buildings based on where resource nodes are, base building has no depth in that case.
CANNED_F3TUS
Positioning production structures as proxies has depth to it and is a strategic decision. Also with the way resources are gained you still gotta decide if you want to gain more power initially or more rec and how much resources you want to spend to get an economic advantage. Cause rec and power cost money and depending what way u go will determine what you can do early game. Rec costs power and power costs req.
nachocheese
deciding if you want more req or more power has nothing to do with basebuilding however, as the base buildings aren't what generates those resources.
Ololo111
The game might be good.. but this is kind of compromising to see the same thread on the Steam today.
CANNED_F3TUS
Could explain the stupid statement.
Ace40k
i'll be honest, anims dont look bad and the destructible environment is great, too. however, game looks goofy as hell. ugly walking tin cans shooting at each other? seriously? at least that's the impression i got...
also, dont give your hopes up! i remember people's reactions on seeing the first Act of Aggression trailers praising the game as the revival of modern RTS and a true candidate to a C&C Generals sequel. what happened several months after? game died a miserable death (despite being quite solid) and everyone jumped ship.
moral of the story? anything new on the market looks great and fresh, but what it finally comes down to is longevity and consistency. i am very very cautious when it comes to new RTS game IPs because they usually fail horribly. now look at DoW in comparison: the series has been in existence for over a decade with many copies sold, highly praised and loved worldwide. now tell me, who should be ashamed of what again?
Amoc
DoW III isn't particularly large scale. There are lots more unit models, but you're not exactly experiencing huge spread out armies on sprawling battlefields. You're smashing blobs against each other on small, constrictive maps and playing MOBA with them.
CANNED_F3TUS
Still gonna be bigger than iron harvest though. I just dont see many units being controlled in this iron harvest game and will be just as moba esque with heavy emphasize on winning the battles with powerful robots. The maps will also be pretty small bout the same size as DoW 2 maps. I also dont buy the graphics and insane physics this game will bring to the table. Something is gonna get dialed down i know this much.
Edit. About the small constrictive maps. The maps have been getting bigger. Work shop maps are quite expansive too.
Cataclawy
DoW3 should just be a teaser trailer, got it. Thanks! /s
"They call it the war to end all wars. If you ask me, GET READY TO FIGHT!"
Such better voicelines than Dawn of War 3, many wow
Yeah, get yourself hyped up over a teaser trailer. -.-
CANNED_F3TUS
It does but i aint getting super stoked about it. Looks like its gonna be a CoH Moba hybrid :DDDDDDD But people probably aint gonna ++heresy redacted++ about that.
deadman
It looks vaguely interesting, but I'm always skeptical of cross-platform RTS' as it tends to mean they're somewhat lowest common denominator in nature so as to appeal to console gamers (and hardware/controls), and it usually also means far less mod support.
Amoc
Yeah I know. Map size is sort of a complaint-within-other-complaints with DoW III. The game is designed so that large, sprawling maps don't really "work" the same way as they could in other games, but then the resulting small maps make the game feel even more constricted.
CANNED_F3TUS
Not sure about that. Maps should not be humongues regardless maps the size of some DoW 1 or SC 2 maps are good enough imo.
Amoc
I'm talking about the lane-based map criticism, but also acknowledging why it exists with DoW III's current mechanics.
CANNED_F3TUS
Not a fan of lane maps but they are as old as RTS games themselves. Im sure they gonna release laneless maps that are balanced. Some already are not so bad.
Amoc
It's not necessarily the lanes themselves that are the problem. It's part and parcel with the overall design concept. Because combat is so MOBA-oriented (ability spam), there is less opportunity for multi-front combat. Units are far less effective without attentive player input in this game than others, so the inclination is to keep almost all of them together. This removes a lot of the need for interesting maps, at least compared to other RTS games.
The game design lends itself to boring maps.