Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Bugdet for Warhammer 3: don't you see a problem?

2»

Comments

  • Bonutz619Bonutz619 Posts: 730Registered Users
    We don't know what CA's budget for game 3 is. I'd imagine it would be higher since this is the final game of the trilogy but I'm just speculating. Not really a solid argument point either way.

    Secondly, I haven't seen any credible evidence suggesting that game 3 will sell worse then the other two. Quite the contrary actually. This franchise is maintaining a upward rate of popularity and increasing based on the fact that Warhammer 2 and it's DLC's are constant best sellers on Steam.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Posts: 15,390Registered Users
    Staying on topic.
    Bonutz619 said:

    We don't know what CA's budget for game 3 is. I'd imagine it would be higher since this is the final game of the trilogy but I'm just speculating. Not really a solid argument point either way.

    Secondly, I haven't seen any credible evidence suggesting that game 3 will sell worse then the other two. Quite the contrary actually. This franchise is maintaining a upward rate of popularity and increasing based on the fact that Warhammer 2 and it's DLC's are constant best sellers on Steam.

    https://steamcharts.com/app/594570#All

    The game's maintaining it's momentum, and we'll very likely see another spike in a couple of weeks. It will sell less than game 1, but this is inevitable; it's been out longer.
    Game 3 must have variety in its core races. Ogres, Chaos Dwarfs, Kislev, and Demons of Chaos in its full iconic, glorious, undivided glory.
  • FonRestorffFonRestorff Posts: 80Registered Users
    I’ve bought 6 copies 3 of 1 and 3 of 2 to play with friends.
    I think most fans will buy all three since that’s what you need for mortal empires.

    Would be interesting to see how many has bought two first and then the first one.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 4,864Registered Users
    Marker said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Looking at the franchise, I think it's fairly easy to anticipate that WH3 will sell less than its predecessors. There is franchise fatigue after all these years, most popular factions are already out, some players just jumped ship along the way. But it could be also very expensive to produce. Just look at the possibilities

    1) Daemons: they have an extremely diverse rosters, with a lot of unique units with no parallel in other races, and a campaign design that must be unique to them. Probably the most expensive race of the trilogy.
    2) Ogres: similar problem, a monster heavy race with the standard infantry itself requiring a new skeleton. Surely as expensive as Lizardmen, maybe more.
    3) Chaos Dwarfs: here you can save a bit on line units, but there a lot of war machines requiring new models, effects and so on.
    4) Cathay or Kislev or Dogs of War: these should be the cheapest, but they need expanded lore and, especially in the case of Cathay, a whole host of new monsters and characters.

    So, as I see it, WH3 starts with a big problem even from the design board. It will be difficult to balance the production cost with lower sales. I'm not optimistic at all.

    Stop typing an opinion and stating it as fact. You don't speak for everyone, not even for most!
    Uhm? Nor I'm trying to. The title is literally a question.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 4,864Registered Users
    FrostPaw said:

    Now you have concluded your result... what do you suppose you can do about it?

    I would just judge the result, play it or don't. Nothing changes.

    ... discussing it?
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 4,864Registered Users

    There are a few issues with your thought process here:

    - Ogres are not hard to do at all... they do not have flyers, have limited new models, especially compared to lizardmen, ogre-models can be reused for other factions as mercenaries, chaos ogres etc...
    - chaos dwarves will be one of the cheapest one to accomplish...its greenskins, dwarves, a bunch of artillery pieces, a few golems and the most difficult ones will be the lamassu, bullcentaurs and demon bulls...but they are all bulls and nothing is super out of the ordinary
    - Kislev will be the cheapest one so far, considering that they only require bears as a new model and the rest are reskins
    - Daemons of chaos are more difficult....but... compared by how much is saved from the other 3 races, that should not be an issue, both chaos dwarves and kislev would allow enough saving on budget to go full out on daemons, just like how dark elves and high elves saved enough for lizardmen to get that variety of models going

    And keep in mind, that there will be unit-packs..so.....yeah, not that worried.

    The race packs possible for game 3 also don't seem to be that worrying with potentials of cathayan factions, which are all human-based.

