r/dawnofwar • u/R4v3nnn • 4d ago
Is DoW4 Multiplayer going to be big?
Or will it become a niche just a month after release?
Or perhaps it can have at least similar playerbase as some AoE2/4 or StarCrafts?
Like big enough for comfortable play for noobs and beginners
22
u/bareunnamu 4d ago
Given that the developers cannot confirm whether a replay feature will be included at launch, I honestly find it difficult to expect a massive multiplayer scene to emerge.
8
u/Shake-Vivid 4d ago
Replay and observer mode features have been confirmed as being made but I doubt their exclusion at launch is going to be the reason a MP scene doesn't emerge. We know the games definitely going to get those features after all, we just don't know if they'll be finished before or after the games out. The main thing to determine MP success is whether it's actually fun to play or not.
6
u/ifawasstupiddontsayb 4d ago
Replay feature is so very important for multiplayer.
For one, it's incredibly hard to get better without watching played matches back and seeing what happened and could have done better.
And secondly for youtube videos and streams. Without replays its ever only first person gameplay, which is hard to follow and hard to self commentate on. An issue shown painfully obvious in the battlereports. Observer feature adds ontop of that for tournament play, but the big one are replays.
If you want to see a real nice implementation of multiplayer in a game check out Mechabellum. It has live played matches to join as observer and even bet on outcome (not my jazz but still). It also has fixed weekly tournaments set up, advertised and joinable in game. Chefs kiss
3
2
u/SmithOfLie 4d ago
I would say that lack of replay and observer at launch would be a pretty big albatross around the game's neck. The big issue for any multiplayer game is player retention. No game ever keeps the numbers it had at the start, even if the launch is very successful, people just naturally drift away towards new things, get back to their old reliable or get bored. Developing the core playerbase that ones to stick with the title is a must if it is to have any sort of relevant MP community.
I very much doubt that the number of people who would be interested in going back to the game, say 3 months down the line when the features are added, is equal or larger to the number of MP minded people who consider these important for their sticking with the game.
I might be wrong, but it is a risky bet to make.
3
u/DarkOmen597 4d ago
Reminder that these developers made the abysmal Iron Harvest.
This game is gonna be worse than people expect and it's gonna leave a bunch of people upset.
Watch.
In fact, those dame people will downvote this comment.
9
u/Loud-Huckleberry-864 4d ago
I am huge sc2 fan and this is my last chance to dive in competitive game. After all flop recent releases if daw didn’t deliver I may just stop looking for pvp scene.
So yeah, I’ll go all in in 1v1, you are welcome to join me
2
4
u/R4v3nnn 4d ago
SC2 is still very playable , the other big one is AoE2.
Brood War is pretty big too... But inside Korea
5
u/Loud-Huckleberry-864 4d ago
I want something new and aoe games aren’t my cup of tea
2
u/R4v3nnn 4d ago
Kinda same ;)
2
u/archwin 4d ago
Hey man, I’m gonna be joining you. I’m gonna be horrible because I don’t play anywhere near as much as any of you guys, but I’ll be there.
And if we ever play on the same team, I will try to support you the best I can
And I’m sorry if we lose. But I’ll try to make sure we have fun doing it. :)
1
u/TCTD-BibleDude 4d ago
Company of Heroes 3 has an active player base and revives regular updates. Check it out
1
u/Sapodilla101 2d ago
SCII will never die. Even if Blizzard never makes SCIII, I hope the SCII esports scene will keep attracting new generations of competitive players, like chess.
-1
u/Kagemand 4d ago
Warcraft 3 is in a very good state now, has a well-sized multiplayer community and is actually a much better and more enjoyable game to play than SC2 given its lesser macro focus.
Company of Heroes 3 is also looking to get an extremely good looking update this next month, and the is already now in a very good state compared to release. Overall it’s also one of the best RTS games out there. Smaller player base than WC3, but it has a dedicated following.
5
u/Loud-Huckleberry-864 4d ago edited 4d ago
The reasons I like sc2 are the reasons people hate sc2. I can’t compare this game 1v1 wise to anything ever released.
