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

Not going to lie, I’m concerned about the game’s longevity.

245

Comments

  • HadrurusHadrurus Registered Users Posts: 35
    That’s super weird that quite didn’t paste
  • BonutzBonutz Registered Users Posts: 5,215

    This sounds like a lot more doomsaying to me.
    People need to calm down and have some perspective.
    Wh2 was a mess at release, mortal empires was a mess at release and was not in a good state for over a year.
    Yes we all see and I’m sure the developers knew they where being forced to release a game that in many’s opinions was not ready, that is the problem with the corporate structure. On the plus side of that corporate structure, without it we would never likely see a game to be more exact a trilogy of games that are interconnect in the way total war warhammer has.
    I would bet CA’s worst release was Rome 2 and that just got its last DLC just a few years ago. Things will be fine, players will return when game is in better shape, half of our regular most active players are likely playing mortal empires right now. All this negativity is just breeding more negativity.
    I’m not surprised that the negativity has continued after the roadmap because it’s exactly as I expected, the same people complaining about no news then complain about the news they hear. Making more posts stating variations of the same complaints and concerns do nothing for these forums so please just be patient.

    This isn’t meant to be taken as “doomsaying.” That’s not what I intended with the post. It’s just realistic observations that I, and many others, have noticed.

    I have a lot of faith that CA will get the game up to snuff but yes, I do have concerns and they are valid. Ultimately time will tell what CA does but I want this game to kick ass and take names for half a decade or more.
    I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass...and I’m all out of bubblegum.
  • YurisusukiYurisusuki Somewhere in LustriaRegistered Users Posts: 1,110
    My first ME campaign was witj norsca and I didn't finished because was Impossible, I just started to play ME after potion of speed, because before that was a pain, I don't think we wi have the same problem in IE, because I hope CA learned the lesson about turn times, but I also started to play warhammer 2 little after Vampire Coast, and I wanst here too, what matters is how much the dlcs will sell, as some said, 3k get two years of dlcs before they decided to move to 3k2
    We Live in a Society.



  • NyxilisNyxilis Registered Users Posts: 6,733
    Artjuh90 said:

    Nyxilis said:

    I still think people have short memories. Do people not remember how negative the posts were at game 2's launch? People were viciously attacking any one saying things were going to be fine. They were making all kinds of conspiracy theories.

    They were also saying the game was dead, it's dead, it's going to die.

    People with very short memories don't seem to realize how much they sound like deja vu to me. Up to including the more negative reviews early on with Steam, as if anyone pays attention to those beyond does the game boot up or not.

    Game 2 was not remotely bug free. Again, short memories. How many people here have complained about corrupted saves? Any loyalty bugs preventing factions from being played? Something like how Queek couldn't take any units from pestilences cause they would near immediately faff off from loyalty bugs? The AR values were terrible there as well, up to and including the armies you spawned to try and hamper the enemy automatically lost because they were 'minor factions' and they had penalties that were laughable so they also got bulldozed. That didnt' get fixed till mid lifespan.

    If complaints want to be made I get it, especially since they made some of the same ones. Yeah, that sucks and shame on them for that.

    But end of the game? Yeah, if people don't remember the outright toxic vomit that was constantly unendlingly spewing at the front end of game two. When they were not telling people about the longer times between DLC, being cagey about Norsca and then when they admitted to it? Hah, I hate to tell you even the hate going now does not remotely feel new, it does not feel original, it does not feel even worse.

    Games not dead, but it's probably going to be a year before some are happy with it.

    Did never actually stopped playing warhammer 2 and deinstalled the game. yet me and many other have with warhammer 3. warhammer 2 had issues yes but the core was great, warhammer 3 has mayor issues in it's core gameplayloop of RoC. this is one thing the people defending the state of the game always forget to mention
    When I lost my 10th lord in a row with the Skaven bug I actively quit and went back to other games that were coming out around the same time like Stellaris. And lets be clear at something here, at it's core Warhammer II was simply game one with a narrative. That was primarily the big change and people were not exactly universally pleased on that. They wanted ME but they did sooner than now get ME. Now tell everyone they'd be stuck on The Vortex for over half a year with no DLC and I think you'd get a much different response. Because I don't know where Odd is coming from The Vortex was not entirely fine at launch.

    Which is my particular grouse here, even for the people who did like the RoC campaign, at this stage even if they played half as much as me they could have finished every race at least once. The campaigns are incredibly short and the narrative of course shoves you along. So it boils down to a big point of one had ME and this ones does not have IE for them. And yes problems with RoC but it's why I'd much rather have IE and some DLC.
  • BloodydaggerBloodydagger Registered Users Posts: 4,000
    It's too bad WH3 didn't hit the ground running. Instead it hit the ground with a loud splat.

