Profile of MajorBloodnok

I fully realize how much AI casuals love this map, its their blood and bones.

But it also can not be denied how small multiplayer map pool is, especially since all the maps are exclusive and there is no map overlap between the modes, which made CoH2 look like it had much more maps on release.

Good point!

I disagree. I think good games (8/10 rated by plebs) succeed and find the audience.

What you are describing are minor mechanics and direction changes. People will roll over and adapt as long as your game is an objective upgrade. Whether it is more micro-management focused, or more casual, or more strategical - it would have been fine either way as long as it is fun.

I don't think you have understood the nuances in the various COH audiences, if you dismiss such differences so lightly.

(Upgrade conditions would include: better visuals, optimization, pathfinding, AI, netcode, new QoL features, content, mechanics, major rebalance, better backend for content delivery, playbase moderation tools, new and more beneficial business model) I can accept some V1 launch drawbacks but the overall upgrade package has to be an undeniable progress. Otherwise why are you releasing it, this is SF6 and Diablo 4 are taking over all the gaming buzz this month.

Rant noted.

And to prove my point, freaking fighting game has 60k concurrent players this week. You tell me that the primary a console, fighting 1vs1 pvp game, is enjoying this kind of success on PC? It is absolutely the decade of variety: anything goes as long as the quality is good. I bet most of you are playing random crap, from HOI4/WW2 simulators to fantasy MMOs, Cards and Gachas.

People bitched about Diablo III changes (I say this in a positive context where some bickering on social media is absolutely healthy for any game), people now bitching about Diablo 4 mechanics that returned to some Diablo 2 style. Good execution will become a new norm, it is actually healthy for every game to go through these refreshes and wiggles in direction. You can take bad direction, the weather in COH2: admit mistake, learn from it, adapt.

I read the same things about Paradox games streamlining/simplifying themselves. Total Warhammers were panned for magic and other deviations from historical TWs.

More rant. I have never suggested a console player will enjoy COH3. At this stage, I have no idea how it will trend.

The problem with COH3 is, that it isn't just some sharp corners that need brushing. It is the trainwreck that ends up going backwards. Take tank-balance for example: AT superblobs, mines triggered by sound, AT shots clipping on fences, superskillplanes, weird pathing, what are tank destroyers, only heavy destroyer in the game files somewhere never tested. The game is so broken you have multiple direction, technical and design failures all at the same time - sure it functions as a program, but it is a literal mess, don't even know how to start unraveling it.

From your subsequent posts, I deduce that you are primarily interested in team games? Nothing at all wrong with that, but what you describe in team games is not necessarily what is wrong in 1v1. In fact, albeit innocently, you are highlighting the problem with COH1 v COH2. It's the old, old problem do you balance the game from 1v1, or from a team game perspective? FWIW, I think these two POV are irreconcilable and that in fact you should run team games on a different perspective. Here I do agree with you that in 2023, it should be possible to distinguish between 1v1 and team games without too much problem. Team games do not need a wealth of light vehicles with multiple options. e.g. how long will a bike or Weasel last, when players in AT are pumping out fuel and heading for 'heavies' and durable infantry?

Saying that Relic was in some kind of design-checkmate is questionable. COH3 was supposed to be a slam-dunk, it had so many design lessons learned (only by community and ex-Relic), and many low-hanging QoL/Mechanics people asked for years. Couple that with 10 years of modern online gaming trends, visual progress, service monetization - and you have a formula that only needs that 8/10 execution. Nobody even gives a fuck about campaign, it reviewed to some absurd scores (I played COH1 campaigns while in school, rarely do I play SP in RTS).

You have patently ignored what I wrote previously. As a team player, you are entitled to ignore the basics of 1v1 where it changes from COH1 to COh2, but I can assure you those changes were fundamental to the mechanics of 1v1 and explains why so many COH1 1v1 players did not adapt to COHO or COH2. Do you want me to spell these out for you? It involves inter alia light vehicles, ticker timing, capture points and values for capture points.

