COH3 epic fail

This comparison does not make any sense.

Of course it makes sense, CoH2 back then had so many fucking major issues that it was an absolute dealbreaker and made 75% of the playerbase quit in 3 months. If the launch is terrible, then the entire game's future leaves little room for hope.

While CoH3 in it's current state is far from perfect, there isnt really any dealbreakers that make the game unplayable like it was the case with CoH2.

"Cartoony graphics", a couple missing QoL features and weird audio etc. is all annoying, but it won't make people stop playing... apart from the people who would have quit the game after <100h no matter what. Hell, the balance craziness on both sides can even be fun af for the average player.

Considering Relic prioritized SP for launch (SP is way more important for sales/money than MP at the beginning; that's just a fact) I would say we can be pretty happy, this is the best multiplayer launch experience in CoH history.

The game runs smooth even on toasters, there is no unplayable lag, there's already 4 factions, and with the ladders there is even something to grind for already.... none of this was the case in 2013.

Yes, after 8 years of patches, CoH2 is more polished and superior in some aspects than a brand new title from a medium sized company, holy shit. But that doesnt matter when a lot of people are bored to death by the previous game by now... which they are as long as the new game is overall in a decent okay spot, which it is

I'm honestly surprised to see so many people here okay with what's been thrown out of the gate. Company of Heroes 3 is trash right now, the lustre of newness will fade quite quickly, although I do have to say I didn't expect them to be touching balance quite so soon so hats off to that.

Yes, Company of Heroes 2 was also bad at launch. That being said, we were also dealing with an entirely different situation where Relic was dealing with the fallout from a publisher changeup and was clearly given a lot of leeway. Dawn of War 3 proved that SEGA is more than willing to pull the plug if things get dicey.

Age of Empires IV is something of an outlier in that most of the post-launch support is on Microsoft's strategy divisions, and I get the impression that Relic is only tangentially involved there anymore.

We're dealing with a studio that has rapidly ballooned in size but is staffed by almost none of the people who made the games which made the studio what it is, and this launch has proved that the learning curve is apparently brutal. It's anyone's guess as to how it all turns out in the end, but the absolute fumble that is the singleplayer campaign's current state and the public beating the game is currently taking may cause irreparable harm that the studio may not get the resources to fix. In the end it looks like Relic might be going the way of BioWare - either way it's not the company that makes the games I like anymore, and if they end up burning for it I'm going to sit on the sidelines with my popcorn in hand.

Show Spoiler

My point is that you need to compare CoH3 now to what is on the market right now as well, not to what was on the market 10 years ago. You're argumenting against someone who claimed that Relic will instantly drop CoH3 or that it is screwed up beyond repair, but most people don't claim that.
CoH3 was clearly rushed and could have used another couple of months for implementing basic features and polish that you could expect if a) the predecessor already has it and b) Relic markets so much as developing stuff for and with the community.
They cut those features because they did not want another delay. That's their fucked up management and nothing to excuse.

Yes, CoH3 will very likely improve with patches. But a bad launch state of CoH2 does not excuse that CoH3 launches with missing features and still some screwed up designs from what I saw on gameplay videos. If that weren't the case, their road map wouldn't include 'fixing the game and delivering basic features' for the first months. We know it could have used more time, Relic knows it could have used more time, no need to arguethat this were not the case.

I definetely not in the camp of people that say CoH3 were a failure, I've always written that I expect it to surpass CoH2 in quality within half a year or so, depending on how committed Relic really is. But I am tired of that mind boggling tribalism that players will defend unfinished games, just because launching broken shit has become the norm over the last decade.

But I am tired of that mind boggling tribalism that players will defend unfinished games, just because launching broken shit has become the norm over the last decade.

CoH 3 is fundamentally a working game. It's not like a 2077 where the units load in 3 seconds after you move the camera over them; abilities work, animations look fine, textures load in, the balance is a little whack but it's not insanely bad.

