Why is the 3rd game in a strategy series often cursed?>HW3sucks>AoE3sucks>DoW3sucks>Victoria 3sucks>HoI 3sucks>Civ 3sucks>Stronghold 3sucks>CoH 3sucksI think devs simply fail to innovate on the originality and refinement of the prior titles and end up flopping
because everyone expects the same jump in quality from 2 to 3 that they got from 1 to 2but in reality, there was nothing more that could have been added to 2 because it was almost a perfect gameFor the purpose of this comparison, EU3 was #1, EU4 was #2 and EU5 was #3, because no one really cares about EU2 or 1.Add C&C3 to the list.
>>2284712See I was going to add C&C 3, but I think it's a pretty decent game all considered
>>2284704Because by the time you get around to (typically) the third game in any series, the studio that made it doesn't exist any more. The name does, sure. Even some of the original people may well be there but they're not calling the shots any more since they inevitably got bought out.Effectively, the people who made game 1 (and sometimes 2) made it for the love of the game. They had the passion for the project and it typically shows. Dawn of War 1 is a wonderful example of this. Flawed, yes, but they did their absolute screaming best. DoW2, while different, still showed elements of this but you could tell that external influences were fucking things around for them. DoW3... well...The same goes for any game. By the time number 3 gets around to being made its not being made for the love of the game any more, its being made to print money. The original dev's (if they're still there) can't make what they want because they're pushed by external factors to make something as dilute and milquetoast as possible to appeal to the broadest audience they can get. And worse, if they're angling for a 'multiplayer first' type (like Homeworld 3) then pretty much any hope of soul the game may well have had has been sacrificed on the altar of theoretical return.
>>2284704WC3?
>>2284833I said OFTEN
>>2284833It's pretty cursed, all right. It brought WoW and LoL.
>>2284704Counterexamples: CC3, AoE3 AoE2 sucked and the only good CC aside from CC3 is Generals (ZH)
>>2284894Vantablack take, crack the cyanide capsule NOW
>the debut entry will typically be rough, but if well received, people will want a sequel>if the devs learned from their mistakes, the second game will be a lot better, but if it's actually perfect, they won't have anything left to improve>after a long wait, the third installment comes out, it was impossible to match people's expectations after the second game, so the devs just made it different and no one liked it as a result>eventually the fourth game is made and some players say it's a return to form, others say it sucks, while some claim that it makes the third looks good by comparison or even that it was never bad>the company/franchise kicks the bucket forever, fans say it's unfortunate because even at its worst, the series was consistently solid>then, when nobody expects it, the makers of the original launch a kickstarter, promising a spiritual sequel the fans always wanted...
>>2284704Aoe3 and civ3 were the second best games in their respective series thoughbeit. I could even make arguments as to how certain aspects make them worth playing over the supposed best games.
>>2284704>>Civ 3>sucksLISTEN HERE SONNY, CIV3 IS THE BEST ENTRY IN THE SERIES AND THATS FINAL... KIDS THESE DAYS JUST DONT KNOW HOW TO USE MULTIPLE UNITS PER TILE... AND WHATS WRONG WITH GRIDS ITS A COMPUTER GAME USE SOMETHING THE COMPUTER CAN UNDERSTAND... NOW GET BACK TO MOWING MY LAWN!1
>>2284704age of wonders 3 was ok
>>2284704HW3 is a direct descendant of the direction taken by HW2.The series was doomed to end up there since then, they just skipped having a slow descent to garbageness via a bunch of increasingly bad title, and instead held as long as possible to unleash all that shit in one go.The series was cursed as soon as it left HW1 & Cata's style of storytelling.
>>2284704>HW3pleasehaven't i suffered enough
>>2285602The leaked version of HW3 didnt look bad, the actual game was straight Blackrock gay and lameI guess the higher ups that dont get fired changed it
SANDS AND SINNERS
Homeworld 2 was pretty bad as well. I don't know how people memory holed this . The only 2 good games in the franchise are the original and Cataclysm.*Ancient mystic prophecy*New never-before seen evil aliens that suddenly have taken over the galaxy... that are just the walmart version of the previous evil empire.*All the Bentusi are dead except this one ship lel.*"The Progenitors" , the oldest sci fi cliche in the book.*Villain has 3 nigh-invincible death stars up his ass that he only brings out once you have the one thing that can kill them.*The ancient god you hear about in legends is a giant ion-cannon-frigate*You liked salvage? fuck you lel*The self-balancing rubber band difficulty in the original pre-patch version.I guess Homeworld 2 Complex sugar coated a lot of the awfulness?
