I think they got the message :)

[Le Chimiste]

I'll still play this game cause it's got potential, but let's say I'm only moderately surprised to see all that negative stuff thrown at it.

See, I paid 160 in 2019 anyway so I might as well take what's there :)
But in general I believe the whole collector's package is worth something. Some parts of the gameplay seem confusing and incomplete but that will be fixed as DLCs come and as I get new habits obviously. We still have some good looking material to play with. And not many if any other games providing similar content, so the mere fact that HW3 exists is already pretty cool. It's not "yet another" imperfect FPS that might as well not exist. It's got some relevance.

Besides here's my situation : I am not buying this in order to relive the year 2002 - it was "imperfect" as well btw and I have enough memories. I am not in search of a very deep cultural identity trip in the form of what "Matrixism" was, I'm looking for a good cultural product but there ain't going to be any full immersion. I have some disposable income, I have bought even more useless stuff than video games and that's OK. I like video games for their replay value and my #1 ever favorite (which is ANNO-1404) has a trash campaign to be honest, so HW3 is nothing I can't work with.

But there's some people that don't fit the aforementioned criteria. And those are also some of the ones that gave "various entities" the $$$ the top management of which may or may not have bought Rolexes with... So -I WOULD GUESS- that in the face of the relative mistakes that were made*, there is going to be some degree of being (virtually) punched in the face by the market for this game. Some degree. What exactly did Gearbox expect ?? You can't just mess around and never find out. Now's the time when you find out.
I messed around and found out a few times as well, now they just have to deal with it but I think they got the message. Those reviews have cost them money and will do it some more.

The rest of us might as well filter out the chaff from the wheat and focus on what works. It should have been better, but could have been worse.

Peace

[chauser]

Amen brother

[Petresko]

Man, you just said a whole bunch of nothing.

The game exists, therefore it's cool. How?
It's a slap in the face who expected the same level of quality storytelling and game mechanics as HW1 and HW2.
The game is supposed to be tailored to the core fanbase of the original games yet the development studio made it based on the outdated assumption that graphics sell games, like they're trying to attract new audiences with it...

You admit you are not playing the game to remember the good old days, which makes your opinion on the game irrelevant.
The whole point of having a game named HW3 is to attract people who loved the previous games in the franchise and are very likely to buy it based on nostalgia.

You also admit to wasting money on half-assed / useless content, which is one of AAA publishers' incentives to dump more half-assed "meh" games onto the market.
Why make good quality content, when suckers who waste money willy-nilly on half-baked taters will just suck it up?

This whole thing wreaks of "it is what it is"-sm, formulated to be the safest, most flaccid, cushioned, least offensive, mediocre statement.

[DV]

They haven't gotten the message until they admit to their screw up publicly and release a road map to fixing the problems that many have pointed to.

Of course we can scratch off story campaign because there is no way they can fix that without a complete rework of the game. There is no way the dev and publisher will foot the bill to fix that mess. The only way they can fix that is to remove the staff that created that mess and black list them from future involvement within their respective companies.

The only fix for the campaign is to right it off as a non-canon mess that will not count towards future iterations of the IP.

[Le Chimiste]

Some people are way too mad over this. It's like they view HW3 as a pile of plutonium. Dude, it's not even globally a gameplay problem so the core of the game still holds (that's the gameplay, not campaign. Back in 02 maybe yes offline story modes were the center of a game, but in my memories that changed around year 2010 with Battlefield 3 for instance - which had an explicitly multiplayer focused gameplay. I must have spent 20hr on the campaign and like 980 on PVP. It's going to be much of the same ratio here even with lower absolute numbers.)
And besides about that comment on "remembering the good old days" please read again - I remember it alright cause I have a decent brain. I'm just not chasing a re-boot of a point in time that's now history and that I'll never get back to regardless of how great the game might have been. Some people try to re-live bygones, I'm sorry but it doesn't often work.

[Vanquisher]

If Homeworld fans are upset with the game: it's a bad Homeworld game.

And without the Homeworld title it's just a mid RTS.

[TheOrangeBox]

The Homeworld story was/is the selling point of the game, not the skirmishes.
It might have been revolutionary when was first released to market for the innovative play mechanics along the vertical plane rather than just the horizontal plane.

But what captured the imagination of players was the story, Without the story the game blends into any other rts games. And these days we've more than we had back in the day,
GBX must take stock on the feedback and rectify as much as it can as CA did recently with TW Pharaoh launch.

The days that CEO launch games and forget is over. They need to be accountable for the shortcoming affecting not only gamers but the talented developers that have been dumped onto the street while they retains unjustifiable salary and bonuses.

