I haven't really followed developments in recent years on this franchise, why aren't Relic making this game? It might have something to do with the fact that Dawn of War 3 was something everybody would rather forget ever happened.
Apart from playing a few hours of The Dwarves I'm not really familiar with King Art Games. Here's hoping they can capture the magic of the first Dawn of War, while simultaneously making sure the gameplay lives up to modern standards.
While most people remember the first game most fondly I'm actually a big fan of Dawn of War 2. I suspect that less inspiration will be taken from this game though.
GW wrote: The fourth – and very long-awaited – installment in the legendary Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series is arriving next year.
Brought to you by Deep Silver and KING Art Games, the epic Warhammer 40,000 real-time strategy game (RTS) is returning to its mass-battle, base-building roots with deeply satisfying gameplay and a brutal, expanded Sync Kill system.
You’ll take command of four unique Warhammer 40,000 factions – including the Adeptus Mechanicus, making their Dawn of War debut – alongside the iconic Blood Ravens Space Marines, the Orks, and the Necrons.
Good to hear they are going back to base building mass combat.
Dang, I was telling my friend after the dawn of war 1 remaster to not get their hopes up since rts games are a dead genre. I figured that was all we were getting, a throwback, nothing more. I can’t believe I’m eating my words right now, but I’m real happy to be wrong and I’m sure they are too. Hopefully it’s good too!
They are bringing back the stuff people asked for the most: base building, large armies and sync kills.
As for why Relic isn't making this one, they no longer have the license for it. They can remaster their old games though, here's hoping that Dawn of War 2 also receives a remaster at some point, as that one is also my personal favourite of the series.
I wouldn’t worry too much about the number of factions or which factions will be represented. I’m sure the deluge of DLC will take care of that, assuming the game is successful.
On that note though, have the Leagues of Votann made an appearance in a video game yet?
El Torro wrote: I wouldn’t worry too much about the number of factions or which factions will be represented. I’m sure the deluge of DLC will take care of that, assuming the game is successful.
On that note though, have the Leagues of Votann made an appearance in a video game yet?
They are apparently in Mechanicus 2? Not played it myself though.
Am I the only one left in utter disappointment?
It looks like a mobile game.
Trailer is the weakest of the 4 cinematics, but that doesn’t matter too much, gameplay is where it’s supposed to be at. And well… some concepts like that it has base building is promising, the roster of armies is not bad either. But if we take a step further from basic concepts to something with a little more meat on the bone and look at the seconds of gameplay, we get a mess that looks cheap as hell. Animation level is bare bones with some exceptions, guns sound horrible. And the layout of the map, how units move across the field felt like I’m watching a tile based game. Those gigantic unit cards above the unit - what the hell kind of design choice is that?
It’s from the creators of an unpolished mediocre iron harvest game. Compared to reveal gameplay footage of DoW 2 for example, nothing shown feels like it has any mass or impact. We get a glimpse at 1,5 a sync kills, while they don’t even show us the end of the dreadnought one.
I wished for a cross between DoW 1 and 2 with the graphics of the latter. I guess we’ll see, but guessing that for an announcement trailer they picked the best of the best footage, that they have so far - I’m underwhelmed to say the least.
Sometimes I wish Valraks rumors would miss more often.
Yay.
I feel like the physics definitely aren't synched with the map currently, but I can't tell if that's mostly something I noticed with the Necrons or a more universal problem. It definitely felt early. Buy in will depend a lot on the final product, but I'm also not really an RTS fan so that was always going to be the case.
Just watched the launch trailer for Dawn of War IV and I’ve gotta say—I’m hyped. I’ve been a fan of the series since the original Dawn of War and all its expansions. That game nailed the grimdark atmosphere and gave us some of the most satisfying RTS gameplay in the genre.