Glad you like wc3 more tho
1
u/R4v3nnn 4d ago
Well to me WC3 is less attractive because of less macro focus and heroes, but it's just a matter of taste and preference. I'm really glad it's doing great and Grubby did there really good job
0
u/Kagemand 4d ago edited 4d ago
Macro focused games will never have broad multiplayer appeal, as they stress players out too much. Throughout a match you never have downtimes, you need to perform at max throughout the entire game duration, basically like running a mental sprint for 30 mins.
2
u/R4v3nnn 4d ago
Ok, this is why mobas will be always more popular
But WC3 is still smaller than SC2, AoE2 or probably Brood War which are more macro focused, than to me bigger audience among rts fans prefer more macro
DoW and CoH were always less macro focused and still were not popular.
Still it's a matter of preference.
1
u/Kagemand 4d ago edited 4d ago
Tbh I think WC3 will get bigger than SC2 now, with Korea also mostly going back to SC1.
DoW and CoH unfortunately never had Blizzard’s marketing machine behind them. In particular they’ve always had worse launches, worse matchmaking systems etc. They are still great games.
I mean, I do hope DoW4 will be a good game and do well. My point to the above poster was just that there are other RTS games out there already as good alternatives to SC2.
SC2 was a good game as well, I just don’t think it is a particularly good multiplayer game for most people. I forsee the relaunched WC3 now overtaking it in popularity, and it will in all honest likelihood grow to be more popular than DoW4, given how polished WC3 is now.
2
u/R4v3nnn 4d ago
Korea never turned into SC2, BW it's national sport there, like k-pop stars were playing it etc
WC3 and SC2 are good games, just different
And yeah, at least WC3 received something, while SC is like - wait for shooter and fuck off
1
u/Kagemand 4d ago
I followed SC2 and it did initially seem like it could take over from SC, but yeah it didn’t. So yeah WC3 seems bigger than SC2 now.
1
u/Jochon 4d ago
I doubt WC3 will grow. Reforged is not as good, and Blizzard has been scrubbing the old one away.
1
u/Kagemand 4d ago
You’re not up to date, the vast consensus is that the Definitive edition is good for the state of the game’s multiplayer, in particular that the new graphics are much better than the first reforged attempt.
The new Definitive campaign was also good and had good reviews. It could have had more RTS elements but WC3 always mixed RPG elements in.
4
u/Ratattack1204 4d ago
Depends what you mean by "big"?
If you mean big like, call of duty is big? Hell no.
But could be big among the RTS community if it's good. Ive been itching to get back into RTS multiplayer for a while now and its looking like a good candidate. Hopefully they stick the landing.
1
u/R4v3nnn 4d ago
I gave example, like Idk AoE2, aoe 4, Brood War, SC2...?
1
u/Ratattack1204 4d ago
and what does that mean? Like peak concurrent players? Longevity?
Again. Totally depends on how well they do.
8
u/SpenglerPoster 4d ago
Rts is already a niche genre and dow is a niche game where most people play just for the single player. Unlikely.
9
u/Mirizen 4d ago
I disagree, number of people who play pvp in dow de and dow2 elite mod are pretty decent
6
u/SpenglerPoster 4d ago
I play DE so I know the game is not literally dead but AOE 2 has over 17k players right now and dow de like 1k.
2
u/Mirizen 4d ago
To me 1k is enough to be considered healthy
1
0
-1
u/Ferrar258 4d ago
Lmao player base under 10k = dead game
1
u/Sapodilla101 2d ago
Is this sarcasm?
1
u/Ferrar258 2d ago
No, it is reality
1
u/Sapodilla101 2d ago
Then you're ignorant AF. I come from fighting games, where the player bases are minuscule, and I have no problems getting matches. I'm currently playing Avatar Legends, which peaks at around 700 concurrent players daily, and I don't have to wait more than 2 minutes to get a match. TETR.IO peaks at even fewer players, like 600, and I don't have to wait more than a minute to get a match.
