Why is this game dead where are my necrons reeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[NOT_A_SHEEP_FARMER]

Y this game die, all i can play now is coh2 and that got old i want my space opera rts and i dont want to play ultimate epoch on daw1, where the necrons and y is that trash fabtasy game getting all the love y tho

[Erica Estrelina Hill]

you will never see necrons in this game ..

Warhammer 40K is dead , it be killed by Stupid Relic

[Abaddon]

The game would be awesome if they didn't try to innovate into some sort of trash that nobody wanted or asked for. There are some mods that fix most ingame inconsistencies, but the tool doesn't allow to add custom models.

Our best bet is wait for someone who wants to spend time reverse-engineering it and add this feature if it's even possible.

[NOT_A_SHEEP_FARMER]

it really be like this, I know what u mean rip 50k back to apocalyps i guess

[simmerdown]

Cause they abandoned it, and aren't going to do anything more to this game. I was hoping for Tau.

[XTS]

Why is the game dead?

Poor game design/direction, they did not innovate at all instead they tried to make this game as much of a MOBA as possible without it actually being a MOBA, anything that made the previous DoW games was removed and replaced with no mechanic or ones that were reggressive.

People who wanted a DoW game did not get one, people who wanted a classic RTS did not get one, people who wanted a 40k game that reflects the lore did not get that.

[fallenpally13]

Hey i wanted a successful DOW 3 like the next guy but for some reason in the last 2 years triple A games have just been slacking. Right now as i speak Fallout 76 is dying, they took a page from the "winning strategy" of Relic and released a game unfinished. To make it worse they probably got folks blaming the fan base for their reviews. Hopefully Relics dedication to AoE4 will work out for them since they decided to drop DOW 3 and put all their eggs into that ammo crate.

Necrons have to small of an audience, Imperial Guard and Chaos would of been a game changer.

[Gorbles]

Originally posted by Ranger:

Originally posted by XTS:

Why is the game dead?

Poor game design/direction, they did not innovate at all instead they tried to make this game as much of a MOBA as possible without it actually being a MOBA, anything that made the previous DoW games was removed and replaced with no mechanic or ones that were reggressive.

People who wanted a DoW game did not get one, people who wanted a classic RTS did not get one, people who wanted a 40k game that reflects the lore did not get that.

This post pretty much nails it. Relic didn't give the fans what they wanted. This game was dead on arrival because Relic made a game that had no audience.

This is funny, because that's exactly what people said about DoW II.

Relic have done what they've always done. The difference this time was perhaps elsewhere.

Opinion post.

[XTS]

Originally posted by Gorbles:

Originally posted by Ranger:

This post pretty much nails it. Relic didn't give the fans what they wanted. This game was dead on arrival because Relic made a game that had no audience.

This is funny, because that's exactly what people said about DoW II.

Relic have done what they've always done. The difference this time was perhaps elsewhere.

Opinion post.

Only DoW2 got on going support in the form of 2 major expansions and free last stand DLC well all DoW3 got was abandonment. I guess thats the funny part?

Seems those who said that about DoW2 were alot less correct than those of us who said it about DoW3.

If Relic had done what they had always done this game would have gone down alot better and recieved expansions.

Factual post.

[Gorbles]

Originally posted by XTS:

Originally posted by Gorbles:

This is funny, because that's exactly what people said about DoW II.

Relic have done what they've always done. The difference this time was perhaps elsewhere.

Opinion post.

Only DoW2 got on going support in the form of 2 major expansions and free last stand DLC well all DoW3 got was abandonment. I guess thats the funny part?

Seems those who said that about DoW2 were alot less correct than those of us who said it about DoW3.

If Relic had done what they had always done this game would have gone down alot better and recieved expansions.

Factual post.

You're talking about the support of the game, which is separate to talking about whether or not it had an audience. The same criticisms happened to DoW II, but yes, the support was different.

I wasn't arguing the support though. Nor your opinion of which game you prefer :)

[Gorbles]

There was talk that DoW II would never reach 1 million sales. Again, you're simply taking what you think is the reason and calling it so.

"not giving the fans what they wanted" is a simple reason that doesn't account for the varied things the potential fanbase of a Dawn of War third installment wanted. It's a nice catch-all, but it's not a reason in of itself.

Like I said, people said the same things about DoW II. We're not privy to Relic or SEGA's decision-making r.e. the ending of support, and there are a multitude of external factors that will differentiate sales between an RTS game in 2009 and an RTS game in 2017.

It's very simplistic to say "bad games do badly". Marketing, PR, the economy . . . these are all valid (and significant) factors.

There's nothing wrong with not liking the game either. But nobody has "the fact" on why this game didn't do well. Or even facts, plural.

[IronFox]

Originally posted by Gorbles:

There was talk that DoW II would never reach 1 million sales. Again, you're simply taking what you think is the reason and calling it so.

"not giving the fans what they wanted" is a simple reason that doesn't account for the varied things the potential fanbase of a Dawn of War third installment wanted. It's a nice catch-all, but it's not a reason in of itself.

Like I said, people said the same things about DoW II. We're not privy to Relic or SEGA's decision-making r.e. the ending of support, and there are a multitude of external factors that will differentiate sales between an RTS game in 2009 and an RTS game in 2017.

It's very simplistic to say "bad games do badly". Marketing, PR, the economy . . . these are all valid (and significant) factors.

There's nothing wrong with not liking the game either. But nobody has "the fact" on why this game didn't do well. Or even facts, plural.

I think that's pretty much it. The "Not giving fans what they wanted" is present all over the place and one of the #1 reasons they say as justification to not buy the game. What do people expect happens to a game where reviews are at 40% positive mostly because people are upset about the "didn't get what we wanted". Of course nobody buys the game if everyone says it's bad. And of course there's no expansion if the company does not expect to earn money with it. And now it's a bad thing that the game is abandonned and they hold it against the developer. But who has abandonned the game first? The developer or the cummunity?
And I can't agree with the "It's moba stuff" because it's even possible to play with the old skirmish game modes. So NO it's not a 100% moba game. Just if you want to play it like one.


It's a sad fate this game suffers. The most common reviews complain about the "moba content" and "did not listen to fans". The moba content is like said optional and there is still RTS content and the "did not listen to fans" is not a reason to say it's a bad game all in all. Only if these people are utterly upset afterwards and searching for the hair in their soup and talking bad the rest with it.

And through that there's barely a chance left to ever have a new dawn of war since it's too high of a risk to produce a game that is most likely to fail again. Regarding to the sold copies of the prequels.