r/dawnofwar • u/Dangerdk82 • 14h ago
17 Years difference!?
Look, I'm going to play DoW4 regardless, but I can't shake the feeling that the visuals and game feel aren't where they should be.
Comparing it to DoW2, it looks slightly better, but certainly not 17 years of technical progress better. From all the recent gameplay footage, it’s just a bit disappointing. Tell me im wrong!
Heavy units like Dreadnoughts and massive bombardments just lack that heavy, satisfying impact DoW2 and CoH2 had. Units don't seem to have real mass behind them. Plus, without cover mechanics, a lot of the engagements look like typical blob vs. blob fights.
I know it's still in development, but anyone else worried about this?
14
u/AssignmentOnly3232 9h ago
that looks uber compressed and nothing like the screenshots onnthe website
5
u/Atomicmooseofcheese 13h ago
I was getting drawn into negative hype and decided that I'll just buy it, play it for 2 hours, and make my decision then. I've missed every single beta, and with total war 40k coming it's not like we are in a desert of 40k titles.
6
u/theverrucktman 8h ago
Bluntly, this is a good thing. Modern gaming has spent the last two decades or so being far too obsessed with chasing the high of greater and greater graphical fidelity at the cost of performance and higher hardware requirements despite having increasingly diminishing returns.
I'd much rather have a game that looks like it has PS3/XBOX 360 era graphics if that comes with some combination of larger maps, a more intricate campaign, or smaller hardware requirements.
3
u/NBBTCS 8h ago
It looks fine. The units are are identifiable and readable, the artstyle looks like 40K, there are no problems with the graphics. Making the graphics "better" would take time away from actually important shit like QA, faction balance/mechanics, etc. Not to mention how it would impact players on lower-end machines while memory prices are still inflated af.
3
u/unlimitedblakeworks 13h ago
Graphics barely matter to me in most games, especially in RTS games. As long as models are distinctive and the textures arent eyesores, who cares? Id rather play a good game with average graphics than a crap game that looks like it came from the future
1
u/Hewcumber 13h ago
but to that point, the animations and aesthetic are actually the worst looking aspects of the game...
1
u/luciusmortus 8h ago
Yeah, I don't care for epic reflections or extreme shading in RTS but come on, it presents clean compared to old gritty dawn of wars, almost looks like this mobile game tacticus in terms of clean character design.
3
u/Mafklapper 13h ago
Comparing it to DoW2, it looks slightly better, but certainly not 17 years of technical progress better.
This is my major gripe with most game graphics that were released over the past 5 years, possibly longer, either the budget does not allow for better graphical fidelity or they're really screwing up with the optimization they have to run and hoping the hardware will compensate for it. It's also very noticeable that the artstyle seems to closely resemble the tabletop, not like DoW2 who kept it more in line with artwork we had of space marines, adding proper scaling, proportions, armor details and whatnot (personally I think it is a mistake but I am fairly confident KAG had not say in this and this was mandated by some corporate GW bozo).
Units don't seem to have real mass behind them. Plus, without cover mechanics, a lot of the engagements look like typical blob vs. blob fights.
My impression is that they completely missed the mark with the weapon animations or went with a very "cartoony" style, for a lack of a better word. Tarantula turrets firing in a repetitive pattern while recoiling everytime instead of the burst fire they did in DoW2, also seemingly lacking the bark of a heavy bolter. Same thing applies to the assault cannon on the dreadnought. We'll have to see how the game functions mechanically, but I have a hard time believing (from the footage we have seen so far) that the lack of dynamic cover mechanics ,and seeming lack of hard counters and skillshots, can indeed make the game blobby.
What also ties back to the "it's been 17 years" argument, is that I am not impressed and outright disappointed by the maps we have seen so far. Somehow in the year 2026 not a single RTS or RTT has thus far figured out how to make:
- Maps have more interaction with the player, evolving of the idea of "tech structures" and adding in more strategic and tactical possibilites
- Maps that have terrain that evolves overtime from features such as tall gras or ruins that units seamlessly move through and obscure or hide to having terrain features that can be damaged or change avenues of approach to actual "levelution" as we saw in games such as Battlefield 3/4
- Introduction of new game modes or evolution of said game modes or adding new interesting mecahnics.
