Talk:Dawn of War III

HYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYPEHYYYYYPE

It's only a rumor, so take it with a grain of salt (I wouldn't add rumors to the page itself), but it's mentioned that while you control the pesky spess elfs, the orks and the bloody magpies, another faction will act as the real antagonist of the whole conflict (Yet again Chaos under the banner of Khorne, I guess)

And then we saw they were trying to rip off DOTA 2 and all went to the warp, oh boy, I guess we all go level up our BFG:A fleets until they release Space Hulk: Deathwing, because this decade has failed. --McNash (talk) 18:43, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

• You don't like the art style, boo fucking hoo. It's still the same setting as it was in the first two games, and honestly the only reason you seem disappointed is because you were convinced it would go the old "brown and bloom" approach. --Newerfag (talk) 05:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Why indeed, however, this isn't just my personal opinion, there seems to be an ever increasing amount of fans who are not happy with how things are going on with DoW2, actually, I wouldn't have bothered myself with this situation if not because being an old C&C fan (and one who tried to be as open-minded as possible as up to 2013) I have seen the same pattern back when EA started to make bad decisions with that RTS franchise. Then again, who knows, maybe by some incredibly lucky streak they may manage to turn this into a success, but isn't it similar to what Games Workshop did to WHFB? .--McNash (talk) 06:25, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • And now they have turned it into a MOBA, no seriously, all this Power Core thing... I mean, you people let Age of Sigmar entry become a massive rant platform and therapy room for some editors here, so, why don't let us do the same with Dawn of War III now that they have done the exact thing we all wished never would happen? --McNash (talk) 04:14, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
• Given that the game is very far away from release casting judgement on it is premature as fucking hell. The art style choice is a bit weird but I haven't really seen enough non-scripted gameplay to tell if this looks good or not. But come on, dawn of war 2 looked like shit at this stage of development. Crazy Cryptek (talk) 06:03, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
• I'm fine with the art style since whatever, 40k lends itself to more cartoony or more dark'n'gritty art. I'm bothered by the choice of animations for Gabriel, and the gameplay shown so far which just felt like a step back from DoW 2. The Knight is pretty cool, I am a sucker for how it tests the flamers when it first lands. Its making me want a mech-warrior like game but with knights. Saladofstones (talk) 20:44, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Freeblade for the IOS made everyone think it would be something of a Mechwarrior with CQC. But then it was a railshooter. A bad one to boot. - Ben (talk) 21:19, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Is the "Consensus" section a good idea right now?

I mean, I know the game definitely has its flaws (and I personally would've preferred it to be more like the first game), but I think it probably would be a good idea to actually get /tg/'s opinions on it before we let a few users here assume they speak for everyone. That, and it's only been one day since its release so there hasn't been much time for a consensus just yet. --Newerfag (talk) 15:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

So far as I have seen, most people are loathing the game, from those who played it half of them are down voting it, and that's not for workable technical issues, but for core aspects of the game, the people up voting them say it feels like WC3, which feels like an insult. I am rather impressed you guys have been so soft with Relic, if it was Games Workshop I suspect you would have given them a pounding as massive as the one back when they released The End Times and Age of Sigmar --McNash (talk) 02:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

On the other hand, we or even 1d4chan as a whole can't speak for /tg/, which is why I decided to ax the "Consensus" page for now. We've already got complaints in the past that we're somewhat estranged from /tg/ proper, and calling one or two peoples' opinions a "consensus" didn't sit right with me in that regard. Might be better to listen into a few threads and collect what people are saying from there first. --Newerfag (talk) 02:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I Don't know, so far as I have read people didn't take the game too well, most of the discussions seem to have been done in /v/, there wasn't such a bad as Age of Sigmar during its earlier months but I don't see people too happy about the changes, in other note, I don't see how 200,000 copies is faring well for a game such as this, 200,000 is what Battlefleet Gothic: Armada did, the lead developer declared it was a major success for Tindalos, but then again, Tindalos is a rather small developer studios and I didn't see their publishers at Focus Home Interactive spending really much in advertisement. Dawn of War 3 on the other hand seems to have received more advertisement as well as help from Games Workshop themselves and a considerable budget from Sega, just compare the amount of stuff in each game, and the amount of effort put in animations, effects, etc, also, I remember how back in the turn of the millennium a RTS (eg. Command and Conquer 3 in 2007) could sell 1 million copies in just one month, even as late as 2010 Starcraft 2 sold 1.5 million copies in just 48 hours.--McNash (talk) 22:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Who the fuck wrote this thing?