  • ArchRangerArchRanger Registered Users Posts: 180
    I feel like a lot of people are really overhyping how much influence IE is going to have on the player counts. IE has the large hurdle of requiring players to own all three games to have access to it. Something tells me those 165k player peak count is made up of majority of players first stepping foot into the series. Same with the GamePass players (since the game was free-to-try if you have GP).

    We also went from CA saying that the teams are all focused on working towards Warhammer content last month to now Rich stating that main team has moved on leaving the DLC team to clean up up the game and handle everything (hence why we are now looking at 6 months post-launch of doing pure clean up duty, catching WH3 up to the same standard as WH2 was left at like with tech/skill trees, Anti-Player Bias, etc etc.). Plus they have to tackle making the RoC more appealing while also finishing off IE, which requires updating WH1/2 races.

    I am pretty sure OP's concerns are valid and that a lot of people high on that copium need to realize the scope of WH3 probably took a huge hit due to the state the game was released in and the huge player drop off. The Sega suits see that and don't care for explanations (despite it probably being mostly their fault with wanting the game to release as soon as possible rather than baking it in the over for another 4-6 months). I've mentioned before that keeping expectations low is good to moving forward to avoid disappointment and think the roadmap and Rich's message confirms that is a safe bet. Don't expect a second race pack beyond Chaos Dwarfs. Don't expect more than 3 Lord Packs a year. Don't expect more than a few years of post-launch content (I see some people expecting DLC all the way to 2028-2030).

    If we get more than that, that's awesome! More is always welcomed of course. But the fact is, WH3 is going to take a hit on post-launch plans due to how everything played out, regardless of how hopeful some players want to be. It's just how the gaming industry works and CA is no different. We can see that with them pulling so many devs off WH3, despite a lot of the community saying it's their cash cow.
  • alpharender33alpharender33 Registered Users Posts: 199

    I feel like a lot of people are really overhyping how much influence IE is going to have on the player counts. IE has the large hurdle of requiring players to own all three games to have access to it. Something tells me those 165k player peak count is made up of majority of players first stepping foot into the series. Same with the GamePass players (since the game was free-to-try if you have GP).

    We also went from CA saying that the teams are all focused on working towards Warhammer content last month to now Rich stating that main team has moved on leaving the DLC team to clean up up the game and handle everything (hence why we are now looking at 6 months post-launch of doing pure clean up duty, catching WH3 up to the same standard as WH2 was left at like with tech/skill trees, Anti-Player Bias, etc etc.). Plus they have to tackle making the RoC more appealing while also finishing off IE, which requires updating WH1/2 races.

    I am pretty sure OP's concerns are valid and that a lot of people high on that copium need to realize the scope of WH3 probably took a huge hit due to the state the game was released in and the huge player drop off. The Sega suits see that and don't care for explanations (despite it probably being mostly their fault with wanting the game to release as soon as possible rather than baking it in the over for another 4-6 months). I've mentioned before that keeping expectations low is good to moving forward to avoid disappointment and think the roadmap and Rich's message confirms that is a safe bet. Don't expect a second race pack beyond Chaos Dwarfs. Don't expect more than 3 Lord Packs a year. Don't expect more than a few years of post-launch content (I see some people expecting DLC all the way to 2028-2030).

    If we get more than that, that's awesome! More is always welcomed of course. But the fact is, WH3 is going to take a hit on post-launch plans due to how everything played out, regardless of how hopeful some players want to be. It's just how the gaming industry works and CA is no different. We can see that with them pulling so many devs off WH3, despite a lot of the community saying it's their cash cow.

    Agreed, but they are pulling devs out not because they are giving up on Wh3 but because that is how game development works. A dev comprises of many people and talents like art, design, sound, etc. cannot be employed to bugfixes. These talents are not gonna sit idle while the rest of the team fixes the bugs so, it is beneficial to start working on the next game as soon as the assets of the current one are finished. Creation of assets for the next fanatasy Total War began as soon as the assets for Wh3 were done.
  • talonntalonn Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,460
    Oh well.. bring on 3k2 then lol
  • Red_DoxRed_Dox Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,885
    edited May 1

    I'm not. IE will release, it'll be poggy woggy awesome, and all will be right with the world.