Broken is too strong a word, but unpolished and rushed are definitely applicable.

CoH 3 is fundamentally a working game. It's not like a 2077 where the units load in 3 seconds after you move the camera over them; abilities work, animations look fine, textures load in, the balance is a little whack but it's not insanely bad.

Broken is too strong a word, but unpolished and rushed are definitely applicable.

Probably was not clear enough, with broken I did not refer to CoH3, it was a general statement.
But actually broken and unfinished games have mentally moved the norm so much, that a still rushed and incomplete game such as CoH3 suddenly shines and needs to be defended against criticism? That's the tribalism I am talking about. It's someone's new favourite game, and everything is excused because there are worse games out there and the predecessor had a worse launch.

It's not okay. Relic said the game is basically finished by launching it. Critiquing that there's still tons of rough edges that could have been fixed on Relic's side and features missing is absolutely fair. The fact that a game 10 years ago had a worse launch does not change anything about it. I know plenty of games that had better launches, so what is the argument there?
Anyway, I know that you're surely not the 'correct target' for this answer, but more a general point.
CoH3 is playable, surely fun at times, and yet this does not excuse Relic from stripping features that could be expected and that they also promised.

If you want to compare CoH2 to CoH3, the best one would be like, "CoH2 was good outside, but unfinished inside".

CoH3 is definitely finished deep inside (engine vise), but its clearly an early access game. What really saddens me, is not even the stuff like "ladder" or something, but lack of basic small polishing.

Why re-use icons from CoH2? You already had made a lot of new icons, why cut corners are mix-mash assets? Whats the point of this, its not like it would take a lot of time to finish all them. Especially with dedicated people for art department.

What was the point of MP tests in a first place? To check if servers work? People during all tests, gave feedback about broken\OP mechanics. One of them, un-ironically, being DAK which received band-aid fix.
Why paradroped units aren't fixed, why emplacements aren't fixed or UKF problems? Loiters and so on. All of them were reported during tests.
With a dedicated people working on balance at Relic, what there were doing with all feedback or even at all? Balancing SP?

Its the same situation CoH2 had, where clearly unpolished and broken multiplayer might had already scared off some of the player base, who arent fans of the game. And the worst part, it could have been 100% avoided, but relic chose to just ignore it.

Point here being, CoH3 is still solid game, but it had everything to be a good at launch, yet it isn't, simply because relic cut corners for some unknown reason.

I'm honestly surprised to see so many people here okay with what's been thrown out of the gate. Company of Heroes 3 is trash right now, the lustre of newness will fade quite quickly, although I do have to say I didn't expect them to be touching balance quite so soon so hats off to that.

Yes, Company of Heroes 2 was also bad at launch. That being said, we were also dealing with an entirely different situation where Relic was dealing with the fallout from a publisher changeup and was clearly given a lot of leeway. Dawn of War 3 proved that SEGA is more than willing to pull the plug if things get dicey.

Age of Empires IV is something of an outlier in that most of the post-launch support is on Microsoft's strategy divisions, and I get the impression that Relic is only tangentially involved there anymore.

We're dealing with a studio that has rapidly ballooned in size but is staffed by almost none of the people who made the games which made the studio what it is, and this launch has proved that the learning curve is apparently brutal. It's anyone's guess as to how it all turns out in the end, but the absolute fumble that is the singleplayer campaign's current state and the public beating the game is currently taking may cause irreparable harm that the studio may not get the resources to fix. In the end it looks like Relic might be going the way of BioWare - either way it's not the company that makes the games I like anymore, and if they end up burning for it I'm going to sit on the sidelines with my popcorn in hand.

Point here being, CoH3 is still solid game, but it had everything to be a good at launch, yet it isn't, simply because relic cut corners for some unknown reason.

I guess Relic was either (or both) under pressure from SEGA to release the game or miscalculated the time needed to fix things twice but wanted to avoid the bad PR of moving the game's launch only weeks before the respective launch date.
They rather went with the option of "the game is okay, overall best is to launch it right now and fix stuff later". They might be right on this from the company's perspective, but not from a player's perspective.

