An article about Relic

Maybe I should be more accurate and say lazy publishers. Can you seriously deny we haven't had a number of half assed releases recently? Batman, no man sky, animations in mass effect? All released not exactly finished by publishers and yes getting bad PR. It would be worse if they were unable to improve them for their customers after release.

I have some sympathy for Relic due to thq collapse but you can't deny game was released compromised to what it could have been, remember peer to peer multiplayer?

The 1blizzards and plane crashes are all subjective, the competitive community hates them but the comp stompers prob love them.

I agree that I feel Relic's patching system wasn't good, massive patches just didn't work.

Game development all boils down to resource management, time, money etc a developer normally has a set time and budget to produce a product in, this means hard decisions have to be made, things get cut, It is just the reality of the business. 2

1-Blizzards: as i said, there was ZERO ATTEMPT (IIRC and what the changelogs shows when i go with a quick control + F serach) to make it a bit less frustrating. At the time i mentioned couple of things which might had help but nothing was tried (removing mp cost and xp gain of fire pits, lesser freezing penalties, some tactical benefit of using deep snow, removing deep snow during non blizzard time).

2-As i said before, i don't know what are the internal issue and problems. WE ONLY KNOW THE RESULTS.
They can be working there ass off, but it MIGHT had been there some middle process which was ineffective or inefficient. There could be not enough people to realistically work properly on it.

And releasing a product with the we'll fix it later attitude will only get you poor reviews, poor sales and out of a job.

Not saying it happened here, but it happens quite frequently. Timelines OP.

The biggest misconception I read all the is the lazy developer issue. A development team is made up of so many disciplines that if you're lazy people will notice and you will be fired.

IMO, Relic tops head decision making and community handling was LAZY. We are at a point on which they seem to not care (as much as before, possible due to DOW3 release) so they are more lax in letting the community trying to fix game (not just balance but bugs).

There are people willing to do mods, abilities and skins for you to sell. There are people who are willing to spend their free time in order to balance test things, find bugs and fix them. All this "free" resources which they didn't use till too late in the life stage of the game.

PD: i'll say it again. Communication was bad and sometimes polarising. You don't like your community? Too bad, it's your community. Yeah, it's scary and hard to deal with randoms on the internet but i see that this site was not used as it's fullest on their part. And the occasional times they do so, sometimes it was in a trollish way (use Shocks inside an M3 YOLO).

There is no way of knowing what decisions were made and why, but laziness, nah.

The fact is they don't have the resources for whatever reason to support the game like they did before.

OR because of how the game plays (dynamics, handling, mechanics, engine) it might not make too much sense on having it? IMO it would be a layer of depth which doesn't really add to much due to how positioning and projectiles and handled.

On CoH2, IMO, this not worth it, cause you'll had to implement a new mechanic and stress the PC even more to handle the respective position between the damage dealer and the victim target. Right now, it all depends on what part of the tank, the shell lands. If the vehicle lands an accuracy role, it would most probably land right on a straight line to the vehicle. But when not and with scatter, what would be a "frontal" shot can transform into a "rear" shot with enough RNG. If side armor was implemented this would be even worst.

First of all the stress on the PC is neglegible
Second of all it reduces the amount of RNG: Imagine a tank shooting exactly at the side of the other tank. In vcoh that was always side armor, but in coh2 it is a coin toss between front and rear which makes a huge difference. side armor basically eliminates the situation when you flank an enemy tank but only hit its front
This adds a very nice strategic component, some tanks might have more side armor, some less, which would require more micro and thought put into it.
And yes, pathfinding sucks, but that is another thing for itself

No other option? Maybe it was a tech issue since it was the DOW2 engine.

as the dow2 engine is an pdated version of the coh1 enginge i highly doubt that

It could be a design decision but not laziness.

it would have made the game better, which means it was a stupid decision, but many like those were made

I'll do this later?! LOL There might not be a later, it isn't a good way to run a business and not how developers what to ship a title.