I gave Dawn of War II a shot, but it never really clicked for me. The shift in gameplay style just didn’t scratch the same itch. So seeing the footage for DoW IV already feels like a return to form. From what they’ve shown so far, it looks like they’re leaning back into the large-scale battles and faction flavor that made the original so iconic.
And the cherry on top? My favorite faction is one of the launch factions. Go Necrons. Cold logic, ancient grudges, and gauss weapons that strip flesh from bone—what’s not to love? Also I consider videogame lore to be cannon, so its even more to learn.
I feel like the downer in the thread but this feels so much more underwhelming than the DoW3 trailer. Then again that game went down hard. I dunno i'm just worried about DoW4 and the music seems to keep in line with DoW2 rather than jeremy soule's DoW1 music. Honestly i think how good DoW1 was makes it like a lightning caught in a bottle moment. DoW2 was decent but i'd rather see Gabriel Angelos than Cyrus for DoW4. Maybe they couldn't hire the voice actor again for gabriel angelos.
Definitely not hyped for this game so far after how they handled DoW3 and it not looking super stellar at first glance. Definitely a wait and see and not buy upon release type of game, the only thing that makes me interested is that they have a Last Stand mode as that was one of the standout parts for DoW2 in my opinion.
Geifer wrote: But but but I haven't played Dawn of War 3 yet!
Please remind me, folks. What are sync kills you're talking about? I haven't played the first two games in ages.
Sync kills are those glorious, cinematic finishing animations that trigger when a unit or character takes out an enemy in close combat. They’re not just visual flair—they’re pure grimdark theater.
Think of a Dreadnought grabbing an Ork Boy, snapping his spine like a twig, then flinging the body aside like yesterday’s scrap. Or a Space Marine executing a Chaos cultist with brutal precision. These moments don’t affect gameplay much, but they absolutely elevate the immersion. It’s like the game pauses to say, “Yes, this universe is brutal—and here’s your front-row seat.”
I'm unconvinced. The trailer is leaning quite heavily on nostalgia ('You liked Dark Crusade didn't you?!') and the animation of the gameplay still looks quite cartoony.
cause yeah that game looked VERY pretty but its AI was - I mean it wasn't even there. Heck the difficulty slider didn't actually do anything and the only time the AI was any threat was
a) just after it got its free unit number boost (that you also got) by teching up
b) If you chose to build only infantry - at which point the AI built only flamers.
Otherwise it was entirely devoid of fun. It wouldn't contest resource points; in fact it didn't really do anything. Which is a shame as the game was a fantastic concept and mechanically worked.
It's a big worry because if there's one thing that the RTS community is good at proving - its that its VERY singleplayer minded. You can get lucky with a Starcraft or Age of Empires experience and get a big multiplayer community going, but a lot of customers only go as far as VS AI and even the mutiplayer side likes a good AI
I'm suddenly very worried- relic might have made mistakes with 3 but they were a solid developer team.
IH team did not impress me one bit so they'd have to seriously step up their game a LOT
That said on the early video I skipped through it sounds like Dawn of War 1 updated which is good; a few things from 2 like power harvesting points. The higher unit cap also sounds just like what I'd be after with Dawn of War 1 style play.
cause yeah that game looked VERY pretty but its AI was - I mean it wasn't even there. Heck the difficulty slider didn't actually do anything and the only time the AI was any threat was
a) just after it got its free unit number boost (that you also got) by teching up
b) If you chose to build only infantry - at which point the AI built only flamers.
Otherwise it was entirely devoid of fun. It wouldn't contest resource points; in fact it didn't really do anything. Which is a shame as the game was a fantastic concept and mechanically worked.
It's a big worry because if there's one thing that the RTS community is good at proving - its that its VERY singleplayer minded. You can get lucky with a Starcraft or Age of Empires experience and get a big multiplayer community going, but a lot of customers only go as far as VS AI and even the mutiplayer side likes a good AI
I'm suddenly very worried- relic might have made mistakes with 3 but they were a solid developer team.