can someone give me some tips for homeworld 1? I played a few missions but I can't really wrap my head around the strategy of how to approach combat, I build a bunch of ships I send them to attack and then I either win or lose with little idea why I won or what I should be doing different if I lose like in a age of empires style game I could attack with and army lose and then think "hmm those archers in the back line were firing the whole time I should have focused my attention on them" or "wow those knights hit hard I need more spearmen". It's usually easier in an RTS to parse whats going on then it is in homeworld
>I CAN'T HOLD IT! I'M I'M--->I'M GROOOOOWWWWIIIINGGWhat a based dev for putting in his giantess growth fetish.
>>2285802>*All the Bentusi are dead except this one ship lel.Cata does justify 99% of all Bentusi having fucked off and never come back. Hell, only the 3 that were directly threatened by the Somtaaw should still be around at best.But yeah, agree with the rest.>sugar coated a lot of the awfulness?It was le epic micheal bay moment in a series that was mostly the opposite.It was refreshing and fun back then, we couldn't have know that it was going to be the new tone instead of just an epic final conclusion.Complex was nice tho, sunk more our into it than the actual game.
>>2285802>The only 2 good games in the franchisenot so fast
>>2285823>can someone give me some tips for homeworld 1?scavenge everythingenemy capital ships are hilariously vulnerable to being scavenged
>>2285827Genuinely, what did they mean by this?
i like CK3
>>2285823In the early missions, large numbers of heavy corvettes set up in a wall formation will obliterate pretty much everything you come across. When you fight the pirates you can steal the laser frigates for some ability to punch up at frigates till you get your own laser frigates. Then , a lot of missions facor certain ships, the swarmer guys die vs multi gun corvettes etc. Lastly , homeworld's campaign relies a lot on scripted sequences , so doing a mission a second time is a lot easier since you know when / where the game spawns new threats
>>2285915she's a GROWING threat
>>2285823You have ctrl groups of ships set up in formations, if I remember correctly, fighters are in x for claw, everything else is in wall. Then it s just rock paper scissors. Hw 1 's balance wasn't that great, the only ships I remember needing were interceptor in the beggining ,hvy corvettes in the mid game, and a giant wall of ion cannon frigates to shoot at anything larger than a corvette, with support frigates repairing them. When you get destroyers and cruisers just add those to your anti large ship group, and when you get missle destroyers you can replace your corvettes with those. Winning fights was just a matter of focusing down highest level threats and cycling your wounded large ships out when they fall below 50%. I spammed a lot of probes to see where enemies are coming from first, so I could position my unit groups properly.
>>2284704>AoE3>sucksAoE3 is the 4th AoE game, you barely not underb8 dipshit.>Age of Empires and Rome>Age of Kings and Conquerors>Age of Mythology and Titans>Age of Empires 3>Age of Empires Online>Age of Empires 4
>>2285981>AoE3 is the 4th AoE gameAge of Mythology is not an AoE gameNotice how it's "AoM" and not "AoE"?
>>2285823>I can't really wrap my head around the strategy of how to approach combatfighters beat fightersbombers beat big slow shipscorvettes beat fighters and bombersfrigates beat corvettes and frigatesion frigates deal high concentrated damage to single targetsdestroyers destroy frigates and other big shipsmissile destroyers are the artillery of this game, they're good against everythingheavy cruisers beat other big ships and are just big destroyers with much more hp and firepower, highly prone to getting stolen due to being slow, steal every one you encountercarriers are mobile producers who can create units up to destroyer tier independently of the mothershipstealth fighters can safely delete frigates if microed correctly, but its too much work for the payoff imo
>>2286011That's retroactive PSX-PS1 bullshit. Back in the day it was made and promoted as the sequel to AoE2.Peopke who were noit even sperm at the time they showed this shit at E3 get no say in what it is.
>>2286019AoM was always marketed as a spin-offwhy would anyone think a mythology game would be a sequel to a historical series?