You're a League of Legends player, so that checks out. 😂
1
u/Ferrar258 2d ago
Ye, under the definition of "profitable eSports scene and multiplayer stability" all of those games are dead. Not only mobas but also shooters are good examples of thriving competitive and multiplayer scene
1
u/Sapodilla101 2d ago
Evo France just happened, and Avatar Legends was in the main lineup. You don't even understand the term "multiplayer stability" if your only argument is daily peak concurrent players. What a fucking clown! Stick to League of Legends. You're just a sheep who plays whatever's popular.
If you think only MOBAs and shooters are "good examples of thriving competitive and multiplayer scenes," then I'm sorry to say you're stupid AF.
This dude thinks fighting games are dead because they peak at less than 10k concurrent players daily. 😂
→ More replies (0)
2
u/FlashingNova 4d ago edited 4d ago
Depends on if the dev fosters the competitive player base. I considered myself to be part of it. I don't really care for campaigns, graphics or comestics. As long as the game balance is good and there's a high skill ceilling, im happy. I like it when there's good skill expressions. For example, I'm conq in AOE4, Diamond in sc2 and Master in LoL. Those games have incredibly high skill ceilling. I know im probably part of a very small core but the competitive player base is the most loyal in my opinion. Ill generally stick with a game if i put hundreds of hours learning it and mastering it. With that said, from all the video ive seen. I dont really like the direction they are going.
Anyhow, to answer your question. They seem to be really focus on the flashy aspects of warhammer and i think that's the direction they are aiming for. Which is good for the casual player base. So noobs and beginners should have a good time. As for how "big" the player base will be depends entirely on the devs. The game can be very pretty with amazing graphics and sync kills but if its shallow and simple. Thats not going to retain a lot of players, especially on the pvp side. I don't think im the only one that finds 2 players mindlessly running it down with a dozen of squads not very entertaining. My brain finds 0 stimulation in mindless pitch battles but well see how it goes. Ill definitely buy the game. I love the warhammer verse.
3
u/Shake-Vivid 4d ago
The Devs said if the demand is there they will do all they can to support the multiplayer for competitive play providing all the necessary tools to make it work. A lot of the playtests have been multiplayer focused which I've been a part of and they're definitely taking it seriously.
8
u/FlashingNova 4d ago
That's good to hear, can i ask you something? How does the whole "free" research feel in MP. I feel like it removes urgency and decision making. For example, should i make units or research this tech instead. Since youre part of the playtest. Can you tell me did you feel like it simplifies the game too much?
5
u/Shake-Vivid 4d ago
I can't go into details due to signing a NDA. There is a large playtest soon though so recommend signing up for that. Hopefully you'll be able to judge for yourself.
2
u/Grugnorr 4d ago
Let's start with seeing proper configurable key bindings, replays and ranked ladders ...
2
u/Appropriate-Walk-257 4d ago
I’d be surprised if it turns out as good as Company of Heroes 3. I watched the all gameplay videos the game doesn’t look good especially the animations. I think it will see a spike in the beginning later it will be around 200 - 300 active players.
2
u/TranslatorStraight46 1d ago
I would expect something about the same size as Company of Heroes.
A few thousand players at any given time but not as big as the titans.
4
u/TCTD-BibleDude 4d ago
One of the reasons Dawn of War 2, and company of heroes 1, 2, and 3 could be made was ongoing engagement with those games multiplayer.
DOW 4 will hopefully get players for the single player but watching the mp gameplay I think it will be less popular than Company of Heroes 3.
But I’ll be happy to be wrong
1
u/Vichnaiev 4d ago
Barely anyone touches multiplayer in these games, its gotta be less than 5% of the playerbase, so saying that is one of the reasons DoW games were made is a joke.
1
u/Invictus_0x90_ 4d ago
Aoe4 has a pretty grass roots community and long term support from people like EGCTV. The PvP scene is heavily supported by ex starcraft pros who continue to get a decent following on twitch.
I don't think dow4 will garner the same. But I do think it will run for a long enough time (I mean shit there's still a dow1/2 "pro" scene)
1
u/Mister_Swoop 4d ago
You can reliably find pvp games on DoW1 right now. How big do you need it to be?