IH team did not impress me one bit so they'd have to seriously step up their game a LOT
That said on the early video I skipped through it sounds like Dawn of War 1 updated which is good; a few things from 2 like power harvesting points. The higher unit cap also sounds just like what I'd be after with Dawn of War 1 style play.
Not just the Developper but also the greedy ass publisher.
And i already can point to the aenemic combat in the shooting realm that makes is the hallmark of Iron Harvest.
Also no it didn't really mechanically work, as it was in essence a CoH 2 clone with a worse cover system and horrendous pathing.
So long as it sticks to Dawn of War 1 gameplay it should be fine. Dawn of War 2 was not a bad game by any stretch, I just never really considered it a proper sequel give how different it was from the first.
I think they tackled the cover system mechanic, like it’s a boardgame. Judging by gameplay foootage, a single squad gets packed into a dedicated pocket of cover, like they are sardines, and stand straight like they are battle droids. Looks quite lame.
Hopefully they at least don’t get the cover bonus, if they get shot from the back
I’ve watched a few gameplay reviews that have sprung up recently, all of them say pretty much the same thing, without any real critique, other than “feels a bit raw here and there”, which felt like people don’t want to lose their journalism rights in the eyes of the developer.
Maps look quite small
And there is no build routine 721. We get base building, but no actual builders. Odd choice, a bit too command and conquery for my taste.
One of the reasons why I like RTS :(
Even “Prehistoric tribes”, a mobile game for button phone from 20 years ago, had builders
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: I think they tackled the cover system mechanic, like it’s a boardgame. Judging by gameplay foootage, a single squad gets packed into a dedicated pocket of cover, like they are sardines, and stand straight like they are battle droids. Looks quite lame.
Hopefully they at least don’t get the cover bonus, if they get shot from the back
I’ve watched a few gameplay reviews that have sprung up recently, all of them say pretty much the same thing, without any real critique, other than “feels a bit raw here and there”, which felt like people don’t want to lose their journalism rights in the eyes of the developer.
Maps look quite small
And there is no build routine 721. We get base building, but no actual builders. Odd choice, a bit too command and conquery for my taste.
One of the reasons why I like RTS :(
Even “Prehistoric tribes”, a mobile game for button phone from 20 years ago, had builders
That is normal and also par of the bill with the publishers there. Sadly it has become extremely commonplace as the quality of games has devolved and the access to the mental selflobotomisation that is social media increased.
The build and resource system sounds like they've built it out of the Dawn of War 2 style and then upped the unit limits and removed some of the tactical to make it practical to run larger forces.
That in itself isn't bad nor good its simply a style choice. CnC style or Starcraft building units style are both solid fun systems in their own right.
I'd be more concerned about map design - these days you seem to get the choice of a bonkers massive map that's open access but has only a few key points to contest; or lane style maps that are small, fast and often aimed purely at trying to squeeze as many multiplayer games in as possible.
And AI design and pathfinding. If the AI is braindead boring to play against; if the pathfinding is poor; etc... if those core components are bad then you've got problems no matter if your buildings are freebuild or builder based.
chaos0xomega wrote: I saw a screenshot that showed orks get mekboys which are identified as builder units, so not sure that critique is accurate.
The real question though is if the game will have army customization, or are we all stuck playing blood ravens?
Hmm, that’s peculiar. Maybe he has specific buildings like turrets that he can erect as a leader skill? Judging by the gameplay footage, you just place a building (in the glimpse we get of the ork base). Also, I think I heard reviewers say that there are no servitors, bonesinges, ect. But I’m not 100% sure, if I rember that right, I thought I did.
I’ve watched a few gameplay reviews that have sprung up recently, all of them say pretty much the same thing, without any real critique, other than “feels a bit raw here and there”, which felt like people don’t want to lose their journalism rights in the eyes of the developer.
Sadly i noticed this too and feels normal these days.
