This is the only AAA RTS fully releasing this year, did they do it? Click here to check out Homeworld 3: bit.ly/GamerZakhYTHomeworld3 [ad] It's playable now if you pre-order the Fleet Command version, otherwise full release in a bit. Thanks to Gearbox Publishing & Blackbird Interactive for sponsoring.
when u mentioned stupid DRM and talked about performance then u have answer here - #^$&^%$ corporations implementing useless garbage into game so ur PC won't handle game on stable 60 fps lmao - a shame
@@WojDestroyerThanks, and on what you say about DRM affecting performance, it may or may not, but keep in mind I cranked graphics to max and with the RTX 50 series set to release this year, my GPU and system is basically 2 generations old now. I bought my current PC 3-4 years ago. You're not supposed to crank settings to max without the latest hardware. I have people saying they have a 1660 GPU and getting solid 60 by just dropping some settings. Graphics options are a thing.
@@GamerZakhyes but if you would watch how cracked games (DRM removed) works and how original game works in terms of performance then you might change ur mind on that as this is DOCUMENTED that DRM EATS hardware resources, also I might have top high end PC as of today available hardware I am still not fond of installing games that have DRM for no reason. Also argument "but game have multiplayer component so it is MUST HAVE to have DRM in game BLA BLA BLA" nope it is not reason to do so, even with DRM u can cheat so whatever.
@@WojDestroyer I can't change my mind because didn't say it didn't eat resources, I said I can't judge that here. I'm not qualified or in a position to say what the effects of Denuvo are on this game. All I said is that I cranked graphics to the max when I don't have the latest hardware and you can drop options or use resolution scaling to get it back to 60fps even on lower end cards. I do know Denuvo's history you know, I've run a gaming channel for over 12 years lol. I'm just not going to go around guessing things, which is why in the video I just say there is Denuvo and you can decide for yourself.
Things not covered: 1. Camera modes, control modes and movement options. Specifically the way you move around your camera and the way you move around ships. Demo defaulted to "click on terrain features" to move and WASD camera and in the video you only show that and not any of the old school ones. The demo had bad implementations of both TBH and was one annoying point for people. 2. Detail on ships (textures were pretty bad upclose in demo), specifically non-carrier/mothership ships. 3. Ship dynamic size (demo defaulted to the silly perspective thing, NRS? and bad implementation of it to boot, so fighters looked almost as big as capital ships) 4. Balance in terms of having stupid abilities on everything that lasts 10seconds and you have to spam constantly (ie. nofun esports-junk). Of things shown. In all previous games the thruster tail on fighters would be very long (you can tell easily by looking at any video, they persist for around 8-10s) but in this they're very short (2-3s persistance?). Is there a setting to give them back the giant persistent thrust tails? They're not just nice to look at, they also make it easier to figure out things like how units are moving around.
Those mostly aren't covered because those weren't major problems from before. People generally likes the classic Vs modern controls and camera modes options. The textures? What do you mean, everything visually looked great with the textures. I even flew inside ships during the demo and those textures were still sharp. I've not heard a single person say the textures were bad until this comment. I also show plenty of up close footage in this video, so you can just see what it looks like. And the dynamic size is said to be fixed, but also you can see all the ships on the screen in this video. And I talk about balance, I have not tested every ability but generally you can only use an ability once every battle. There are no thruster settings from what I've seen.
Hah, I felt like I was the only one that didn't care about the horizontal mothership. But then again I always played the Taiidan back when I was young! Glad they added an option to change it at will tho!
Attack Move isn't really a thing with fighters. It is more related to frigates and larger. The idea of attack move is that you can pull back and kite or reposition while still attacking. In short move attack would make them move while still facing and attacking the enemy. In the demo the move attack command would make the ships turn away to move to location and stop firing so was broken.
Hmm, I had and still have a lot of concerns from what I saw in the demo, put me off from buying Hw3 day 1. I'm glad to see units look to be more responsible and more importantly, have more staying power. That was one of my main concerns. I remember being spellbound by Homeworld 1 back in the day, with its atmosphere, ambience and storytelling. I have high hopes for this game, it looks visually impressive. Can't say I am very impressed by the writing direction of what you showed. It's just seems too... personal. Homeworld was always about the fleet, to me. Not Joe-mcbeardface or S'jet. Hell, I remember not even being sure anyone was 'human' back in homeworld 1. I liked that.