    Right now, it is seemingly a 50:50 coin toss if that helds true.
    Game#3 should have been a no-brainer after they tinkered 5 years with game#2. And while game#3 had some good Quality of Life improvements, in other areas like the skilltrees [while raising the levels to 50], we are back to early game#2 or game#1 crap. We have still bugs from game#1 around and even managed to get new ones like the formation issue. The Prologue campaign is wildly regarded as as good, the actual campaign rather hated. After Vortex and then fine tuning storytelling ideas and trying to make campaigns more fun with 5 years of DLC, that is a pretty flawed approach. And thats not even goping into the controversial "god-race + DoC" debutchery that I personally have problems with. Reskins here are another symptom of development seemingly go wrong. Now lets ignore the sluggish patch process, CA was already infamous for back in the last two games. Blood DLC coming like 6 months after games release, is certainly not normal and double cursed when you have the "Blood for the Blood God!" race in the core game.

    IME is the big promise, the lose thread, that now can make it...or break it. And the track record so far lost a lot, and I mean A LOT of good faith in the product. *If* CA manages to botch up IME at the first drop, which means "the beta", then things will spiral downhill fast. The betatest itself is a good idea but if they would want to betatest around for months, maybe they should have started it in March/April. Delaying it so far away is not a good omen. Kinda feels like they started building the damn thing last week, while it should already be worked on since last year. If the betatest will be good (very large map as wished for; not a brick ton of new gamebreaking bugs; turntime for bigger map +more factions is still acceptable fast and not back to ME start crawl) then of course balancing and testing for 1-3 months might work out and the actual IME release could then present the milestone we waited for. And from there, the DLC and rework team hopefully would get their **** together and bring us back to a road of evolution and progress like in game#2.

    What will happen, that we see end of the year. One path will keep the game on live support for the next years, the other path might end the whole project faster then most of us would have suspected.

    -----Red Dox
    Post edited by Red_Dox on
  • ReeksReeks Registered Users Posts: 9,487
    Huh, when the regular yes-men start to get nervous something gotta give j/k (or am i..) ;)

    Do better CA


  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 35,552
    Red_Dox said:

    I'm not. IE will release, it'll be poggy woggy awesome, and all will be right with the world.

    Right now, it is seemingly a 50:50 coin toss if that helds true.
    Game#3 should have been a no-brainer after they tinkered 5 years with game#2. And while game#3 had some good Quality of Life improvements, in other areas like the skilltrees [while raising the levels to 50], we are back to early game#2 or game#1 crap. We have still bugs from game#1 around and even managed to get new ones like the formation issue. The Prologue campaign is wildly regarded as as good, the actual campaign rather hated. After Vortex and then fine tuning storytelling ideas and trying to make campaigns more fun with 5 years of DLC, that is a pretty flawed approach. And thats not even goping into the controversial "go-race + DoC" debutchery that I personally have problems with. Reskins here are another symptome of development seemingly go wrong. Now lets ignore the sluggish patch process, CA was already infampous for back in the last two games. Blood DLC coming like 6 months after games release, is certainly not normal and double cursed when you have the "Blood for the Blood God!" race in the core game.

    IME is the big promise, the lose thread, that now can make it...or break it. And the track record so far lost a lot, and I mean A LOT of good faith in the product. *If* CA manages to botch up IME at the first drop, which means "the beta", then things will spiral downhill fast. The betatest itself is a good idea but if they would want to betatest around for months, maybe they should have started it in March/April. Delaying it so far away is not a good omen. Kinda feels like they started building the damn thing last week, while it should already be worked on since last year. If the betatest will be good (very large map as wished for; not a brick ton of new gamebreaking bugs; turntime for bigger map +more factions is still acceptable fast and not back to ME start crawl) then of course balancing and testing for 1-3 months might work out and the actual IME release could then present the milestone we waited for. And from there, the DLC and rework team hopefully would get their **** together and bring us back to a road of evolution and progress like in game#2.

    What will happen, that we see end of the year. One path will keep the game on live support for the next years, the other path might end the whole project faster then most of us would have suspected.

    -----Red Dox
    Believe in the Power of Positivity.
    "There's no fun in picking on the weak. If you must, go for the mountain high, the language most foreign, target the strong." - Kenny Florian

    "I like small words" - Winsy C

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Son of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, Conqueror of Mountains, purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor, Uwu usurper, pog wog warrior, poggers patroller

  • ReeksReeks Registered Users Posts: 9,487

    Red_Dox said:

    I'm not. IE will release, it'll be poggy woggy awesome, and all will be right with the world.