Indeed, but gameplay looks dull at Alpha AND their previous game being lackluster in key areas on delivery is when concerns rise.
I honestly hope they've hired the right staff; got the time timeline; got enough budget and do a really fantastically awesome job with this. I really want to see Dawn of War rise up again and become the next big major RTS on the market. 1 was outstanding; 2 was great*; 3 was solidly made but aimed at the wrong target audience and features.
4 so far sounds like a blend of 1 and 2 which should be a successful combo.
*Honestly I feel mostly let down by Retribution pushing that whole "unique campaign for each faction" which turned out to be "identical linear missions with just the briefing changing".
2 was different but fun - 3 I must really play one day to really find out; but yeah that one seemed like they leaned far too far into trying to make it a moba type game or online/mp focused and such.
Glad to hear Necrons are making a return after they got teased in the end of Dawn of War 3. Also neat to hear the Mechanicus are now a playable faction in this. Can't wait to see what other races get added.
The one thing that stands out to me is that the voice acting sounds -- flat. Characterful sound but just not the accent/edge to it to bring it to life. Like its clipped talking.
We've basically hit the point where we've removed the distinction between Primaris and Firstborn entirely. It's all just Space Marines again, just at the new scale.
LunarSol wrote: We've basically hit the point where we've removed the distinction between Primaris and Firstborn entirely. It's all just Space Marines again, just at the new scale.
Thats not really accurate, theres a few firstborn units (tactical marines, devastators, etc.) which no longer exist in the Primaris format.
I can see some older armour marks at most as being a cosmetic option for some of the leaders in the game, but I don't see it as very likely for the army's baseline units. You can tell by the vast majority of stuff for recent SM-centered games that it's all followed GW's push for the new model range.
LunarSol wrote: We've basically hit the point where we've removed the distinction between Primaris and Firstborn entirely. It's all just Space Marines again, just at the new scale.
Thats not really accurate, theres a few firstborn units (tactical marines, devastators, etc.) which no longer exist in the Primaris format.
I'd expect all of those to get reworked in some form sooner than later. They're not going to hand around at the smaller scale.
The Blood Ravens simply acquired the Lion's armor and weapons as "gifts."
If they can rock Custodes and Grey Knight armor and have Dorn and Fulgrim's personal weapons... this makes perfect sense.
Somebody will make a meme mod which makes the Lion slowly lose his gear, and it magically appears on your leader character, till at the end the Lion is just charging into battle in his skivvies and the last scene of the game just pixilates his nethers.
Admech/necron animation was nice and all, but adds nothing to what we know about DoW4. Helps new people learn a little about the factions? That’s something I guess.
Yer looks like propa dakka and propa stompin to me boyz.
(Gameplay animations and whatnot)
Off all the things the animations are definitely not what get's me excited, actually at 1:01 you see that all the boys do the same animation loop, which is really stale, nvm that we don't even see reload animations? Also really artificial unit formations are on all the units and complete syncronicity.
Both are things that Iron Harvest also suffered from.
Seemingly we also don't get cover interaction.
In essence to me it looks tooo smooth clean, but like a downgraded for ease mobile game in design.
What throws me with animations is that they look "sped up". Not sure if they are just doing it for video, but there just seems to be a bit of added speed to the motions.
I can overlook it so long as they've actually built a good AI into the game. That's what let Iron Harvest down entirely - its AI was just braindead dull to play against. The only time it gave any credible threat was IF you only built one unit type (eg infantry, at which point the AI would build all mech flamers to counter); and on its staged reinforcement wave (player and AI got 2 pre-set reinforcement waves during skirmish). Otherwise the AI never secured resource points on the map; never contested them and just went from their base to your base in a line attack.
Overread wrote: What throws me with animations is that they look "sped up". Not sure if they are just doing it for video, but there just seems to be a bit of added speed to the motions.
Good catch actually, i rekon it is to suggest a busy look that diverts from the lackluster loop the models have.