Regarding your points about the January MP test:
They said (beforehand?) that they won't be able to incorporate the feedback into the launch version, but will use it as a guide to prioritize the work in the first patches. Which is fair given that the test was about a month beforehand, but the overall point still stands: They knew that CoH3's overall state is - let's say - subpar and launched it anyway, and that misplanning is their fault.

Relic will always be a huge question mark. They are an enigma wrapped in a riddle.

The art department clearly has been working their butts off. The new terrain textures, models, and GFX look very nice. Yet the 2D UI stuff is a mess? The stuff that takes minutes to make???

We can calculate the damage based on range, elevation, and distance to explosion of a projectile hitting an arbitrary object in the 3D world. But setting correct team colors? No f'ing way bro. C'mon we only had 5 years to make this game.

Game looks solid and pretty to some extent. Will be amazing in a few months, years.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aNje54h3jfc

cOh3 lOoKs aMaZiNg

coh1 loo kso much better.
look at animation of man on 88mm vs coh1 vs coh3
so sad

Regarding your points about the January MP test:
They said (beforehand?) that they won't be able to incorporate the feedback into the launch version, but will use it as a guide to prioritize the work in the first patches.

Well, I didnt know they've said that. If this is the case, then I expect them to introduce proper patch this week fixing at least few of the major issues which were point out it. But I do have a feeling it was a bla bla from them, because day 1 DAK nerf didn't look like it was well thought out beforehand.

The art department clearly has been working their butts off. The new terrain textures, models, and GFX look very nice. Yet the 2D UI stuff is a mess? The stuff that takes minutes to make???

Speaking of which, I made a post of exact this shit on the official forums. This is not even all of the crap the art department pulled.

https://community.companyofheroes.com/coh-franchise-home/company-of-heroes-3/forums/9-coh3-feedback/threads/3624-coh3-fun-game-good-performance-poor-art-direction-and-gui-decisions-for-a-launch-title

Bonus meme: https://imgur.com/a/7eRO11B - What beautiful mountains.

Well, I didnt know they've said that. If this is the case, then I expect them to introduce proper patch this week fixing at least few of the major issues which were point out it. But I do have a feeling it was a bla bla from them, because day 1 DAK nerf didn't look like it was well thought out beforehand.

Found it again, it was on their summary after the MP test, but not before unless I missed something. Basically saying the feedback will incorporated after the launch. Obviously it's a lot of corporate gibberish and I guess some things will be swept under the carpet, but they were frank enough to say the feedback won't change the launch state. They probably did not have time for that anyway.

I guess Relic needs to figure out how to tackle balance etc. There can't be a meta or well-founded balance opinion after only one day, so all that they have at this point is people screaming on their forums about DAK and maybe some internal suggestions what could be implemented for their play tests. Changing stuff at this point is like asking your crystal ball for advice. I wouldn't blame them for a weird band aid fix at day 1. If this still happens in a month, then that's a different case.



https://community.companyofheroes.com/coh-franchise-home/company-of-heroes-3/blogs/36-tech-test-coh-development-update
Show Spoiler

But I am tired of that mind boggling tribalism that players will defend unfinished games, just because launching broken shit has become the norm over the last decade.

Full agreement and we have Total War: WARHAMMER III tribalism to prove that abusive relationships with Sega marketing don't have a happy ending.

Largest Total War Content Creator calling out unfinished Sega games;

LegendofTotalWar Rants about Warhammer 3 & Creative Assembly;

Volound | The Warhammer 3 Launch "Review Bomb" Was From Fawning Fanboys;

Volound | Total War will be as bad as FIFA & World of Tanks soon;


With future games this seems what Sega marketing is planning for with NFT crypto pyramid schemes etc.