>>2285823Focus on enemy capital ships one at a time with your capital ships, meanwhile screen their strike craft with yours (if I remember correctly you can click+drag+possibly a hotkey to spread out attacks across a whole group of enemy units). If you are at the point in the game where you have support corvettes/frigates, use them to heal your cap ships.I sort of disagree with the one anon on heavy corvettes, in the early game they're the heaviest ship you've got so maybe briefly worth it but I don't feel they justify their much higher price vs just getting a bunch of fighters (they really aren't THAT good against fighters). Multigun corvettes are insane vs fighters though, those are worth buying. Of course you need salvage corvettes for >>2285908. Assault frigates aren't really worth stealing other than the first time you see them because they are harder to approach without getting wrecked. Ion cannon frigates are comically vulnerable to salvage.As to other general rock-paper-scicsors: > fighters beat/stalemate other fighter-class craft> bombers good vs cap ships but honestly it's usually easier to just build/steal cap ships> Multigun corvettes shred strike craft. Do NOT try to approach enemy multigun corvettes with your fighters.> Heavy corvettes good against multigun corvette I guess> Assault frigate good against corvettes> Ion cannon frigates good against cap ships> Big cap ships are big> Support frigates are your healers> Dont build defenders they are shit. I'm not sure Remastered even has them.Good luck, if you didn't steal all the ion frigates you saw you'll need it.
>>2284712I think EU5 is quite good, better than EU4 on release.Most of the good features of EU4 were not there on release, as it was basically EU3: Divine Wind 2.0.
>>2285823After playing Homeworld 1&2 remastered, Cataclysm and Deserts of Kharak this year, I noticed that these games are only hard in the beginning where you only have light units that are hard to use and easy to lose. Once you max out your destroyers and cruisers and give them anti-fighter escorts nothing can stop you. The AI is dumb and scripted, sending big armies that you need to attack head on - placing probes around will let you know they're coming.In Homeworld 1 I struggled against the Kadeshi, but everything after that was easy. All my heavy cruisers were from salvage and they kicked so much ass.Cataclysm was rough with just ACVs for so many missions but destroyers from salvage and then Somtaaw's own capital ships trivialized the game.DoK was the hardest (and most fun) at the Kalash site.
>>2285802one of the producers hired his gf to be the writer or something.
>>2284704>Civ3>sucksThe only thing that sucks here is you faggot, take that cock out of your mouth
>>2285708It was fine until they decided to hire some troon writer to pozz it up
>>2284704AoW3 was great.
AoE3 was good
>>2285979bombers were best in claw formationfighters were whatever
>>2284704>aoe3 sucksbait>victoria 3 sucksmore understandable but still ....bait>civ 3 suckssuper bait, confirmed
>>2286709> HW1 gets easier at the enduhh anon?the supernova level??the warp gate level???Surely at least on your first playthrough you found these somewhat challenging????>remasteredOK, this slightly dulls my point (no fuel levels to micro, all resources auto-collected at end of level even that fucking supernova... lol...), but still....
>>2287971>>2287958Astoundingly bad taste!
>>2288003>bad taste>aoe3>civ 3>vic 3....actually this one is "kinda" understandableyour opinion=poo
>>2284704>AoE3>sucksOnly thing here that sucks is your whore mouth you fucking faggot
HOI 3 is great and the one time they dared to actually lean toward making a real wargame.
>>2284704Baldur's Gate 3 and Fallout 3 both fall into this as well.
>>2288130You might personally dislike BG3, but it's broadly praised
>>2288196>it's broadly praisedThat's rarely the sign that something doesn't sucks.
>>2288130>fallout 3good opinion>baldurs gate 3bad opinion
>>2288211I'm all ears
>>2287986Yeah, those weren't hard in the remaster. I heard the fleet scaling supposedly makes it hard to beat without a mod to dial the scaling down, and the Kadeshi levels did filter me at first. However, I tried again a few months later and beat the whole whole game after that no problem. Like I said, a wall of capital ships owns almost everything smaller (cruisers demolish frigates in just a few shots from a long range, yum), and also gravwell generators make strikecraft harmless. I don't remember whether the original was hard, but I do remember it being long-winded.