    No problem. I will be happy to be proven wrong. Don't see why people (not you) are getting all defensive. Still, I stand by my opinion here. At release we'll evaluate.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Posts: 15,390Registered Users
    Marker said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Looking at the franchise, I think it's fairly easy to anticipate that WH3 will sell less than its predecessors. There is franchise fatigue after all these years, most popular factions are already out, some players just jumped ship along the way. But it could be also very expensive to produce. Just look at the possibilities

    1) Daemons: they have an extremely diverse rosters, with a lot of unique units with no parallel in other races, and a campaign design that must be unique to them. Probably the most expensive race of the trilogy.
    2) Ogres: similar problem, a monster heavy race with the standard infantry itself requiring a new skeleton. Surely as expensive as Lizardmen, maybe more.
    3) Chaos Dwarfs: here you can save a bit on line units, but there a lot of war machines requiring new models, effects and so on.
    4) Cathay or Kislev or Dogs of War: these should be the cheapest, but they need expanded lore and, especially in the case of Cathay, a whole host of new monsters and characters.

    So, as I see it, WH3 starts with a big problem even from the design board. It will be difficult to balance the production cost with lower sales. I'm not optimistic at all.

    Stop typing an opinion and stating it as fact. You don't speak for everyone, not even for most!
    I'm sorry, but you don't need to explicitly state an opinion is an opinion, it's redundant. This is proven by you knowing OP's opinions are opinions, hence why OP doesn't need to state this again. OP doesn't present false facts, they're merely presenting their opinion.
    Game 3 must have variety in its core races. Ogres, Chaos Dwarfs, Kislev, and Demons of Chaos in its full iconic, glorious, undivided glory.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 4,864Registered Users

    Marker said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Looking at the franchise, I think it's fairly easy to anticipate that WH3 will sell less than its predecessors. There is franchise fatigue after all these years, most popular factions are already out, some players just jumped ship along the way. But it could be also very expensive to produce. Just look at the possibilities

    1) Daemons: they have an extremely diverse rosters, with a lot of unique units with no parallel in other races, and a campaign design that must be unique to them. Probably the most expensive race of the trilogy.
    2) Ogres: similar problem, a monster heavy race with the standard infantry itself requiring a new skeleton. Surely as expensive as Lizardmen, maybe more.
    3) Chaos Dwarfs: here you can save a bit on line units, but there a lot of war machines requiring new models, effects and so on.
    4) Cathay or Kislev or Dogs of War: these should be the cheapest, but they need expanded lore and, especially in the case of Cathay, a whole host of new monsters and characters.

    So, as I see it, WH3 starts with a big problem even from the design board. It will be difficult to balance the production cost with lower sales. I'm not optimistic at all.

    Stop typing an opinion and stating it as fact. You don't speak for everyone, not even for most!
    I'm sorry, but you don't need to explicitly state an opinion is an opinion, it's redundant. This is proven by you knowing OP's opinions are opinions, hence why OP doesn't need to state this again. OP doesn't present false facts, they're merely presenting their opinion.
    I actually stated it explicitly. "As I see it"
  • KronusXKronusX Posts: 1,357Registered Users
    I could see WH3 selling worse if gamers put two and two together. CA's excuse for patches/dlc for WH2 taking longer is the fact it is more difficult since it is more races . As of right now, it takes them 6 months aproximately per DLC. Their original every 3 months or so switched to every 6 months, so it doubled. Now if you double that, you get 12 months waiting time for DLC, which is every year. I do not know if I am ready to invest in a sequel that would take a year per DLC release.

    Food for thought.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USAPosts: 18,328Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    Business discussion. Moved to Chat.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • LestaTLestaT Senior Member Posts: 3,240Registered Users
    Warhammer 3 will have the biggest combined map. I'm getting the game solely for that. My fav factions are already in game 2.
  • Rolf1989Rolf1989 Posts: 330Registered Users
    KronusX said:

    I could see WH3 selling worse if gamers put two and two together. CA's excuse for patches/dlc for WH2 taking longer is the fact it is more difficult since it is more races . As of right now, it takes them 6 months aproximately per DLC. Their original every 3 months or so switched to every 6 months, so it doubled. Now if you double that, you get 12 months waiting time for DLC, which is every year. I do not know if I am ready to invest in a sequel that would take a year per DLC release.