Homeworld 1 was a classic, they really captured the "yea if we don't survive this our species is dead" stakes to it. I didn't pre-order this one because I got burned by Starfield last year... got a feeling it's going to be another 'wait a year after release before playing it' type of game where by then they fix all the obvious problems.
I agree, I don't like what I saw here at all. Give us faceless stills of Karen again, or hell, even faceless stills of this new Karen would be preferable to what we see here.
What a beautiful looking game. I'm new to the series, but have been curious about it for a while. It looks like a lot of fun, looking forward to more videos.
The originals are quite difficult to get into if you didn't play them back when they were new. Not really any other RTS that's quite like Homeworld mechanically, and thematically it's pretty heavy. Not a great analogy, but I kind of think Star Wars fans would like StarCraft and Dune fans would like Homeworld lol. And like Dune, until the recent modern films it wasn't really mainstream. Homeworld 3 is trying to reach a new audience, but jury is out on whether it'll alienate the OG fans, but for a modern game it's solid imo, with some rough bits still for launch.
It looks... fine. But the story presentation and dialogue is a huge oof, I didn't want Mass Effect or The Expanse, but something that's all Homeworld. Imogen's floating hair that stays perfectly still and her much more relaxed way of speaking is... weird. We didn't need personal characters, the ship and the fleet were the characters before.
I'm not sure of all the details of the lore, but one thing that I think is a big factor is that Karan was born on an outcast world and lived her whole life in struggle and war. Meanwhile Imogen was born in a time of peace and prosperity, and from the sounds of things she wasn't even supposed to be fused with a ship. She's forced to now because Karan has disappeared and there's no other candidate. This would make them two very different people. Karan was basically bred to be fused with the ship, Imogen not so much, is my understanding.
Karan wasn’t bred, shes a scientist who volunteered. It was treated as a highly experimental sacrifice. It ended up being a boon, because it created a diplomatic connection with the Bentusi who called the state “unbound” and saw Karan as kindred.
@@Kyle7565 I was being metaphorical, like how I was 'bred' to be a gaming RU-vidr. The context and coincidence of my upbringing lend to my ability to create gaming videos on RU-vid, not that I was specifically raised to make them. The main point was Karan lived in difficult times, Imogen (up until this point) lived in good times.
One "little" thing (not so little imo tho) that many games/devs overlook, is actually the UI size. I really appreciate when they let you resize the HUD/UI. Not sure why that's the thing I wanted to point out, but I guess it's because I've lately been annoyed by certain games having a way too tiny UI. So among what other else might be great and/or crap about this game, at least I'll give two thumbs up for the UI scalability. Like I said, it doesnt get enough attention from reviewers nor devs, so again, thumbs up to the devs for this.
UI scale is also important for future proofing the games. Old games have widescreen mods now but the UI shrinks as the resolution goes up, so you can't really play old games at 2K resolution and in some cases even 1080p is unplayable because the buttons are tiny. Also good for different screen sizes, distances, or people with vision difficulty.
They intended it to be vertical, then the marketing people came: "Mothership needs to be horizontal". DEVs: "HELL NO!!! Its tradition, the fans will be outraged!" Marketing people: "Exactly ;) And you put in a button to flip it horizontal. Easiest publicity ever"
@@GamerZakh Hello GamerZakh. I was very passionate about Homeworld 3 from the beginning and shortly after the announcemnt, I made some map design suggestions on the forum because I felt like this was where the previous entries were a bit lacking given the maps felt a bit empty. I suggested using Freelancer as a model where you have many points of interest on a single map, but with vast distances between them and a lots of stuff like asteroid / mine / debris / ice / nebula (some times with unstable explosive coulds) fields. It's super-interesting. To my suprise, Homeworld 3 maps do contain these points of interestest, or to be precise, one point of interest, but not a lot of space to fly around and not any other places of significance with enough distance between them that would make the map feel like there is depth to it. So this bothered me the most during the demo and I didn't bother providing any feedback because I knew it was already too late to change that. As a result, I think the multiplayer will not be emergent, but rather repetitive.