    Right now, it is seemingly a 50:50 coin toss if that helds true.
    Game#3 should have been a no-brainer after they tinkered 5 years with game#2. And while game#3 had some good Quality of Life improvements, in other areas like the skilltrees [while raising the levels to 50], we are back to early game#2 or game#1 crap. We have still bugs from game#1 around and even managed to get new ones like the formation issue. The Prologue campaign is wildly regarded as as good, the actual campaign rather hated. After Vortex and then fine tuning storytelling ideas and trying to make campaigns more fun with 5 years of DLC, that is a pretty flawed approach. And thats not even goping into the controversial "go-race + DoC" debutchery that I personally have problems with. Reskins here are another symptome of development seemingly go wrong. Now lets ignore the sluggish patch process, CA was already infampous for back in the last two games. Blood DLC coming like 6 months after games release, is certainly not normal and double cursed when you have the "Blood for the Blood God!" race in the core game.

    IME is the big promise, the lose thread, that now can make it...or break it. And the track record so far lost a lot, and I mean A LOT of good faith in the product. *If* CA manages to botch up IME at the first drop, which means "the beta", then things will spiral downhill fast. The betatest itself is a good idea but if they would want to betatest around for months, maybe they should have started it in March/April. Delaying it so far away is not a good omen. Kinda feels like they started building the damn thing last week, while it should already be worked on since last year. If the betatest will be good (very large map as wished for; not a brick ton of new gamebreaking bugs; turntime for bigger map +more factions is still acceptable fast and not back to ME start crawl) then of course balancing and testing for 1-3 months might work out and the actual IME release could then present the milestone we waited for. And from there, the DLC and rework team hopefully would get their **** together and bring us back to a road of evolution and progress like in game#2.

    What will happen, that we see end of the year. One path will keep the game on live support for the next years, the other path might end the whole project faster then most of us would have suspected.

    -----Red Dox
    Believe in the Power of Positivity.
    In other words


  • manuelpsmanuelps Registered Users Posts: 2,813
    My main concern is that they're releasing the first DLC before we get IE properly. And it's potentially a full chaos DLC, which would turn some people down, so that DLC risks not selling well.
  • Darksteel83Darksteel83 Registered Users Posts: 169
    Red_Dox said:

    I'm not. IE will release, it'll be poggy woggy awesome, and all will be right with the world.

    Right now, it is seemingly a 50:50 coin toss if that helds true.
    Game#3 should have been a no-brainer after they tinkered 5 years with game#2. And while game#3 had some good Quality of Life improvements, in other areas like the skilltrees [while raising the levels to 50], we are back to early game#2 or game#1 crap. We have still bugs from game#1 around and even managed to get new ones like the formation issue. The Prologue campaign is wildly regarded as as good, the actual campaign rather hated. After Vortex and then fine tuning storytelling ideas and trying to make campaigns more fun with 5 years of DLC, that is a pretty flawed approach. And thats not even goping into the controversial "go-race + DoC" debutchery that I personally have problems with. Reskins here are another symptome of development seemingly go wrong. Now lets ignore the sluggish patch process, CA was already infampous for back in the last two games. Blood DLC coming like 6 months after games release, is certainly not normal and double cursed when you have the "Blood for the Blood God!" race in the core game.

    IME is the big promise, the lose thread, that now can make it...or break it. And the track record so far lost a lot, and I mean A LOT of good faith in the product. *If* CA manages to botch up IME at the first drop, which means "the beta", then things will spiral downhill fast. The betatest itself is a good idea but if they would want to betatest around for months, maybe they should have started it in March/April. Delaying it so far away is not a good omen. Kinda feels like they started building the damn thing last week, while it should already be worked on since last year. If the betatest will be good (very large map as wished for; not a brick ton of new gamebreaking bugs; turntime for bigger map +more factions is still acceptable fast and not back to ME start crawl) then of course balancing and testing for 1-3 months might work out and the actual IME release could then present the milestone we waited for. And from there, the DLC and rework team hopefully would get their **** together and bring us back to a road of evolution and progress like in game#2.

    What will happen, that we see end of the year. One path will keep the game on live support for the next years, the other path might end the whole project faster then most of us would have suspected.

    -----Red Dox
    From what I see in the roadmap, they are first going to adress all issues that players don't like that also effect IE. Then they will release IE as a beta with the other stuff that is prepared.
    Fixing the race seems the lower priority.

    I think the IE map part is mostly done already. But that WH3 issues are preventing a release.

