Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III

One of the worst RTS games have ever played, Buggy as hell, terrible campaign and the gameplay is just awful, WHY does it take so long to earn the resources for a SINGLE SQUAD.

Hardcore Gamer, Gamereactor and Empire Online are all lying to you. This game is in fact not good, and you shouldn't buy it. Play StarCraft 2 and pretend you're playing 40k. Play some of the older DoW games. Just don't give these people your money.

Buggy mess. Only played so long because I went AFK and I wanted to finish the campaign before I uninstalled.

打折35块买的，这确实是这款游戏该有的价格

THESE LOSERS HAVE BEEN MAKING GAMES FOR DECADES NOW AND THEY STILL DONT KNOW HOW TO MAKE A DECENT GAME. DOW 2 LETS US ZOOM ALL THE WAY IN, AND GAVE US 5 FACTIONS. BUT NOW THERES ONLY THREE FACTIONS. THESE IDIOTS GAMES WORKSHOP DONT EVEN PLAY WARHAMMER THESE LOSERS DONT EVEN PLAY THEIR OWN GAME. THESE DOGS DONT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT WAR AND THEY TALK ABOUT WAR ALL THE TIME. MAKE A GAME THATS BETTER THAN THE LAST, DONT BE LAZY. the Emperor is disgusted with you low lives, nothing but an excuse for a game maker.

