I'm going to quote you three so you know who I'm directing this at, then after that other people can jump on the bandwagon and hate me more. My aim with this is to dispel a few myths but I'm not hopeful.
Zevargel wrote:
You open your point by saying Relic ignored the community when they first teased DoW III content. It's a little more complex than that. They'd likely been working on it a while, and the chance that a percentage of people online voicing concern, hatred, apathy etc would change anything so far into the development process is quite absurd. Relic have a plan in mind, and for better or worse to keep projects on track they stick to the plan, or Sega isn't going to be too keen in funding them anymore. As Dullahan says, the feedback provided wasn't exactly helpful, since it was mostly concerning how repulsive the artstyle was or how moba the game looked. Very little was actually constructive, and if let's say 50% of your fanbase doesn't like the way it looks, and then 50% of those people are saying what looks bad, and 50% of them are saying why it looks bad, and then everyone has a different and not well fleshed out idea of how to change it, then you don't have much reason to listen to anyone in particular when the fans can't reach a consensus. All companies work like this because bending to the will of some vague wishes is going to lead to complete disarray.
You second point about them lying doesn't seem to have basis because they never lied about what their game would be. They showed off screenshots, then videos, then the betas came out and we could all see for ourselves what the game would look like. Just because it didn't fit the way you wanted it does not mean Relic lied, because this is the only way I can see how you came up with such a statement. They got it wrong, certainly, horribly wrong: they under delivered on key things that you pointed out (obs mode, leaderboards, gamemodes), and that contributed to the demise of the game, but they didn't lie, so that's not valid criticism.
Oddnerd wrote:
Look, I'm going to be horribly nitpicky here and I know it's annoying, but in my own words I wrote 'celebrate what is likely the death of the franchise'. No one wants to celebrate the death of DoW as a franchise, but this is exactly the shortsightedness that I'm talking about. DoW III's horrific failure is not going to give Sega much confidence in continuing support for the series as a whole. You can whoop and cheer as much as you like that DoW III is no more, personally I think it's kind of foolish that people would waste so much time and negative emotion to revel in failure because they feel vindicated or whatever, but I don't think I can communicate that to people anymore.
DoW III's failing is not something to cheer about because it spells serious doubt for the games ever being revisited or continued, and as much as some might like, we can't play Elite forever (unless you're Venji). I'm saying this because it's easy to see this as "revenge for a bad game" but I think people need to look past that and see that the consequences of DoW III being pulled are far more long lasting.
You're correct in that this failure should show Relic how not to do things, and I hope too that they learn. I am not asking anyone to wish that DoW III had done better, you can read that in my post. I wanted to like it, but I couldn't. A lot of people instantly hated it, and some still like it now. What does it matter it's all subjective, hence why I am not saying we should weep for it, but don't expect a sequel any time soon or ever.
Marutectz wrote:
I'll ignore the hyperbolic point about purging forum after forum because that's not true, but I don't think I have time to outline exactly why since we both know it's hyperbole.
Well, in the short term, yes, we won! WE WON! The consumer wielded ultimate power and DoW III died. In a sense, that is winning, because we've slain the beast and now it's dead. But it's winning in the same sense that you then realise that a much bigger beast called Sega is going to come along and eat the wretched carcass forever, and now we have no more DoW. Poor analogy aside, I've explained this point too many times. Yes, the consumer told Relic what they didn't want and Relic paid for it dearly, but now we have nothing.
I don't want to make this a personal argument either because that's going to devolve into nothing good but what you're saying about Armada II may well be correct, but that same level of blind faith about a developer is how we got here in the first place.
Your second paragraph I get the gist of, and I agree with it. DoW III was poorly designed, and it wasn't enjoyable. I mean, yeah, not much else to say but I agree for the most part.
Your final paragraph though shows me you missed the point, and you missed it badly. I'm not crying nor preaching, I'm warning you that your celebrations are shortsighted if you think that this is good news for the DoW franchise. You don't care about DoW III, but I'm fairly sure you want Dow IV. Good luck, basically. I never told anyone to like the game, or even that by buying it they'll fix it, I feel like this is a misconception that popularly surrounds anyone who seems to defend DoW III. I don't like DoW III anymore. I used to, but then I got bored of it. I'm not an apologist for the shit state of that game but I don't think mindlessly celebrating it being dropped is good. In the end it shows Sega that people don't like change and would rather stick with what they have. And Sega might be horribly wrong if they think that, but if they do then the whole series gets fucked over.
Your last point about triple A titles doesn't really do the argument justice either because you're going against what you said earlier, which is that people rule the market. The devs get away with these practices because they know people will give them more money. Battlefront 2 came out very poorly because it pushed this mentality to the extreme and people finally noticed that it was truly predatory. But there's plenty of games out there doing just fine with microtransactions and hordes of DLC because as you said, the consumer decides what's worth it, and the consumer is buying these things. Don't blindly blame the devs for their evil ways when it suits you, and don't ennoble consumer power when it suits you too. This is also disregarding other factors such as the complexity of designing lots of modern games and cases where microtransactions are acceptable, but that's a whole other tangent.
Your point about arrorgance confuses me, because I doubt arrogance has anything to do with it. If you beat a metaphorical dog, it's going to walk away with its tail between its legs, not with a grin that says "I told you my behaviour would lead you to brutally assaulting me". There's no arrogance in it at all, in fact there are probably some quite serious questions about Relic's future and layoffs. And once again, don't misquote me, I didn't blame you for killing the franchise, I blame Relic for that (well, I don't think excessive hostility is good either but nevermind).
Anyway, I doubt anyone will read any of this, but if you do, please give me the courtesy of responding.