    Food for thought.

    Couldn't they just be staggering DLC releases to make up for the longer wait for TWW3?
  • Bogdanov89Bogdanov89 Posts: 535Registered Users
    If anything CA is under-utilizing the whole Warhammer franchise.

    You got people yelling for more DLC content, more patches, more races, even asking for paid reworks of old races just to speed up the development.

    CA should make Warhammer franchise their most important and the other projects should not be anywhere close to as big as warhammer games.
    Check out the Community Bug Fix Mod on the Steam Workshop.
  • DarkLordDDarkLordD Posts: 2,315Registered Users
    I don't think its franchise fatigue but more the lack of consistent DLC drops. Every 2,3 months a DLC would do miracles to many folks around here, I am sure!

    I am NOT worried what so ever about WH3, I also don't allow myself to be, looking WAY to much forward to see the universe kind of 'completed' and imagine the immense amount of content with a combined map of game 1, 2 AND 3 ! so many races, so many sub factions, so many ways to play.

    WH never gets dull or boring for me ! and I speak after playing WH1 and 2 together with almost 4.000 hours into it ! JEEEZZZ !! I am crazy.
    Dark Lord D the Fearsome (I) ~~~ First Dark Lord of the Old World.

    --~~ let them hate me as long as they fear me ------------------------- Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, Roman Emperor
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Posts: 10,131Registered Users
    edited March 23
    LestaT said:

    Warhammer 3 will have the biggest combined map. I'm getting the game solely for that. My fav factions are already in game 2.

    that will be the pull for many "veterans" of the trilogy/warhammer. Mind you that we probably would get WH3 under "almost" any circumstances as long it fulfill the promise of the combine map with ALL Warhammer Armybook races (and then some) on one campaign map.
    One can not overstate how unique this is what singular achievement this would be for Warhammer fans.

    We will see how many it pulls outside that.+

    Alot of the ifs of course depend how Wh3 actually looks like.

    Will we have 3 races with 8LL over all or do they "create" a 4th race.

    Is the "every game needs a good game or it won't sell" argument actually true (doubt it...)?

    Ect.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • LithaleonLithaleon Posts: 1Registered Users
    Xenos7 said:

    Marker said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Looking at the franchise, I think it's fairly easy to anticipate that WH3 will sell less than its predecessors. There is franchise fatigue after all these years, most popular factions are already out, some players just jumped ship along the way. But it could be also very expensive to produce. Just look at the possibilities

    1) Daemons: they have an extremely diverse rosters, with a lot of unique units with no parallel in other races, and a campaign design that must be unique to them. Probably the most expensive race of the trilogy.
    2) Ogres: similar problem, a monster heavy race with the standard infantry itself requiring a new skeleton. Surely as expensive as Lizardmen, maybe more.
    3) Chaos Dwarfs: here you can save a bit on line units, but there a lot of war machines requiring new models, effects and so on.
    4) Cathay or Kislev or Dogs of War: these should be the cheapest, but they need expanded lore and, especially in the case of Cathay, a whole host of new monsters and characters.

    So, as I see it, WH3 starts with a big problem even from the design board. It will be difficult to balance the production cost with lower sales. I'm not optimistic at all.

    Stop typing an opinion and stating it as fact. You don't speak for everyone, not even for most!
    Uhm? Nor I'm trying to. The title is literally a question.
    To be fair man, you're not asking, "Is there a problem with this?" You're asking if people see the problem. You're presupposing that the problem exists. But anyway, back on topic, No. This next game will probably sell just as well as the second one. The difference between the first and the second was upfront sales vs engagement and longevity. Warhammer 2 did not sell as many copies up front, judging by the steam charts, but it maintained its' player base for much longer. It took Warhammer 1 less than 6 months to drop to having an average playerbase of less than 20,000, with only a few sales throwing it back up. Warhammer 2 has stayed at an average of over 20,000 players for it's entire life cycle. What makes people buy the game? Popular races and flashy stuff. What makes people KEEP buying/playing the game? A fun and interesting campaign with improved game mechanics. If they take the changes they made to diplomacy in Three Kingdoms, and put them in Warhammer 3, we're already looking at a much better product.
Sign In or Register to comment.