Company of Heroes 1 had some seriously shit mechanics that made the cut, though. Global upgrades are one thing, but economic upgrades can add to the snowball effect which was seriously reduced in Company of Heroes 2. Manpower income is another thing that was entirely unnecessary, as was purchased veterancy in any way, shape, or form. They even included zombie squads, which I successfully feedback-sabotaged during the pre-alpha. |
Basically, they're gauging how much work it's going to take to get the game into a state that would be considered to be "acceptable" for the largest number of respondents. This will most likely lead to some quick math at the level of upper management where any serious work being done on the game will be severely curtailed given its current state as a likely financial disappointment. Keep in mind - Dawn of War III had a full expansion in the works which community members were constantly kept on the hook about until it was revealed as a pipe dream that had been squashed by bean counters long ago.
I don't know for sure that Company of Heroes 3 is a financial disappointment - but there are a few metrics that I know high-level management look at to determine such things. One of them is straight-up sales, and rest assured, if Company of Heroes 3 broke any records there we would have heard about it. People I know with a casual interest in the series avoided it entirely due to a variety of factors, but bad word-of-mouth from Day 1 was the prime motivator. The second, increasingly-important metric is microtransaction revenue, and the ability for the game to keep generating revenue from the already-existing player base. The particular implementation of microtransactions here, with a lacklustre cosmetic shop and no ability to actually customize your profile at launch means that the game is probably "underperforming" at this level as well.
With this survey it honestly seems like they're fishing for an excuse to justify a pre-existing plan to take the game (and the rest of the studio, hopefully) behind the shed and shoot it. |
I take issue with people saying the Starcraft/Warcraft campaigns are good when really they're incredibly generic and the thing that most people praise about them is the story - this, I suppose, is a matter of taste but if I REALLY wanted a good story, I wouldn't be playing an RTS game, and I certainly wouldn't be playing one written by a bunch of morons smashing together every terrible trope in the generic-fiction playbook. "Story-driven RTS" is a recipe for disaster, because the strength of the medium, to me, is not in a linear narrative.
But again, you can chalk it up to taste. Some people have awful taste, as evidenced by the fact that Company of Heroes 3 still has people playing it. |
RTS campaigns are never good and they never really have been. Most of the time it's either a boring slog with the enemy given some sort of random artificial advantage or it's an annoying mission that has you controlling a handful of units in a way that generally breaks most of the features that make you want to play an RTS game in the first place.
I truly don't understand the people for whom the campaign is genuinely enjoyable. |
I don't think it was an attempt at anything in the mobile market at all, rest assured there would have been announcements and promotional stuff related if that was the case. However, it was a pretty naked attempt at emulating the style and general aesthetic of Blizzard RTS games and League of Legends in an attempt to draw in MOBA kids. I loathe that particular aesthetic style (itself ripped off from tabletop Warhammer many eons ago) and it was one of the design decisions I disagreed with the most, although I don't think it compromises the gameplay significantly enough for it to make me reject the game completely. |
It seem so and that straw man is you.
Not only a straw man but also a forum warrior it seems.
I stand by what I said the claim that "Russia is so far the only one (with the possible exception of Japan) that still officially insists on a glorified and sanitized narrative that conveniently glosses over things..." is simply inaccurate since a many countries do the same including US and UK
And I stand by all statements, so that leaves us exactly where I said we would be, because, again, you're incapable of having a real, adult conversation. |
That wasn't an argument, it was a statement for your own benefit. Nothing I wrote is inaccurate. You're arguing with a strawman.
Again, if you want to go down this road, I'm fine with it, I can be a ridiculous pedant too, it's pretty much what I do for a living. |
Ask the US government or 99% of US citizens about the fire bomb attack in Tokyo and the nuclear attacks in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and you you will get "sanitized history" response.
They will simply not accept that those where "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity".
Russia is simply not the only one as you have claimed.
You're trying to quibble over definitions I never once brought up.
Let me just stop you right here Vipper, and spare you the indignity - you aren't capable of having this discussion with me. You've posted here enough that I have something of a measure of what kind of person you are, and you do not have the critical reasoning or straight-up intelligence to have an honest conversation with me. Stick to Company of Heroes, which you have devoted an inordinate amount of your life to. |
I didn't say they didn't defend their actions, I said they don't suppress the accounts and push an "official" sanitized history.
Don't put words in my mouth. |
Enemy at the Gates is basically a documentary about the invasion of Ukraine at this point. |