How many CoH3 content creators with a backbone?
CoH3 is still in beta and Relic/Sega marketing lied about this.
CoH3 and WARHAMMER III tribalism is playing right into the hands of what Sega marketing wants which means more gaming feudalism or worse racketeering like this;

This Sega arcade game is so rigged that people are suing the company, July 14, 2021:
https://www.inverse.com/input/gaming/segas-key-master-arcade-game-is-so-rigged-people-are-suing-the-company

ADVERTISED AS SKILL-BASED, BUT ITS MANUAL SAYS OTHERWISE — One of the chief bits of evidence given by plaintiffs’ lawyers is that the game manual for every Key Master console literally owns up to the whole damn con within the fine print.

Like Warhammer III and EA Fifa, Sega marketing wants a bunch of sheeple and Company of Shills.
Why?

Because this is the new Sega marketing;

Sega/CA marketing has become the EA of strategy games. For recent proof of this look into Sega's Super Game initiative and Warhammer 3.
Sega marketing is investing over 800M dollars into making live ops games that can compete with Apex and Fortnite.

From independent Total War content creator, Volound;
Creative Assembly Spent 4 Years Making a Fortnite Clone:

Volound
Been more than a year now since Warhammer 3 launched and had very few people come to me and tell me I was wrong about anything. The most hilarious instances though are the recent ones where people try to spin the eventual breaking of a complete dead silence (with crumbs) as some sort of silver lining.

"The fact that CA is still unwilling to post a simple roadmap due in November to showcase the content planned for WH3 should tell you a lot on how that game has been managed and who makes these decisions on the brand/marketing side.
One thing that I’ve noticed is that nearly all of the people I worked with at CA on WH3 have now left the company, including brand managers. Yet it feels like nothing has changed 🤷‍♂️
"

https://twitter.com/Saymonvoid

https://thenerdstash.com/how-much-money-is-fortnite-worth-in-2022-answered/

Fortnite earned its owners over $21 billion in its first four years, which is undoubtedly the world record among games of any genre. Of course, it would be rude and wrong to believe that the cost of Fortnite is its profit since the amount is much higher. Although based even on these data, we can safely assume that anyone who wants to buy Fortnite will undoubtedly buy the entire Epic Games company.

Sega’s ‘Super Game’ initiative will be a multi-title project and might involve NFTs, cloud gaming, 11 Apr 2022:
https://www.news9live.com/technology/gaming/segas-super-game-initiative-will-be-a-multi-title-project-and-might-involve-nfts-and-cloud-gaming-164094

Japanese game publisher Sega had outlined its plans to create ‘Super Games‘ during 2021’s financial year presentation. It had also pledged an additional investment of up to 100 billion yen in the next five years to make existing IPs into a global brand by promoting it to global players by 2024 and create ‘Super Games’ by 2025.

100 billion yen is over 700M dollars. With current and new funding this is likely over 1 billion dollars in ‘Super Games‘ investment.

Interesting point about sound…i feel like the mixing (for lack of a better word) is odd - the action all blends together. Mortars, rifles, tanks…sometimes indistinguishable. In CoH2, I could separate them out easily and the scale of the sounds felt right too.

Wondering if it’s my setup or the game based on your text - I’m running the same setup as coh2, where I did not have that issue (Arctic’s 7 steelseries w onboard sound)

I have mixed feelings about the sound as well. It's definitely different, to me everything sounds a bit more indistinct, like you're hearing all the effects and explosions from a considerable distance away, rather than right up close like the previous games, which makes sense given the player's role. Maybe I just need time to get used to it, though vehicles and their engines/tracks dont seem to have quite the same punch.

Slightly disappointed by the English voice acting and general chatter from the units. I'm probably in a significant minority but I really enjoyed the silly over the top stuff in the first game.

Can't agree more, it's the Age of Empires WWII, made for mobile gamers, instead a real PC game,I don't see a single reason to jump from coh2 to this "thing". I hope the PS and Xbox players enjoy it.