Edit: Did a bit of testing, i reckon 0.9 times would be normal for the game.
I can overlook it so long as they've actually built a good AI into the game. That's what let Iron Harvest down entirely - its AI was just braindead dull to play against. The only time it gave any credible threat was IF you only built one unit type (eg infantry, at which point the AI would build all mech flamers to counter); and on its staged reinforcement wave (player and AI got 2 pre-set reinforcement waves during skirmish). Otherwise the AI never secured resource points on the map; never contested them and just went from their base to your base in a line attack.
I wouldn't, seeing as animations and their duration are an actual balance vector. Nevermind the lack of it suggest also a lack of certain core mechanics. Surpression for one.
As for the AI, Iron Harvest indeed was just... sad.
Unfortunately AI in strategy games hasn't really advanced much at all since the 90s. All you can do is make a progressively more complicated checklist and give it cheat resources to make it harder.
This is perhaps the only area I see generative LLM being potentially a useful thing. If game developers were to develop LLMs that could learn to play their game as the AI opponent they could "lock in" a version of an AI engine that could actually be challenging at different skill levels.
Starcraft 2 had some fantastic work done with their AI and I was hoping that it would have a trickle-down effect of training up staff who might move onto other projects; provide ideas and insight and in general advance the AI development in RTS.
Sadly it doesn't seem to have happened or if it has then the skills are locked into bigger firms either working on other titles and so forth.
Overread wrote: Starcraft 2 had some fantastic work done with their AI and I was hoping that it would have a trickle-down effect of training up staff who might move onto other projects; provide ideas and insight and in general advance the AI development in RTS.
Sadly it doesn't seem to have happened or if it has then the skills are locked into bigger firms either working on other titles and so forth.
Issue is, that around the era of AoE2 and CoH 2 AI was put on the backburner in strategy games, since you know, they focus on multiplayer and multiplayer balance. And whilest personally i can understand it, i don't have to like it, a great exemple is AoE 3 DE that thanks to this focus on MP has had severe changes that just ... suck.
But it's cheaper to change certain units, ressources etc, than to design a competent AI.
Thing is over the last few years it feels less like it was put on a back burner and more like the entire skill set has been steadily eroded and lost. Of course this can also just be because RTS is no longer the focus of most big named developers and as such its smaller firms who just lack the resources and internal skill sets to achieve what they set out to do.
You can't really blame anybody since all gaming "AI" are just a series of IF(THAN) statements and checklists that the computer does in a specific order with specific timings. You can make those checklists and timings try and mimic real world players, but the computer is still at the end of the day going to be doing a predictable checklist, which a human can exploit.
LLMs are basically the first and only breakthrough in this field, but they still have a long way to go. LLMs still can't even play chess properly yet, which is somewhat ironic since we've had Chessbots for a very long time. But then Chessbots are still actually quite simple. They're just a checklist which just looks many hundreds or thousands of moves ahead and chooses the "best" move. Which is only possible thanks to Chess being easily quantifiable. Any other type of game is going to be far far more complicated from the perspective of a computer.
The vast majority of strategy games are also just balanced around PvP. Who cares if AOE2 AI is dumb as a box of rocks, the game is made around single player campaigns, casual games with friends vs AI, or online PvP. The AI is perfectly functional for the 2 purposes it serves.
Not Online!!! wrote: wow. THis looks like nickle and diming for mobile style work.
feths sake.
Assuming it’s paid DLC. (Which is my fear)
It could be that the devs know they can’t deliver 100% for their launch window so kick some features down the road a little.
Some games deliver game upgrades free, t just charge for cosmetics. No idea how this one will fall out.
No chance that happening with these developers, considering they had the audacity to DLC ontop of a broken game with iron harvest AND gw behind them.
Well darn. That blows.
Good thing I’ve got a pretty deep library of games I need to play. Wishlist and wait for sale time. Because I’m not getting it without the crusade bit.