many latest releases beg to difer

First of all the stress on the PC is neglegible
Second of all it reduces the amount of RNG: Imagine a tank shooting exactly at the side of the other tank. In vcoh that was always side armor, but in coh2 it is a coin toss between front and rear which makes a huge difference. side armor basically eliminates the situation when you flank an enemy tank but only hit its front
This adds a very nice strategic component, some tanks might have more side armor, some less, which would require more micro and thought put into it.
And yes, pathfinding sucks, but that is another thing for itself
as the dow2 engine is an pdated version of the coh1 enginge i highly doubt thatit would have made the game better, which means it was a stupid decision, but many like those were made
many latest releases beg to difer

The DOW2 engine was a a modified version of the VCOH one, the infamous COH2 input lag was caused by the DOW2 animation system, so yes, it could well have been a tech issue.

Whether it is a stupid decision or not is subjective.

It's not a matter of anyone being lazy. It's a matter of company priorities and resources.

The reason that quote:

"We've definitely set out to make the core experience of Dawn of War 3 stand on its own. It wasn't designed around eSports. The experience was designed to be as it is... I would hope that [eSports] would be a byproduct of people loving our game, so they play it in that way as well."

.. is infuriating, if you read into it, is that once again multiplayer in DoWIII appears to not be the main focus.

Bugs happen, exploits get discovered, the meta gets stale, player interest drops. These are certainties. What I get from that quote is that when that will happen, it won't be a high priority to fix it in a matter of hours or days but more likely months or not at all. That there won't be a big enough team or plan in place to tackle those issues. Because esports is something that might come up, or not, and either way it's not that big a deal as long as Orks still Waagh.

Once upon a time games HAD to be (mostly) bug free and in a highly playable state before release.
Now they can push them out half broken.
Games are far more complex than ever.

It all comes down to resources and picking the correct battles. For every bug which is shipped many more were deemed higher priority and squashed before release.

I really miss those days
It's not just games tho; software projects in general go live with bugs.
A few decades ago if a program had bugs pre go live, you pull the plug...

pong developers were true heroes who ironed out all the bugs such complex game had before launch.

i dont know what games people here play but all the new games i played past year+, even a few early access games ever had major bugs had launch.

If you buy 'early release' or pre alpha this is expected.
HOWEVER, if you buy a game that has been out for a month (see any battlefield), you SHOULD get it bug free.
Instead it takes developers 3 months or more to fix...
It's like comparing it to buying a brand spanking new toaster, and it either zaps you or only one side works...

A publisher spends millions of dollars on PR for a game pre and post release, that is when their game (product) is at its highest exposure and most chance of scoring a success, so why would they not try and release the best bug free version of the game possible within the given time.

Fuck oath!
+1000

It's not a matter of anyone being lazy. It's a matter of company priorities and resources.

The reason that quote:


.. is infuriating, if you read into it, is that once again multiplayer in DoWIII appears to not be the main focus.

If you look at blizzard entertainment's data on starcraft, very little buyers actually play the ladder at all, preferring to do co-op with friends or custom games/fun modes.

Relic didn't put much effort in releasing a bug free game and then didn't put much effort in cleaning the mess they had.

If they didn't had time to release a high standard game, they could have invest more on the post release team to clean the mess
Or
If they decided to release a high standard game, they could have reduce the investment on the post release.

So in my opinion, they are just guilty of Lazyness as elchino7 mentioned it.

I think people might learn a lot from how "The Scope" has affected the mod team and the results they've created.

Even community members are hamstrung by management.

One of the biggest problems is that (big) Publishers determine when a game will be released based on business quarters and not weather a game is ready or not. Developers don't have too much to say about this unless their publisher has some decent morals.

I like the Relic GM but he may not be the right man for the job. If Alex Garden (the founder of Relic) was still leading the studio he would make sure only the right people get promoted for the right job.
I know Relic suffered a lot from the THQ bankruptcy but that was over 4 years ago. Only results, not words will matter now. It's long overdue to become consistent in words and actions.
I'm sure Relic has plenty of talent to make some good games but they definitely lack good leadership to use that talent.
This lack of leadership has been confirmed by former Relic devs and even by the current Creative Assembly GM that ran Relic for almost a year. With COH2, no leader in Relic with any shred of honesty (not a hypocrite/stubborn) can be happy with the total lack of consistency in words and action.