@@JAnx01 Hey! For maps, it's intended for the community to be able to make their own maps and share them through the mod system. Also the 6 player map is pretty big, you can see it in the replay section of this video. You can just have 2 players on that and it'll feel huge. If the community gets into map making, then there could be a ton of options and variety for multiplayer and skirmish.
@@GamerZakh Thanks for the reply. It's not easy to tell from videos right now. I'll explore the maps when I get to play the full game. Is there a map editor in the base game?
This soubds good, about the demo criticism. Much of it was just regular alpha gameplay feedback. So nice to see them change the most crucial, and that was the wide turna of the ships. The others are fine, and I do agree with you about some more additions to the settings like audio. Would just be nice at some point :) About Denuvo, on the surface its not great. As it demands contact with a server, and if the server is down the game won't run. Idk how this will be with offline play, so I hope you check this out! Btw could this DRM be the cause of the stutters? Its been so before.. idk if they have gotten rid of this, with the modern DRMs.. But for anyone be concerned about the future, when this game no longer may be supported. Im sure thr studio BBI, that is fans of the OG Homeworld. Will do everything to fux this, if we end up here. As they did with The Homeworld Remastered. The last thing I hope they will improve these first months is replay controls. Like the colour, and player POV. And that replay from different patches will work. This could make this very interesting for any chance for Tournaments and shearing epic games. And MOD support! I know some modders are ready to bring some other FANDOM Sci-fi to the Homeworld Engine 😁 All in all, pleased! Looking forward to play extensively the next weeks 😎 Fleet Command
Yeah it was mostly normal alpha feedback, but standards are higher for AAA games, so expectations were for that demo to be a solid Beta at least. Especially because at the time launch was supposed to be just a month later. The delay normally would be fine but people were tired because it's been delayed many times already. I'm not sure about the stutters being caused by Denuvo. If the stutters were regular I'd say yes, but it's specifically when objectives update in the campaign more than anything, so I think that's more to do with how the campaign was programmed. I'm not qualified to test Denuvo's impact on this though. And yeah, replays need the most work right now.
When games do new things, people complain they ruined what made the old games good. When they make games just like the old ones, people complain there's nothing new. For me who is constantly researching games, what I've found is that there's never anything new. A game only feels new if you don't know what it's copying. Wolfenstein cloned Berzerk. Civ 1 is Empire + Civ board game made by someone else. Pong, a stolen clone. And you mention Age 4, you mean the most successful RTS released in the last decade? It's still regularly in the top 100 most played games on Steam not counting Gamepass, consoles, etc.
@@GamerZakh man 21 years... no new ships,mechanics, not even factions.... there is not even the minimal here. ok if you like the game. but for a 60$ game have the exact seme content of a 20 years old game i dont know man this is not the right way.
@@caiqueviola3359 Did you say the same thing about Age 4? Because I said Age 4 was too much like Age 2, same units and everything. Then Age 4 became the most successful RTS of the decade. Same old stuff is what people want. They're actually tired of new things, that's why all the remakes and remasters. Look at Stronghold, remake the original and it's the best selling Stronghold game in over a decade. Some people always say "there is nothing new", but why should there be when everything new is hated?
@@GamerZakhman say one new and original not from franchise hing budget rts that came out. "They're actually tired of new things, that's why all the remakes and remasters. " where there was these new rts games that fail?? they only make remasters and remakes because they dont belive in the genre and just give the easy to sell stuff dont take risks any more. And another thing i am not the only one that complaine about age 4 being kind of more of the same also being succesefull is easy wen there is no competition.
@@caiqueviola3359Great War Western Front tried some new stuff, it was actually praised for doing new stuff. Didn't sell well though. Terminator Dark Fate Defiance tried some new stuff. Sold okay but not great. Starship Troopers Terran Command did some interesting things, sold well but instantly dropped to just a few hundred concurrent players on Steam. Last Train Home has some new stuff too, sold okay but again not amazingly. There's plenty of competition in the RTS space, Iron Harvest, Empires of the Undergrowth, Northgard, but here's a rule: Anything truly new and original is doomed to fail. Because new ideas aren't refined. They're inherently 'bad'. Good execution comes from iteration. Think of any good game you think did something original, in every case so far, I find it actually copied an older idea from a failed or subpar game.