>>2288196>>2288274Trump is broadly praisedSo was Clinton and KamalaSo were Epstein and EinsteinPick your poison
>>2290766Go back to your containment board
>>2290766>Trump is broadly praisedHow to tell you live in an echo chamber
>>2285915
>EU3Sucks>Hoi3Sucks>CK3Sucks>Vicky 3Sucks>Civ3SucksI can't think of a single counter-example
>>2288196BG3 was shit.
>>2284712>>2284715Tibwars is good, though.RA3 was good too.
>>2285802>Homeworld 2 was pretty bad as well. I don't know how people memory holed this Always confused me too.When they surveyed people on what they liked/disliked about Homeworld, and how it should be applied to 3, I went into a long diatribe about how godawful Homeworld 2's story was and that they should steer clear of that direction entirely.
>>2285802compared to HW3, HW2's story is a timeless masterpiece.Honestly, it's not bad at all... when compared to HW3's story.
>>2290766>he believes what the media says>he believes what his particular political wing of media saysngmi
>>2292323That's the thing, they didn't.HW2 was some amorphous ancient mystic prophecy that turned into real world foundations. HW3 was giantess space wizards. There were problems with 2 but 3 was not even in the same universe as 2.
>>2285802>New never-before seen evil aliens that suddenly have taken over the galaxy... that are just the walmart version of the previous evil empire.Entirely possible as history is filled with examples of minor powers existing on the periphery that just surge into prime position when a power vacuum presents itself. The destruction of the taiidan empire and the consolidation that the kushan would have had to go through would have presented exactly the situation for the vaygyr to go from minor border raiders to space huns.
>>2284704It usually (but not always) goes like1. Establish the formula and mechanics for the game2. Perfect and refine it and your game becomes a big success in the strategy game niche3. Try to sell out for mass appeal, simplify and change mechanics, experiment with new stuff and end up with a game that alienates hardcore players yet doesn't appeal to normies because they don't really play this type of game anyway.Sometimes 3 is a success and you end up with a game popular in the normiesphere ie Total war or Civ but the hardcore fans still call it casual garbage and hark back to the days of 1/2
>>2292187Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium WarsRed Alert 3Heroes of Might and Magic 3Warcraft 3Dominions 3Age of Wonders 3
>>2284704Homeworld 3 is especially tragic because Deserts of Kharak had the same devs as the original HW1 and HW2, and it looked visually and continuity-wise consistent with those other games despite being made 20 years apart. Then HW3 came out, and it's obvious Gearbox slop. What happened? Gearbox imposed one of their girlbosses who completely fucked everything up. Even the visuals aren't the same as they were in previous games. HW3 could have been good, but was made bad by the publisher.
>>22935193 was a clusterfuck of bad decisions. I wouldn't call the visuals that far off what could be reasonably considered an evolution from 2. But the shift back to single ships from squadrons was an attempt to please hw1 fans that makes no sense thematically or design wise.Thematically you aren't a scrap fleet trying to scrounge enough soda cans to build one more fighter, you've been a proper navy for decades. Designwise single small ships are a pain in the ass to manage because each one costs action economy to replace, and more action economy to break individuals off for repairs. Multiply that between fighters, bombers, corvettes, and you're doing constant mental math on top of multiple clicks to keep your squads topped up. 2 already solved that problem by just using squadrons and using ship count as the health bar to bring small craft to action economy parity with larger ships.
>>2285905Yeah, this was pretty cool. You could say it's the "first" game in its spinoff tho
>>2284712EU4 was terrible and a downgrade from 3
>>2293364>C&C3 BADbrain damaged beyond repair
>>2294815He's saying it's GOOD you illiterate swine, read the post he's responding to
>>2294815>bro really saw a list containing warcraft 3 and heroes of might and magic 3 and thought it was a list of bad games
>>2294815He didn't say that, but C&C 3 does indeed suck balls. Same with Red Alert 3.
>>2297146Being contrarian for the sake of it is not a good look
>>2297150The campaigns suck. I give absolutely no fucks about the multiplayer. I don't know what you're judging the game by, but I will always judge a game by its campaign and those games are not stimulating or memorable. I know, I played them recently. I at least remember a few maps from Generals, but all the other 3D era RTS C&Cs are mediocre and forgettable slop.