    You are right that if they botch IE. They might also loose a lot of invested players. Calling it a Beta first is also a good idea. Hope it works out.
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 8,074
    It’s worrying to see that they don’t seem to be making the game the priority it should be; they released it unfinished so they could go and **** around with more side projects using profits brought in by TWW.

    Now the bugfix/patches and dlc will come at a glacial pace.

    Very frustrating and concerning.
  • LunaticprinceLunaticprince Registered Users Posts: 5,800
    edited May 1
    manpersal said:

    My main concern is that they're releasing the first DLC before we get IE properly. And it's potentially a full chaos DLC, which would turn some people down, so that DLC risks not selling well.

    It seems the ie comes with the chaos dlc as CA confirm in 2.0 that the content we get with the lp

    Ie, assembly kit, blood pack


  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Registered Users Posts: 12,453
    edited May 1
    I agree OP. If only all players had seen what I saw when they started showing wh3. Then we would have flooded the forums and CA would have so much extra time to fix it.

    But what is done is done. Now we must look to the future.

    CA cant rush out IE. We must hope that the dlc team can and will fix wh3. Yes we are bleeding. Yes the end may be coming. But we cannot panic. The final blow may save us. It must be well placed.
    It needs to be pointed out that what people call "cheese" is just playing the game the way it actually exists not in some fictional way they think it is supposed to work.
  • manuelpsmanuelps Registered Users Posts: 2,813

    manpersal said:

    My main concern is that they're releasing the first DLC before we get IE properly. And it's potentially a full chaos DLC, which would turn some people down, so that DLC risks not selling well.

    It seems the ie comes with the chaos dlc as CA confirm in 2.0 that the content we get with the lp

    Ie, assembly kit, blood pack
    Yes, but it will be the Beta version, so it remains to be seen in what state it will be.
  • Red_DoxRed_Dox Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,885
    Djau said:

    If CA sticks to the Roadmap they've mentioned and even if the Nov-Dec is 2.2 or 3.0...even if 3.0 is delayed to Jan/Feb then we will have officially got more content in the first year than Warhammer 2 did plus starting with a bigger roster. Its just that its slow.

    No. Just no.

    TWW2 release in September 2017
    • October 2017 you got Blood dlc and Mortal Empires
    • January 2018 we got Tomb Kings race DLC
    • May 2018 we got Queen & Crone
    I am unsure what we got in FLC in between. But we got the Laboratory, and Skullthrone 2018 brought the Bone Giant for Tomb Kings.

    TWW3 release in February 2022
    • Blood dlc maybe August?
    • IME release scheduled for Q4. That is pretty close to get delayed into 2023 ;)
    • there is no race DLC on the horizon. So Chaos Dwarfs probably 2023.
    • A new type of bigger(?) rival DLC apparently around August.
    • some FLC RoR will be scattered around the year since they are seemigly taken out of the old rival dlc formula. First batch might come for Skullthrone around May/June but could get delayed.
    When we reach February 2023 and *might* have gotten 1 rival DLC and *maybe* Chaos Dwarfs, we would be on equal footing with game#2 rather then have gotten "more". We might get more FLC when every few months RoR will be tossed around but at the same time we deal with extreme delays in case of IME or blood dlc. And we have to wait and see how the new rival DLC will look content wise in comparision anyway. I still assume that a increase of LLs, will mean a cut down on units. And that is not even considering the "cut away" RoR or the problematic path of simply recolored WoC units tossed, which already were a bane for game#3 so far.
    And the roadmap stuff is after all rough estimates CA *hopes* to uphold as they say themselves in their blog. They delayed the roadmap itself for two months, so I would not take bets of them delivering their TBC roadmap stuff "on time". March 2023 we will have a definitive hindsight answer here.

    -----Red Dox
  • Fan3982173917524862Fan3982173917524862 Registered Users Posts: 1,582
    3K had less issues and the DLC still sold. Look at what happened to that.
    WH3 had a worse start, it's taking forever to even fix the awful launch state and all DLC, including blood which is usually available right after launch, is releasing at the very least 6 months later.
    The possibility of this game getting the same treatment is extremely high. It all depends on IE being impressive and the DLC selling. Because this isn't Troy which got funded by Epic for it's post release support.
  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 15,445

    I agree OP. If only all players had seen what I saw when they started showing wh3. Then we would have flooded the forums and CA would have so much extra time to fix it.

    But what is done is done. Now we must look to the future.

    CA cant rush out IE. We must hope that the dlc team can and will fix wh3. Yes we are bleeding. Yes the end may be coming. But we cannot panic. The final blow may save us. It must be well placed.