1
u/Barrywize 4d ago
My guess is that due to Dawn of War 1 not having much in terms of an e sports scene, and the devs saying DoW 4 is ~70% the same as DoW 1, then no it will not.
Will be interesting to see what Indrid Casts thinks when it drops
1
u/Bolid_Snake 4d ago
It will be big in it’s community and if the game is both good and the recipient of love and care from developers and community alike it will be a gold standard for rts, but if the game is poor on release there’s really no way to say.
1
u/Jonathanwennstroem 4d ago
Let’s hope so we’re a group of ~10 that would play this long term buy dlc‘s etc. if the dev offers.
1
u/Ok-Rush-6379 4d ago
Total Warhammer 40k is likely going to be bigger
RTS is kind of a dying genre sadly :( We all want something new and never stick with the new stuff lol
1
1
u/Nevermore5113 4d ago
I just REALLY hope that the last stand mode will be worth it. I would even buy a standalone version.
God, I loved it so much in DOW 2!
1
u/Qloriti 4d ago edited 4d ago
I bet it won't. For some reason they are focused on single player. They have told many times about pve content. Also from the footages game is oversimplified, has casual appeal, bland simple casual mechanics.
I don't believe they are focused on mp. Being big like StarCraft (I already can tell with absolute confidence it won't be anything close like SC) and casual friendly as you say is 2 opposite terms. It is casual, and casual will enjoy it. But the mp won't last long.
The closest competitor for this game is like Tempest Rising.
That will be a miracle if they at least be abled to surpass coh3 in popularity and presence several months later. No joking.
1
1
u/Something_Comforting 3d ago
99.95% of my time in Starcraft 2 are Co-Op and replaying Campaign. For a game to get big is to easier entry, and Co-Op significantly better than PvP. I just hope they focus on it more than Blizzard's mistake on going all in into eSports.
1
u/R4v3nnn 3d ago
Well, I think it works this way, in that order: 1. Single player campaign 2. Coop 3. 1vs1 4. eSports
So, first to establish casual playerbase, should increase pvp player numbers too. Brood war was exactly in that order.
Coop in SC2 came too late, with too much focus on sweaty esports
1
u/Something_Comforting 3d ago
Hopefully the co op commanders work similar to SC2 commanders. You can even bring other Chapters, Dynasties, that way and get to rehash existing factions into something new.
1
u/BrokenLoadOrder 3d ago
Almost assuredly not going to be, just as it isn't for the vast majority of games. No hope in hell it comes anywhere near Starcraft or Age of Empires for playerbase.
Mercifully, they appear to be smarter than Relic eventually got with not trying to chase that either.
1
u/Sapodilla101 2d ago
I really hope DoW IV sees a healthy esports scene. Even if there's no official support from the devs, I hope we'll get to see grassroots-level tournaments. PvP is critical for the RTS genre, in my opinion.
1
1
u/EasyRecognition 4d ago
Who in the fuck knows? If there are strong psykers among us, they know well to avoid Reddit.
0
u/TrainingAd395 4d ago
To be brutally honest I wish DOW4 had no multiplayer at release and everything went into just the Campaign and Last Stand. Like multiplayer could be worked on post release and would drop with the next dlc or never. I know the backlash from the multiplayer guys would seem bad but honestly everyone knows it's all bark no bite as it is us casual rts single player guys that make or break RTS games these days.lol this isn't rage bait as how could be if it is true.
4
u/Calm-Power-6981 4d ago
Lowkey id be fucking pissed if it didnt have multiplayer. Its an RTS, i cant compete against other players its gonna get boring fast
3
u/mariano2696 4d ago
Idk what rts you play to make that statement, since AoE and StarCraft continue to be the biggest and both are competitive
0
u/Micro-Skies 4d ago
You mean the game with 160 hours of single player content and the game with the best coop mode in the entire genre?
2
u/mariano2696 4d ago
And still they shine because of their mp
1
u/Micro-Skies 4d ago
And that's not even remotely why they got there
2
u/XYZvillager 4d ago
vibes-based assessment. you have absolutely nothing to base this statement on, just saying
if this game didn't have multiplayer i wouldn't buy it. playing against CPU is boring and playing against CPU that is given material advantages or other unfair advantages to make them challenging is even worse.