There might be some elitists who prefer that old version. People still play COH1, Starcraft 1, HOI3, older Counter Strikes, previous SF - the minority, and even they will rollover once the upgrade is undeniable despite not being to their ideal mechanics/details preference.

Experience of the COH franchise suggests that what you have just written is totally incorrect. COHO and COH2 saw off a lot of top COH1 players. Some of those would have gone due to life changes, but many did not like and did not accept the COH2 1v1 changes. Team games are different and the pertinent point here is why Relic did not see fit to try to provide for 2 different modes in COH3. It must be possible to balance the 1v1 game differently from team games, and the lack of maps for team games simply flies in the face of current trends.

I wish everybody here would have gotten that 8/10 sequel to enjoy COH, including gdot, unified + revitalized community and bright future ahead. Instead of talking how Relic is going bankrupt and DOW3'ing it, we could shitposting what kind of these small mechanics and direction changes were the best, what OP units need to be toned down, what could be the patch/content iteration to score 9-10, and wait for the next COH3 showmatches.

Posters on .org have been through the mill with Relic whether the start of COH2, the lack of patches in COH1 or the Dawn of War fiasco. They can be forgiven for a certain amount of cynicism at the launch of a game in COH3 which appears to ignore the mistakes of COH1 and COH2.

Lead sound director for coh1 was a female.

Which is the game imo, that had probably the best overall audio

The Lead Sound designers for COH1 were all male, FWIW.

It's not even the Sistine Chapel, it's more like one of those modern art pieces where one person says they see a brooding meditation on the finite nature of existence and I see a canvas that a Dr. Seuss character sneezed on.

Or even Tracey Emin's Unmade bed?

My guess is that Janne is also well compensated. He certainly has skills. For reference, one of my relatives is a developer for a financial company and makes double the average game developer salary, another works for and IT consulting company and makes about 1.5x.

I would agree with your guess, but as I last spoke to Janne some years ago when he was studying, I don't know what he is doing now.

Relic mostly just needed a competent project manager for COH3. My view from afar is that they didn't. I've managed projects in a couple of industries for 30+ years and am sure that I would've been fired from any position I've ever had if I would've delivered something like COH3.

As far as the number being indicative of something else, my impression is that Relic has way too many employees for a studio that doesn't have a major release soon. Also, the org chart for COH3 looked way too fat. One trivial example is having an Art Director and a Technical Art Director. When you have multiple people doing similar jobs, the result is usually that it slows progress, and makes what should be simple decisions into nightmarish committee decisions.

If Sega was going to pull the plug, it seems like the cuts would've been much deeper. You don't need to keep a couple hundred employees to transfer the intellectual property to another development studio.

Broadly, we are in consensus. However, SEGA apparently took something of a reputational risk back home when they acquired Relic at a bankruptcy auction for approx $26 million at the start of 2013. Allegedly, Japanese companies should grow their product from the ground up and take-overs of foreign comnpanies are (or were) something of a no-no. So there was a save-face element attached to the launch of COH2 and when the request was made for a 3 month extension before release of COH2, SEGA complied. As we know, the eventual COH2 release was innovative but lamentable in so many aspects. I don't want to exaggerate but the COH2 release saw off a fair few of the COH1 afficionados because it was a different game and poorly executed. It was November 2013 before the first real correction took place and it was a year from release before COH2 was up and running, free of the clown car/sniper combo.

DOW2 took an almighty tumble. While I believe COH3 may be retrievable, I somehow doubt if the Japanese in charge want to relive the COH2 experience again and again. If they can sell on and capture their initial capital, it saves face and gives them a get out. There was speculation that SEGA might sell Relic to Microsoft in advance of the AOE rerelease.

Many game companies seem to be currently shedding staff. Kotaku report

I guess it comes down to how you might want to present a company for sale. If you have some workers apparently working on a new project as well as a core title just launched but ripe for improvement and exploration, maybe it might appeal to e.g. Smoking Gun?