>>2297159>fun c&c camp and campaigns reminiscent of the original and tiberian sun>badYou never liked C&C
>>2297183I liked the Westwood ones. The 3D ones are all low grade wannabes. I'm not even exaggerating this, they literally couldn't figure out how to make Tiberium that spread. It wasn't a technical limitation, they were just too stupid and didn't know how to program it.
>>2293364Red Alert 3 is basically mediocre.
>>2297199is it basically mediocre, or mediocre?
>>2297204it is mediocrely basic
>>2284704WTF are you talking about? Emergence was amazing. Watching a poor mining clan going full warrior caste was amazing...
>>2297277emergence wasn't the 3rd game dummy
Homeworld 2 was the intended tutorial section and Homeworld 3 was the bulk of what they wanted to do before Sierra/Vivendi fucked everything up. What a fuckup.
>>2284704>Victoria 3 sucks skill issue
>>2297279YES IT WAS... There was no new homeworld in the last 20 years.
>C&C3 and RA3 goodthe only people with this take are newfags who started the series with them. if you ignore graphics improvements over time then TibSun and RA2/YR both totally mog C&C3/KW and RA3. storytelling, presentation, units, voice barks, bases, map vibes, all much better. C&C3's Temple Prime is an impressive map but Antarctica and Yuri's Castle are better final missions; i can't even remember most of RA3's missions.
Rendered graphics will always blow 3D dog shit out of the water. Doesn't matter how much time passes, only retards pretend its good.
>>2284704>Civ 3>sucksWrong. Could have been better but was still incredible, even on release when the problems were more stark.
>>2298313it's the worst game in the series
>>2298321If you rate III below VII you should be executed and your brain researched for a cure from your retardation.
>>2298429So we agree that until just recently with the release of the seventh game, it was the worst in the series for over 20 years
Civ 4 > civ 3 > civ 2 > civ 5 > civ 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> civ 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> civ7
>>2284712EU4 is the worst fucking example of an "almost a perfect game" one could possibly come up withMy first eu was EU2 which I didn't enjoy that much, EU3 was a massive improvement, EU4 should just be memoryholed out of existence, EU5 is an improvement over EU3
>>2298826>EU5 is an improvement over EU3In what ways? I'm genuinely curious, because I've yet to play EU5 for an extensive campaign. But, from what I've heard, is it really though? Sure, EU3 had its share of deficiencies ranging from "annoying" to "completely broken" that never were fixed, but overall it was a simple and easy to learn game that nevertheless had a certain depth to it and allowed players to create different outcomes whilst also feeling that the player was responsible for it by making strategic decisions and seeing them paying off dozens or sometimes even hundreds of years later, and it didn't require event railroading or mission trees, or whatever; in EU5 it seems like you mostly manage your economy, your estates, your proximity and other admin tasks, it feels like a "grand strategy" without "grand" part in it.
Unpopular fact but eu4 in its finished state was better than eu3.
>>2297536>TibSun and RA2/YR both totally mog C&C3/KW and RA3I would agree with RA3 assessment, it felt absolutely beaten and tired even upon release, an inferior effort in almost every way, but TibWars/KW was peak C&C: RA2 meets Generals engine and certain ideas meets polish meets the most fleshed out story in the entire franchise history.
>>2298849I haven't played EU4 "in its finished state", but did they get rid of "spend monarch points to develop province" or "claims everywhere, coring in couple of months, culture change in couple of years, guaranteed conversion up to a decade even in the most populous provinces in the world"? If not, then its still the same gamey bullshit it was in 2013-15, but now also needlessly convulted, because modern PDX fans think that complexity can replace sound game design.
>>22979413d graphics are rendered stupid. your computer literally renders them in front of your eyes
>>2298863It's still better than eu3
>>2297536i mean, they're good, but they're not the best obviously the best would obviously be ra2 and generals, much as i love tibsun, ra2 is the better game by far
>>2298878Sure, if all you care about is better map and more plausible borders. But overall it is more shallow and boring experience than EU3, by a mile.
>>2298880C&C3 rivals RA2 and is a much better game than Generals.
>>2298881>it's better in the only ways that matter for the genreYes.
>>2298889>it's better in the only ways that matter for the genreNo, it isn't, and that is a very simplistic way to look at things. A beautiful and detailed map cannot replace everything else. Sengoku and Imperator had the best maps at the time, and look at what happened to them?
