Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by Windsong, May 3, 2016.
Don't have time to check out gameplay if there is any. Post it here if you beat me to it.
Please Relic. After all the bullshit in Company of Heroes 2, don't pull the same shit with this game, or I swear, I will call the Chaos Gods to rip your fucking spines out.
Dumping some screens I've managed to pull from around the web.
Titans look neat but scale is wonky. Though they may be new, I am behind on my editions.
Too small for war hounds, too large for dreadnoughts. Are they called Knights, I think?
Rumors: Base building and large infantry fights are supposedly back.
YOU BASTARD I LITERALLY MADE MY THREAD AT THE EXACT SAME TIME AS YOURS.
MFW DOW3 announced:
Oh shit I'm sorry! Mine was hammered out on my phone so I can at least come back to discussion..
4:24 v 4:25 tho
Also, I'll raise your template with another meme.
When the chain sword bite just right.
lmao It's all good, bruh. Any WH40K love is good by me.
Seriously, I saw the link for the announcement literally last night, and I couldn't wait to see what they would show us. That cinematic was spectacular.
And my buddy found this. We've been talking all day about it:
Dawn of War 3: inside Relic's biggest RTS yet | PC Gamer
From that article it looks like it'll be similar to DoW2 Retribution where you could choose a hero or elite unit. Kinda sorta to me anyway.
Still iffy on the Knights though. Love me some Titans. But DoW1 Apoc mod spoiled me on super massive battles with Titans roaming the field and hundreds of infantry moving around their feet.
OOH MORE INFORMATION YAY.
Wait a second...
Context: They did the same thing to Company of Heroes 2 from Company of Heroes 1. The result being that the two factions in the game played very similarly in the late game, and in which the cover system was essentially broken. There were less structures to hide units in, and even AT guns started losing to tanks--the very thing they were designed to beat--because "they wanted tanks to be an accessible unit."
It was still a solid game, I still enjoyed it quite a bit... And then the Sega came. DLC packs that added two more factions which were essentially 15 dollar ports of factions from the first game, complete with abilities and units that were essentially just ripped straight from it. Microtransactions were coded into the game at a fundamental level that unbalanced the multiplayer. All in the name of "making it more accessible." Which translated to "dumbing the game down to bigger number diplomacy."
I'm gonna stand by my hype train comment and wait until I get to see some gameplay.
The article does mention that they've streamlined and simplified their cover system, in particularly making it much easier to kill the units taking cover with melee/assault units. :| Hmmmm...
Yeah, Imma stand by the hype train too... UNTIL I SEE MORE...
I'm very concerned about the complete lack of mention about Chaos, a core faction in the 40K universe. There's Orks, Eldar, and Space Marines, but no Chaos? The last time Sega did that with a Warhammer game, we got this.
As much as I might want to see Relic have another crack at it, under the rulership of Sega?... I don't know... I don't need another game that will get ruined by patched-in microtransactions later down the line. You know?
That's actually a really good point. Even with the flack Sega got for making Chaos a paid-for DLC (or pre-order perk), they're standing by it. Because... Well, 40k. It's gonna make them money regardless.
I actually think it can do the story a lot more good by focusing it on the three factions, and I really like the idea of jumping back and forth between them; reminds me of the original Starcraft. I think Chaos may be a secret antagonist (as trite as that is by now), and be a playable faction for multiplayer, and have their own storyline as paid DLC. That would be the money-making strategy right there. Not good for you and me as fans and consumers, but definitely what a publisher would do.