It reads like a 13 year old jammed on the keyboard as fast as they could without giving it even two second's worth of proofreading. AUGH, MY REMAINING EYE. Zufield (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Check the page story, there you got the names. --McNash (talk) 22:08, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

The giant textwall that is the plot section doesn't help much either. --Newerfag (talk) 01:17, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Tried to compress the plot as much as I could without leaving much of the important stuff. If it looked sloppy, that's because I have done all of it within an hour. Maybe I need some images to prevent it looking like a textwall? Derpysaurus

• Oh wait! I got an idea. I can just turn the entire plot into a collapsible section. Reducing the page length and making it feel less bloated. Derpysaurus

does imperial guard ever appear in this game?

The description of this page says IG is a npc race allied to the space marine, but all I remembered are varlock guards, like the canon fodders, foot soldiers of the imperial knight house of varlock. Or maybe I'm just forgettable that IG does appear somewhere in the game. Can anyone confirm it for me?--TheSpoilerHeretic (talk) 04:23, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

That's it really, though considering the Imperial Guard are taken from the PDF and the Varlock Guard are the PDF, they might as well be the Imperial Guard in this case. -- Triacom (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

They also appear as minor NPCs in some of the campaign missions, but there's just one unit so it can barely even be called a faction. The Varlock Guards are just a reskin of them (or maybe they're a reskin of the Varlock Guards, could be either one). --Newerfag (talk) 18:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Dying

http://steamcharts.com/app/285190#1m At this rate there will be as many or more people playing soulstorm in about 2 months. Safe to say the game is not well received when almost 80% of your players are gone in 23 days. Less than 1K players now.

Let it go

Stop trying to edit the post release section with things like 'overal the game community has given it a positive, if lukewarm, review and other blatant fallacies. Thanks.

No one said anything along the lines of "overall the game community has given it a positive, if lukewarm, review", just that the reception has been mixed, which is accurate given that's literally what it's current rating on Steam is. Mentioning positive aspects of the game is not "fanboying", it's offering both sides of what is obviously a controversial argument and allowing the reader to decide for themselves. If you paid attention, you would notice that the majority of the "Post-Release" section still errs on the side of negative. Also, avoid just wholesale undoing edits like that, you undid several grammatical fixes and even eliminated parts of the article that were on your side of the argument. --User:Sieger (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

"Mixed" isn't "lukewarm", it's "divisive, in the love it or hate it sense". Had you bothered to look at what you were undoing through your haze of butthurt, you might have seen that. --Newerfag (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

"The average naysayer." "Overall voice acting is good" I could list more examples. Don't change it again or your ability to do so will be removed. Shill elsewhere.

Don't assume you speak for everyone. Last I checked on Steam, the reviews specifically said "mixed". Now stop pretending you can force people to stop editing, Internet Tough Guy.--Newerfag (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Anon, you seem to be confusing facts and opinions. Just because you personally didn't like the game, that doesn't make it objectively bad. The Overall Rating on Steam is currently sitting at 52%, or slightly above average, which would indicate that there are a lot of people who don't think this is a bad game. If your only goal is to rage about DoW3, go write a metacritic review or something, this isn't the place for it. --Sieger (talk) 17:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

"The Overall Rating on Steam is currently sitting at 52%" means that it is among the worst rated 9% in Steam (ratings are not distributed evenly between 0-100%, they are clustered far higher). That is not slightly above average, that's far below.