>>2298848Eu5 just takes (almost) everything that eu3 did and improves on it. It doesn't have mission trees nor is it railroaded. Exactly how much of an improvement it is varies greatly, and like any modern day game it's heavily bugged on release, but it has a great foundation and a lot of potential. Just like in eu3 you have a working system in front of you, you introduce changes into that system and you observe the outcomes and adjust as necessary. It doesn't have any magical buttons like "directly increase the development of this place", you pull strings in different places and watch the whole thing react. You could say that Eu5 is the genuine, real Eu4, the proper continuation of the series, while the actual eu4 is just a shitty spin-off
>>2285325They hate him because he spoke the truth
>>2286035Uh, maybe because in terms of mechanics and gameplay it’s literally copy and paste?>nah man the setting makes it a completely different game
>>2299157Technically, the original Red Alert was also a literal copypaste of Tiberian Dawn; and Warcraft 3 didn't change all that much since Brood War. Same game?
>>2299159Is chocolate ice cream no longer ice cream because it isn’t vanilla?
>>2285948
>>2284704Speaking of Homeworld: I've never played the OGs, so I wanted to try it out.Struggling to get Homeworld Classic to run decently, is remaster worth it or is it way too Gearboxed?
>>2300708The remastered collection comes with the originals. However if you have no interest in playing the remastered versions probably just get the original and cataclysm on gog.Cataclysm is very very worth it I'd say even rivalling the original.
>>2285325okey Suede
>>2300723>>2300708I'd also say temper your expectations with how these games run. The engine is prehistoric and you're getting a cinematic 30 fps unless you play the remastered version.
>>2300708I played these remasters earlier this year and they ran fine. There are differences in gameplay, but if you're unfamiliar with the originals, you won't mind. I played Cataclysm too - it required a community patch and even then the UI/text were super small on my resolution, but I found it playable enough.
>>2284704The original game in any new IP is just the devs randomly throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks. If it works, the game is successful and gets a sequel, if it doesn't work, the game fails and doesn't get a sequel.The second game iterates on the first game, perfects its formula, polishes it and removes the first game's jank.For the third game, they've already perfected the formula so they can't just rehash it, so that's why they have to try something radically new and completely change the game's formula in order to keep it fresh, new and exciting.Therefore, the third game ends up being very different from the last two and the fans either love it or hate it.The Warcraft trilogy fits this model perfectly, it's a strong departure in both gameplay and visuals from the previous two games, but in its case the gambit paid off and it was very successful.
>>2300708>>2300727Here are the engine tweaks for the GOG edition of Homeworld Cataclysm/Emergence and they are a big help on modern machines. You just need to use the supplied launcher after installing the patch.github.com/ncblakely/CataclysmEngineTweaks
>>2284712Everyone (rightfully) complained about EUIV's mana system. That's not at all a good example of a game that can't be improved. Especially in its current unbalanced and bloated state.
>>2284712retard
>>2284712>jump in qualityThe story was significantly worse. Also didn't formations not work as well in 2?
Because it is ten fucking years at least after the first one and devs already moved to other place so you have newfags operating under same name, trying to make it different.
>>2299159W3 was absolutely changed compared to brood wars. UX was much better, upkeep mechanics was interesting, actual heroes turned into cornerstone of game, they mattered so much it gave birth to moba.
film is the same, the first sequel can just tie up loose ends from the original, the second sequel has to actually write new stuff which often goes bad
>>2307821This is why you follow the potc path where if the first movie is a hit you write a larger overarching story to get at least a trilogy out of it.
>>2284704What a disaster
>>2284704I don't think there's a common reason. But for a lot of these the sequel arrived right at the brink of the 3D transition, which meant worse graphics, less units/things on the screen. Since that shit cost more to make, they dumbed down the gameplay for casuals to sell more copies, but nobody liked it.For some others, there was a huge timeskip between 2 and 3, and most of the original team left or got a decade older.Also Civ 3 was good.
>>2287720I mean that made it loathsome, but the gameplay isn't good either.
>>2316687Right. I actually had interest in the game because of that new game mode they added. I never had hope the story was going to be good but hey if the game mode was fun maybe it's a I'll pick it up when it goes into the bargain bin.The game felt like shit. And the demo destroyed any interest I had in it.