[h1][i]“In the words of the philosopher Sceptum, the founder of my profession: am I going to get paid for this?”[/i] ~Terry Pratchett, Night Watch[/h1] Lots of things happened since Dawn of War II's last expansion. With the most important one being THQ filing for bankruptcy. Their assets (including Relic with its time-limited license to work with Game Workshop's IP) went to public auction and, despite ZeniMax Media trying really hard to get 'em, in the end it was SEGA who won. But wait, wait. I know what you're thinking. Mixed reviews, lots of complaints, the new publisher... Obviously, what we have here is the same old story – some big guys acquired the old project and killed it with their crappy decisions, right? Well, no. Despite starting with a much more old-school RTS-like approach (similar to what we saw in the Ground Control series, especially in its second installment), the Dawn of War series kept trying to “stay modern”. And judging by what we've seen in the previous game, Relic had a strong belief that the future lay in the MOBA genre (which wasn't even a thing yet, since Demigod, League of Legends and Dawn of War II came out the same year). Sure, technically, Dawn of War II didn't even count as a MOBA. It didn't revolve around a single character, etc. You can make a lot of points to prove that. Honestly, whatever, it doesn't really matter to the point in question. What I'm trying to say is that the direction was set. And Dawn of War III? Dawn of War III was supposed to make the next big step. Development (on paper at least) started soon after Dawn of War II: Retribution. Which kinda shows, since technically, Dawn of War III picks up directly from Retribution. While the original Dawn of War II was much more MOBA-like, Retribution brought back the original RTS mechanics (like resources and unit production) because... You know. People. People complained. Dawn of War II brought in a bit too much change for those who spent countless hours playing the original, so... Yeah. And like I said, Dawn of War III does follow the Retribution formula. Means we've got buildings, resources and units. We capture the POI, the POI generates resources, we spend resources to hire units. If you ever played Company of Heroes (another of Relic's projects), you know the drill. Sounds fine. I mean, nobody really expected Relic to get back to the series' roots here, right? Unfortunately, despite being forced to compromise on Retribution, Relic didn't stop being obsessed with the MOBA genre. And it's not like I'm overthinking or something — they said so themselves. They did believe the MOBA genre was the future and they studied the genre really hard while working on Dawn of War III. It shows. And, surprisingly, not in a bad way. Most of the time. When I took my first look at Dawn of War III, my instant complaint was not about its gameplay, but... About its design. It's actually kinda crazy when you think about it. Back in the 90s, when BLIZZARD was making their first strategy game, they actually wanted it to be a Warhammer title. But thanks to how they wanted complete control over their property, they ended up making a rip-off called... Yeah, it was WarCraft. And yes, I said “rip-off”. I could have been gentler and said “heavily influenced game”, but come on. Lots and lots of John Blanche's signature design was copied as is and when BLIZZARD continued to expand their universe and made StarCraft, it became even more obvious (Terrans were pretty much Ultramarines, Zergs were Tyranids, etc). In other words, BLIZZARD used to steal from Games Workshop (again, let's just call things by their names, we're not in a courtroom). Yet somehow, Relic managed to turn the tables in their games. In Dawn of War II, for example, we had that terrible, [i]terrible[/i] character that felt [i]exactly[/i] exactly like StarCraft's Fenix. You know. The dude who “died” and was “resurrected” as a big mechanical beast. Part man, part machine, all rip-off. Why am I telling you that? Well, because Dawn of War III feels even worse. Everything here screams “BLIZZARD”, not “Games Workshop”, [i]BLIZZARD[/i]. Even the bloody menus! I mean, [i]come on![/i] SERIOUSLY?! We all know how BLIZZARD's stuff looks! Even their websites are designed with that very specific look in mind! And that's [i]exactly[/i] what we have here! In other words, technically, we're playing the real deal... Yet... it's hard not to feel like you're playing... a rip-off? [i]What... the f*ck is going on here?[/i] Anyway, enough 'bout that. What about the gameplay? Well, here's a rather unpopular opinion – Dawn of War III isn't bad. Far from it, actually. It launched with an obvious lack of content (gameplay modes and such), but since this kind of stuff is known for growing with time, it wasn't a deal breaker. And as for the core thing? Like I said, it felt fine. Smooth, comfortable and totally playable. The game also looked quite good, had juicy cutscenes and huge units to control. Yet... only a few months later it was completely abandoned. I mean, it's not like servers went down or something — the game's still fully playable up to this day (even though there are still bugs and even the achievements can act), but we didn't get any major updates or expansions. Why? What happened? What happened is... Exactly what happened with many of those online-oriented first-person shooters. Extraction shooters, hero shooters, doesn't matter. The problem with these kinds of games is that, like with the MMORPGs before them, people only have time for one (maybe two) of 'em in their lives. The day only has so many hours, you know? And when you choose one game? Well, here you are. You're hooked. The game owns you because switching games would feel a lot like losing your progress. Even if there's something technically better on the market, you still don't care. You already have the game you're playing, you invested time in it and you want to keep building on that. You need one heck of a reason to switch. Dawn of War III? While making Dawn of War II Retribution formula more smooth and comfortable, it got closer to MOBAs again. Up to the point where it feels like some sort of a variation. And it was totally the wrong time for that. MOBAs themselves were in agony. Even Guardians of Middle-earth didn't do well. And it was a game based on bloody Middle-earth! The Lord of the Rings and sh*t. That setting everybody loves, no matter their age. Yet even that game closed down. So much for the future, huh? That was Relic's real mistake. They made the wrong bet. Were they to blame? Well, yeah. The clues were all there. MMORPGs, online shooters, MOBAs... All of that stuff follows the same exact formula. The one, thanks to which people still play World of WarCraft, while, say, Highguard was just shut down. But it's all marketing. You know? When I look at Dawn of War III itself, I see a game that, technically, I could have been playing for quite some time. Does it mean that I can recommend it, though? As sad as it is, no. And the reason for that is that Relic went all-in. They made it absolutely clear that online is the main dish here. The single-player campaign, while lasting 17 missions (which isn't really that bad), feels forced and uninspired, while online... Like I said, it never grew into a real deal. Didn't have enough time for that. Relic pulled the plug way too fast for it to happen. There was a chance to go all No Man's Sky. That chance wasn't taken. So, at the end of the day, what we were left with was a game with a single-player mode that wasn't even supposed to make you excited and served more like a bridge to the multiplayer. Which was abandoned right away without providing pretty much any features that were supposed to be dropped in our usual “live service” way. Dawn of War III ended up being a failure. But not as a game, as a [i]product[/i]. There are lots and lots of lessons to learn here, but like I said, it's all marketing.

почти прошел игру на высокой сложности, надоели краши. В миссии по саботажу у эльдар я просто физически не могу из-за вылетов взломать самый первый терминал

Ce qui est drôle avec Dawn of war 3, c'est que c'est mon tout premier Dawn of War et je le trouve quand même réussis. Visuellement il est vraiment cool et propose, les unités sont bien illustré et la campagne est cool. Bien sur j'ai grossi la collection de STR entre temps et bien sur je peut lui reprocher certaine chose comme le système économique qui est cassé, le manque d'unité et de faction ( comme ce que tout le monde lui reproche Je trouve quand même que pris à pars de ces 2 grands frères il reste un bon jeux mais pas une bonne suite !

画质是精良的，但还是不怎么好玩，无聊的。

Отличная игра в своем жанре, жаль большинству не понравилось