I noticed the negative feedback on the Steam forum:
The graphics are nice and the music is good, yet the gameplay is poor. The units are too slow, no cover mechanics, no base building, simplistic strategy capturing victory points, not enough unit and building variety, no true sight, low unit limit, no bonus for veteran units, no micro-management of moving an individual unit, not responsive enough, no coop, price is probably too high. The game is slow, because the unit movement is slow (update: the devs increased movement by 30%), and they have a ton of health. The units need more animations, because when every unit in a squad does the exact same animation (e.g. reload) simultaneously, it's robotic and breaks immersion. Block units instead of individual units is anti-micro strategy. These block units are locked in combat so individual units cannot be repositioned. If you press retreat they'll run all the way back to base. People who are into Warhammer prefer strategy with depth, grittiness and building a base.
Fdev could ignore the player feedback, but they'll risk another ED Odyssey style debacle. By omitting RTS features that made Dawn of War and DoW2 great, RoR could flop like DoW3. Frontier should strive for high quality rather than a mediocre game that sells few copies. So delay the release, put more time in development to make major game design improvements.
Fdev appointed game designers from different genres to design RoR. RTS is not their forte and neglecting player feedback results in a mediocre game. Fdev should hire expert game designers who have proven themselves with best-selling and acclaimed RTS titles.
- A Disappointment
- Really disappointed
- review of this game/demo as an AoEII/SC2/WC3/Dota2 player.
- Demo Feedback: pros, cons, confusion.
- Story mode feedback. You just don't have enough units to control the map.
- Game feels tooooooo slow
- There is no skill ceiling when, you lock units into death ball combat or retreat.
- Units are locked in combat
The graphics are nice and the music is good, yet the gameplay is poor. The units are too slow, no cover mechanics, no base building, simplistic strategy capturing victory points, not enough unit and building variety, no true sight, low unit limit, no bonus for veteran units, no micro-management of moving an individual unit, not responsive enough, no coop, price is probably too high. The game is slow, because the unit movement is slow (update: the devs increased movement by 30%), and they have a ton of health. The units need more animations, because when every unit in a squad does the exact same animation (e.g. reload) simultaneously, it's robotic and breaks immersion. Block units instead of individual units is anti-micro strategy. These block units are locked in combat so individual units cannot be repositioned. If you press retreat they'll run all the way back to base. People who are into Warhammer prefer strategy with depth, grittiness and building a base.
Fdev could ignore the player feedback, but they'll risk another ED Odyssey style debacle. By omitting RTS features that made Dawn of War and DoW2 great, RoR could flop like DoW3. Frontier should strive for high quality rather than a mediocre game that sells few copies. So delay the release, put more time in development to make major game design improvements.
Fdev appointed game designers from different genres to design RoR. RTS is not their forte and neglecting player feedback results in a mediocre game. Fdev should hire expert game designers who have proven themselves with best-selling and acclaimed RTS titles.
Last edited:
.