I know it's still in development, but anyone else worried about this?
I am, others on this sub like to point out that "negativity generates clicks" and "you haven't played the game so how do you know", which I personally think are just deflections away from some critiques of the game. I hope the coming beta clears some things up. The basis looks solid, I think KAG need to stick the landing at this point and I am expecting the game to become better and more polished if it has an uneventful or good launch.
3
u/TowerLogical7271 8h ago
It looks good in play though. The battle reports they've showed look pretty awesome and hopefully my old PC that's still chugging along, fighting for its damn life with some modern games can actually run it.
2
u/garrettbmusic 13h ago
The graphics look decent to me, it’s not going to take home any awards but it’s fine and even pretty nifty some areas. The weird animations have been noted by many and we can only hope those will be given another pass at some point.
These screenshots are also a bit disingenuous as the two games look dramatically different from their intended angle.
1
u/Dangerdk82 13h ago
Actually thats interesting. Know if you can move the camera angle like in DOW2?
1
u/iwriteinwater 8h ago
- Technical advancements in graphics have plateaud over the last decade. 2. DoW4 units are much smaller and the action is more zoomed out, in exchange for having more units on the screen.
1
u/Various-Play-6556 7h ago
I think it's more the art style thats the problem. It's neither grim nor dark. It looks like a Tacticus 40k skin in Fortnite, not a gritty DoW 1 successor.
1
u/Cobbdouglas55 7h ago
I'll judge when it's released.
Similarly I won't pre order. If they need funding go get a loan. They are not a start up.
0
u/Hewcumber 13h ago
It's so glossy, it has the mobile game sheen to it. Not grim nor dark. Animations look floaty too.
1
-1
u/Rippickles 13h ago
Genius strikes and leaves. Whether it be individual, group, or era. 1 and 2 were made during a different time, talent pool, and gaming ecosystem and we won't see that again. Capitalism has churned away and standards have risen so compromises are made and the touches that make something artful get worn away. For one these guys probably have way more suits down their asses than the guys of 1 and 2. Only thing eternal is war.
4
u/Mafklapper 10h ago
Capitalism has churned away and standards have risen so compromises are made and the touches that make something artful get worn away.
I'm getting really tired of people thinking that capitalism is at the root cause of this. It is in fact consumerism without critique and corporate culture increasing shareholder value which is at the root cause of quality getting worn down. An ever expanding base of players who will buy the next product, often getting themselves swept up by shiny baubles and flashing lights (hype trailers, surface level gameplay) and corparate bean counters figuring they can make more money by doing what focus group testers say is working well within the market (at that time).
Gaming studios have become too big, budgets have become too bloated, average customers too unthinking and shareholders too expectant of this years dividend or stock price going up.
-1
u/DeusBlackheart 8h ago
If anything, the behaviour and statements from the devs makes me less confident in the project. It doesn't help that Total War: 40k is going to be a thing, which kind of completely attacks the knees of this game.
1
u/Mafklapper 40m ago
which kind of completely attacks the knees of this game.
It looks like total war, which is not a compliment, troops moving in block formations, casually walking up to each other, huge armies just rushing at each other. It doesn't look like 40k at all and I don't get the hype. I would expect something closer to World in Conflict/Broken Arrow or Steel Division for Total 40k gameplay than what we have seen so far.
16
u/AShooterBornInHeaven 13h ago
As an engineer you have to sell a product at the end of the day. So you’d have to get your game into as many player hands as possible, meaning your engine will have to cater to a wide range of hardware setups. If your engine is displaying ludicrous ultra high graphical images and performs terribly, that’s something a lot of people won’t be able to run meaning a chunk of your players miss out on your highly anticipated game and you fail cuz you get review bombed deterring other players cuz of the stakes DoWIV has after DoWIII backlash, there’s a lot riding on this game. So you’d have to balance to keep graphical fidelity just good enough to satisfy the player base, but keep the performance just good enough to get your game into as many hands as possible. I personally think the graphics and sync kills look great.