That's a logical fallacy. The way Steam's rating system works is that you have one vote; and you can only choose to vote "Recommended" or "Not Recommended". Dawn of War III sitting at 52% means that 52% of people who left reviews recommend the game, and 48% do not. In other words; it's reception has been controversial, not mostly negative. Now, if the article said something along the lines of "Reception has been slightly above average compared to other games on Steam" then you would have a point, but it doesn't. --User:Sieger (talk) 21:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

52% of people liking it is not average. Average indicates a mean/median among samples (in this case among receptions/ratings). An "average reception" in Steam ratings is at about 80% likes. The fallacy here is seeing the rate 52% and thinking that it means average. Look up normalization in statistics.

Apologies, I thought you were criticizing a section of the article, but I now see you were criticizing one of my arguments earlier in the Talk page. You're correct in this instance, it would've been more accurate to say it had a mixed reception. --User:Sieger (talk) 21:49, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Steamspy

Should we remove the bit about Steamspy? While we should be aiming to keep readers informed of the current state of the game's sales, by it's own admission, Steamspy is often inaccurate. From their About page: So 0.1% margin of error for a game with 0.1% of Steam audience would produce results that are mostly useless. That's why Steam Spy has to gather millions points of data daily to predict games sales and audience. And that's why Steam Spy is often wrong. Not by much, but still wrong. Thoughts? I don't have a strong opinion either way, as Steamspy claims they're not wrong by much, but it seems like a potential inaccuracy. --Sieger (talk) 17:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

There isn't a new article telling people how many copies were sold, unlike DoW 1 and 2. Steamspy is the closest thing to a decent estimate backed up by data, along with charts. There's a reason I used "barely broke a quarter million sales", instead of a specific number. Tactical Mehren (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Sales numbers shouldn't be relevant here anyway. We're fa/tg/uys, not people who own stock in Sega/Relic.--Newerfag (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Sales numbers are one of the indicators of a game's success, especially for a game well-known in the RTS circle. More people buying means people like it, and vice versa. This, combined with the rapidly shrinking playerbase for a game supposedly designed for competitive multiplayer, are pretty clear signs that DoW3 tanked. Tactical Mehren (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Dawn of War Realm?

I saw the links and the post at the official forums, but you require to login using your Facebook or Google+ account which actually looks very fishy, no screenshots, or anything, also, the link to PCGamer actually doesn't have really much to do with this DoW Realm project aside from mentioning DoW3 among the games which the writer thinks should get a second chance, anyone who is a longtime user of this wiki can confirm what's going on?--McNash (talk) 03:55, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

This is the first I've heard of it, so beats me. Sounds like a last-ditch effort from a few fans. --Newerfag (talk) 05:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

When I first posted that it didn't require a login to access the site, I'm not sure why they changed it. That being said, it's legit. I've been signed up for a few weeks and haven't gotten spam or anything fishy like that, and their Discord is fairly active on weekends. You can access it here. --Conqueror (talk) 05:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Look at this thread: https://community.dawnofwar.com/discussion/16445/about-dawn-of-war-realm It appears the creator of Dawn of War Realm has been caught asking for mails from the forum users and using Sega's logo, now I believe no one here sees anything wrong with people posting mods and links to community groups, but so far what have been posted about this Dawn of War Realm group are links which require previous signup with personal data, I think we should abstain from posting links which encourage such practices, after all, if the people behind Dawn of War Realm want to promote a revival of the game, why block the view from any non-signed visitors?--McNash (talk) 01:01, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't think he was out-and-out asking for e-mails. From what the moderator said, it looks like the post was taken down on the grounds that the site required an e-mail to access and that it was unofficial. The site founder has since removed the sign-up requirements to access the site, though you still need to sign up to access the forums and such. If you're still concerned, we could change the link in the article so it goes to their Discord instead of the site itself. --Conqueror (talk) 20:55, 1 September 2018 (UTC)