[drh]

Originally posted by Le Chimiste:

Some people are way too mad over this. It's like they view HW3 as a pile of plutonium. Dude, it's not even globally a gameplay problem so the core of the game still holds (that's the gameplay, not campaign. Back in 02 maybe yes offline story modes were the center of a game, but in my memories that changed around year 2010 with Battlefield 3 for instance - which had an explicitly multiplayer focused gameplay. I must have spent 20hr on the campaign and like 980 on PVP. It's going to be much of the same ratio here even with lower absolute numbers.)
And besides about that comment on "remembering the good old days" please read again - I remember it alright cause I have a decent brain. I'm just not chasing a re-boot of a point in time that's now history and that I'll never get back to regardless of how great the game might have been. Some people try to re-live bygones, I'm sorry but it doesn't often work.

A lot of them are just Telegram neo-Nazis on a recruitment drive. They see a big game on release, and send spammers to cry and whine about DEI, ESG, SBI, or whatever the buzzword of the week is to try to funnel people to their servers. That HW3 had some issues at launch just gave them cover.

[Le Chimiste]

That's a conspiracy theory though.
The core problem with the campaign is that it is different enough from what was done before that people feel it was "not quite made for them" - That's a fair thing to say and IMO it's true; it was not really "made for us" according to our expectations. It should have been. But that's one part of the game.

[Ashrock]

Originally posted by Le Chimiste:

That's a conspiracy theory though.
The core problem with the campaign is that it is different enough from what was done before that people feel it was "not quite made for them" - That's a fair thing to say and IMO it's true; it was not really "made for us" according to our expectations. It should have been. But that's one part of the game.

if it wasn't made for us....then who in the hell was it made for. Regardless of who it was written for it's still the hot garbage that Oscar pooped out before going back into his can.

[Le Chimiste]

What I'm guessing is they thought : Well, old timers gonna buy the game anyway and some already have (lol that's me). So what if we appealed to the mainstream general audience instead ?? And yeah old-timers are gonna leave mixed reviews but that's ok cause mainstream media will like our storyline and counter the bad buzz.

Could I be wrong ? Sounds like what they had in mind though.

Problem is this game is very Steam-centered, so what matters is.... Steam reviews, DUH !

But I'm pretty sure they got the message. They care about profit, they are a business not a non-profit. When the term "refund" gets thrown around you know it's hard. But then again I've seen games that were so bad they were unplayable.... I'm just waiting for some small flaws to be fixed and new fleets to be added, then when I have figured out how to play well I'm sure the game will be fine.

[=X-men=]

Game is worth of paying, but it needs some rework at curent state in next DLCS to a canon of hw1 hw2 and homeworld: cataclysm it becomes more arcade style player not like this and some new concepts of a arcade "tower of defence" style physics low hull hp ,dps of some weapon, company needs to hear what customers want to be in their product because they will use and buy it for years .
Players want a return of all play styles from classics with new graphics and all sides of hw universe.
Hope next DLC add some of this content. This should be a canon in developing new games with all previous content as playeble and add new storyline, new ideas, game modes step by step. If mod dev can do this, company can do this more faster.
Dev needs to add ideas of Complex mod Universe mods complex simple. Big ships need reworks of weapon range increase and more turrets installed, force field, cloak, hyperspace, upgrade and bee self sufficient with 1 core installed , because they are most advanced ships in the fleet some sort of Carrier - battlecruiser .
Mother ship too need armors and weapons defences some siege energy weapon and become a fortress because they call it Sajuuk tech and it has 3 cores, small ships need to utilise cloak wen not in combat automatically. Minelayer corvette boarding frigates are missing, powerful torpedos that shutdown easy all ships in 1-3 hits, and more stuff that players expected to be here more Realistic . To see cloaked ship you need to have special sensors etc.
If you add new game type war game and others thing make a fully customisable players avatars for progression system lvls, add some 3d talking faces of pilots and commanders when they reports of commands this is a 2024 year and players will like to see who piloting those ships, not so hard to do so.
They need to listen what community want and don't listen to those who propose to ruin old ideas from hw1 hw2 and hw: c and popular mods its very simple to understand.

[Le Chimiste]

"siege energy weapon" Damn bro I had forgotten about this one !! I spent hours trying to one-shot the Beast mothership. Good times.

[Crypto Gamer]

Even if game campaign story was fine.

It still has less ships,way worse Ship AI etc.

This game has issues even compared to a 25year old game.

You make sure your fans are happy and this game has 80-90% reviews with likely 25-30k peak players.(remaster was 17k).

"wider audience" sees a 80-90% top seller as Space Science fiction RTS games are rare and might buy it.
And game might be money success and even wargame DLCs sell better.


Not listening the extablished community is basically Dawn of War 3.

[VinBG]

Originally posted by Crypto Gamer:

Even if game campaign story was fine.

It still has less ships,way worse Ship AI etc.

This game has issues even compared to a 25year old game.

You make sure your fans are happy and this game has 80-90% reviews with likely 25-30k peak players.(remaster was 17k).

"wider audience" sees a 80-90% top seller as Space Science fiction RTS games are rare and might buy it.
And game might be money success and even wargame DLCs sell better.


Not listening the extablished community is basically Dawn of War 3.

+1