GeneralsGentlemen; Thoughts on Dawn of War 3 Beta
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDrmyvbXeIU

*SNIP*
Like a lot of things that Relic does, their theory does not turn into practise.

QFT

Relic should hire GG, seriously. Maybe then DoW3 can have the longevity as Relic hope the game will have.
In general, favoritism in Relic seems to be a big problem for both devs AND fans. This is why you do not hire friends and family. That's a big no-no.
This is what you can call the "Relic echo chamber" where devs is trying to pat each other on the back to get ahead or get that "promotion". You see the same kind of mentality ALOT on social media. Facebook/twitter have a bad habit turning into a giant echo chamber or "safe space".


How Electronic Arts stopped being the worst company in America
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-electronic-arts-stopped-being-the-worst-company-in-america/

In fact, more than 250,000 people cast their votes on the advocacy website Consumerist and crowned EA the worst company in America the year before, beating out Bank of America.
*SNIP*
A mantra Wilson [the new EA CEO] wanted executives to rally behind was one of its codes of conduct, "Think Players First." That meant making decisions in the best interest of customers, rather than merely for the company. It was about doing right by customers the first time around, be that by delaying a game to make it better, or offering freebies as an apology for screwing up.

How many leaders in Relic, "Think Players First."

From Relic own website;

In essence, we envision the type of games that we would love to play, and then we create them.
Our studio is different from most others. We value ideas and innovation so every game we create is a true reflection of our entire teams’ capabilities. We believe in the autonomous, entrepreneurial spirit of an indie developer – only with the extensive resources of a large publisher.

We are owned by SEGA, a world leader in interactive entertainment. They provide us with the autonomy and creative control needed to preserve the integrity of the gaming experience, from the concept stage right through to final development. Being part of the SEGA family also gives us access to resources and talent that will help us build on our legacy of innovation.

Lots of PR, but not much action. "In essence, we envision the type of games that we would love to play, and then we create them." Ok Relic why not put this to a test?, how many devs regular play COH2 let alone in their free time? Maybe DoW3 will be different? and we see many devs playing their own game right? "Think Players First." Even EA are trying to get this right. Why not Relic?

The talented people in Relic need to be PROMOTED and the top management need to get rid of all the dead weight (managers) that are not really doing their job.

Current top critics and most "helpful" reviews on https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Relic-Entertainment-Reviews-E533032.htm from former Relic devs;

"Artist"
StarStarStarStarStar
Former Employee - Artist
Recommends
Negative Outlook
I worked at Relic Entertainment full-time (More than a year)
Pros
-most of the colleagues are friendly and awesome to work with
-new GM seems to know the problems with this company and is trying to fix them
Cons
-favoritism is key to survive in this place if you want to keep your job
-old timers are only good at little of what they know and most are not updated to the current technology and skill sets
-poor management over all
-might be time to let go some of the top decision makers, some of them might be stubborn and ignorant when looking at the current market
Advice to Management
Don't just listen to what the leads/managers says. Listen to the little guys. Some of them are afraid to speak their mind because of their managers. Look at your game sales and you shall know that some of the decision maker shall be let go

"Confused, disorganized with no clear direction for success"
StarStarStarStarStar
Former Employee - Anonymous Employee in Vancouver, BC (Canada)
Doesn't Recommend
Negative Outlook
I worked at Relic Entertainment full-time (More than a year)
Pros
Talented individuals who want to make great games
Cons
Senior Management nepotistic and hides behind clique. Promotes leads based on who they like and not who is the best for the job.
Advice to Management
Listen to your staff and make effective changes. Don't hire friends and family.

"blooming hypocrisy on all levels"
StarStarStarStarStar
Former Employee - Anonymous Employee
Doesn't Recommend
Negative Outlook
I worked at Relic Entertainment full-time (More than 3 years)
Pros
Some incredibly talented people to work with, office location, full-time position benefits are good.
Cons
Too many managers, but no one seems to take actual responsibilities for anything. Often people are treated unfair, management is reluctant to criticism. The career progress is all about traditional hierarchical career path, based on technical proficiency and past performance, not employee potential and/or talent.