0
u/Micro-Skies 4d ago
Except for Blizzard themselves stating that the vast majority of their customers are focused around PvE content. Your assessment is entirely personal experience based
0
u/XYZvillager 4d ago
the vast majority of their customers are not playing their RTS games, PvE or otherwise. they were not talking about Starcraft or Warcraft 3, if it was even it said at all.
and the difference is that i didn't state my opinion as a fact (or as an assessment).
0
u/Micro-Skies 4d ago
Buddy, I was talking about their RTS customers.
1
u/XYZvillager 4d ago edited 4d ago
but blizzard, in your made up claim, wasn't
Edit:
joker links a quote from 2016...the direct quote from his decade-old video is "the data has shown that *during certain months* coop has more players than multiplayer"
implying that back in 2016 when coop still received new content, the majority of months it was still outnumbered by PvP
meanwhile anyone that is actually familiar with the subject of SC2 knows that SC2 abandoned coop years ago
0
u/Micro-Skies 4d ago
For anyone wanting the actual claim made by a blizzard employee, its in this interview with Lowko.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Sapodilla101 2d ago
I do not understand what you PvE gamers' problem is. If you want to play PvE, go play PvE. But why say stuff like "please, no PvP"?
1
u/Micro-Skies 1d ago
Competitive focuses have killed two promising RTS games. DoW3 and Stormgate
1
u/Sapodilla101 1d ago
Are you sure it was the competitive focus, or are you just making PvP the scapegoat? Stormgate had a single-player campaign, and it still flopped.
Fighting games are purely PvP, yet they're thriving. You're just one of those fools who like to scapegoat PvP as the reason for an RTS game's failure, when in reality, a lot of factors can contribute to the failure of a game, and PvP may not be one of them.
1
u/Micro-Skies 1d ago
Stormgate's campaign was dogshit. Because it was splitting resources with alpha esports tournaments on a build without tier 3 units or the third faction.
Both games heavily invested into esports above all else, falling short of every other promise.
0
u/Sapodilla101 1d ago
This "splitting resources" argument is useless. It makes no sense. The same units and factions are available in both PvE and PvP.
You're acting as if you would've played it anyway. PvP doesn't hurt PvE and vice versa. Both can coexist. You don't see the hardcore PvP crowd asking to get rid of the single-payer campaign and focus on PvP. It's only PvE fanatics like you that seem to have a problem.
1
u/Micro-Skies 1d ago
I do see that all the time, and I was very excited for Stormgate. It just sucked.
0
u/Sapodilla101 1d ago
Exactly. That's the reason Stormgate flopped: it just sucked. It wasn't because of a "focus on PvP." If they really wanted to focus on PvP, they wouldn't have wasted dev hours on making the single-player campaign. I'm sick and tired of you idiots.
0
u/mariano2696 1d ago
It's cringe. They probably think that because of MP focus, companies aren't releasing new campaigns for their games
0
u/mariano2696 1d ago
And Aoe4 was arguably the biggest RTS success from the last 10 years, being a competitive RTS doesn't mean it can't have good single player content. As the other guy said, it's really cringe seeing people complain of MP. Just go a play once a week against a Hard Ai and do your thing. Some people want to face other people and enjoy actual challenges while still enjoying SP content
1
1
0
26
u/SmithOfLie 4d ago
None here are prophets, but I am going to make an educated guess.
RTS is a genre without mass appeal in the modern environment. Even successful titles with e-sports scene (SC2 and AoE4 mostly) are pretty niche.
DoW4 has a strong IP to support possible push, but that is balanced by developers with modest pedigree and more focused on single player side.
My bet is that it has a decent spike in the release window, then quickly loses most of the initial player base, stabilizing with a core of dedicated players with nostalgia for the series or attachement to 40K. It will develop a community driven, modest e-sports scene with small tournaments ran by the dedicated streamers/content creators.
I do not expect a big push for a spectator e-sports, not even on the niche level of AoE4 Redbull Wololo cups. We might get one or two bigger events while the new car smell lasts, but that's a very optimistic outlook.