    Nah, they were so **** in their product no amount of feedback would have gotten them to improve it before launch.
    MarcusLivius: You are indeed a lord of entitlement.
  • ArbitraryDwarfArbitraryDwarf Registered Users Posts: 203
    edited May 1
    Once IE is released with all the extra bits modders need, it really does not matter if CA stop support immediately.

    All the WH1 and 2 races will be there and modders will no doubt fix what CA seem oblivious to.
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 11,655
    I would have written it off as hyperbole before but now with IE set to release what, four or five months from now, I can see how CA haven't exactly given TWW3 the best chance to succeed. IE like ME is the great revitalizer. The gift that keeps on giving. Now I wonder how many people outside the invested ones who are going to remember that TWW3 exists once IE rolls around.

    Me personally I'm done with TWW3 for now. It lasted me two and a half months and 158 hours of game time for the base game. There's just not much more to squeeze out of it for me.

    I am not impressed by the vast majority of the last year and the coming months when related to TWW3.
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 11,655
    manpersal said:

    manpersal said:

    My main concern is that they're releasing the first DLC before we get IE properly. And it's potentially a full chaos DLC, which would turn some people down, so that DLC risks not selling well.

    It seems the ie comes with the chaos dlc as CA confirm in 2.0 that the content we get with the lp

    Ie, assembly kit, blood pack
    Yes, but it will be the Beta version, so it remains to be seen in what state it will be.
    Beta version probably translates to what ME was when it released. Which is to say functional but not optimal and with some kinks and strangeness to it.
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Registered Users Posts: 12,453

    I agree OP. If only all players had seen what I saw when they started showing wh3. Then we would have flooded the forums and CA would have so much extra time to fix it.

    But what is done is done. Now we must look to the future.

    CA cant rush out IE. We must hope that the dlc team can and will fix wh3. Yes we are bleeding. Yes the end may be coming. But we cannot panic. The final blow may save us. It must be well placed.

    Nah, they were so **** in their product no amount of feedback would have gotten them to improve it before launch.
    They are changing it now due to the issues people have.
    It needs to be pointed out that what people call "cheese" is just playing the game the way it actually exists not in some fictional way they think it is supposed to work.
  • HappyBoomerHappyBoomer Registered Users Posts: 284
    I remember people crying that wh2 sold less examples than wh1 and that the game would be abandoned then aswell since it sold less copies than the first game and that wh1 was doomed to failed since it catered to a small fantasy nerd crowd and wouldn't sell well either.

    Dont be concerned its a rocky release but unfortunatly that seems to be the norm nowadays. With IE and the first lord pack people will come back.
  • SagezSagez Registered Users Posts: 318
    I remember how I created ''CA should increase both team and budget for Warhammer 3 in order to create content faster '' thread and I got some dislikes.
    I guess some people like the slow progress and my take was ''controversial''. Lulz.
  • LunaticprinceLunaticprince Registered Users Posts: 5,800
    manpersal said:

    manpersal said:

    My main concern is that they're releasing the first DLC before we get IE properly. And it's potentially a full chaos DLC, which would turn some people down, so that DLC risks not selling well.

    It seems the ie comes with the chaos dlc as CA confirm in 2.0 that the content we get with the lp

    Ie, assembly kit, blood pack
    Yes, but it will be the Beta version, so it remains to be seen in what state it will be.
    True but could be like the first me so functional but not perfect, so at least they put in beta so not people can get their hope off that is will work perfectly


  • LunaticprinceLunaticprince Registered Users Posts: 5,800

    3K had less issues and the DLC still sold. Look at what happened to that.
    WH3 had a worse start, it's taking forever to even fix the awful launch state and all DLC, including blood which is usually available right after launch, is releasing at the very least 6 months later.
    The possibility of this game getting the same treatment is extremely high. It all depends on IE being impressive and the DLC selling. Because this isn't Troy which got funded by Epic for it's post release support.

    Fair still warhammer 2 outlive 3k even the game overall sold less and was probaly expensiver to produce.

    I think ca even statet self the dlcs for 3k didn't got as good as they expect.

    there game 2 have a smoler playerbase for dlcs seems like that the overall factor


  • TheGreatPamphletTheGreatPamphlet Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaRegistered Users Posts: 1,424
    Nyxilis said:

    I still think people have short memories.

    Nah, it's just you that has a bad memory. WH2 reviewed better, had a higher player retention and more content in its early stages.
Sign In or Register to comment.