Generally the approach for modern gaming is to just give all the options and let people play how they like. One benefit is that it allows people who have real life difficulty that makes playing games harder play games that were previously too tricky, so no issue just giving them easier modes. 'Story Mode' is a norm to have now, this goes a step further letting you fine tune how easy you want it to be. You can always make it as hard as possible if you like, so it doesn't take anything away. On the opposite end, we're also seeing roguelite/ironman modes becoming the norm to have as well for the extra hard difficulty.
I loved the original game. The others? Wasn’t a fan of the whole ‘5 Cores’ thing as it seemed to retcon the original storyline. I hope we see the Turanic Raiders and Kadeshii return….
Nice. I've played Homeworld back when it first launched and the second so I'm looking forward to Homeworld 3. Edit. Karan S'Jet is still alive? I thought she'd passed. She and her fleet are missing. Dang. If she has to die in this installment (I hope not), let it be a good one.
I don't know if she's immortal but her life was extended because she's part of the ship. She was supposed to stay in charge but because she disappeared, Imogen is forced to fuse with a new ship.
@@clubjrgaming2610 For me. Campaign is too short. My PT is eight hours. Story? It's like they have no idea what to do so they asked a greenie who doesn't know about Homeworld and picked the simplest plot they can find. There's no journey. In H1 and H2, the journey is fraught with dangers, discoveries and encounters with other races. At the end of it, there's satisfaction because all obstacles are overcome, much have been learned. There is hope and wonder for the next phase with much to theorise. The devs can easily picked any of the questions abounding in H1 and H2 and continue from there. Or perhaps they tried but its too simple and vague. It's so disappointing. Graphics / visuals and game play are good. The VAs are fine and I'm glad to hear Heidi Eaves reprising her role again. For the last time though. Music is ok but not on par with H1 and H2.
vfx still looks funky compared to HW 1 -2 trails are broken up.... Not sure if unreal engine choice was a good one. Looks like at best it's a deep sale purchase at this point. Coming from a Hw vet that's so sad...
15:55 This is not how DLSS works! (or FSR or XeSS) Say you play at 1080p, the GPU will render the game at maybe 720p, then the image goes through AI image reconstruction to make it 1080p. Which allows the GPU to render more frames per second without sacrificing the quality of the image (or maybe a little but it's hard to notice, cause the AI is good).
I'm doing a layman's explanation, also I'm not talking specifically about DLSS. That's just one option there, you can also choose Spatial, TAAU, FSR2, and XeSS. They're all various ways of upscaling and I didn't want to get into the super technical aspect of this option. But also isn't it true that it doesn't affect the UI? My previous understanding was resolution scaling applied to the gameplay, not the UI. Generally though, what I explained was Spatial scaling, which is the most basic of resolution scaling that's been added to a lot of games recently.
@@GileadMaerlyn the resolution upscaling only impacts the game area and not the ui. I unintentionally lowered it to “ultra performance” and ended up with the gameplay being very low quality [think a 360p video on youtube lol] but all ui stuff was just as clear as normal.
Great job on the review, I loved HW1 and it's expansion, HW2 was pretty good as well. But this... the cutscenes kill it for me, ugly characters with no personality. That's not what I want from a Homeworld story, I want epic black and white cinematic stills with gorgeous music and epic sound effects. Pass.
@@GamerZakh Ik, ik, I was just teasing. It's funny how ppl will complain about the smallest of things. We've been waiting for years for this one, I personally don't really mind, even if the ship is upside down.
The increased focus on characters is a bit... dubious. Especially since right out of the gate there seems to be a lot of "you're so special, everyone thinks you're so wonderful" stuff that stinks to high heaven of late-production "consultation", along with the focus on Imogen's whiny fee-fees. Also, seems a shame to have lost the almost Dune-esque grand stage vibe of the old cutscenes - the whole point was that as "fleet command", the player was surveying things from an almost god's-eye perspective; there was a beautifully eerie sense of distance, which made the radio chatter of units all the more poignant, because you were this disembodied force of intelligence and strategy watching over them from afar, capable of focusing down to the tiniest detail, or zooming out to see the biggest events - watching entire ships full of people exploding without fanfare or weeping. Finally, the hair is stupid. There's no practical reason for the person plugged into the ship's core to have a load of loose hair like that.
@@MrGatonegroish I mean... we're 20 years beyond the original games. So that's a lot of time for the concepts to emerge. We're also 2 years out from the big much-hyped teasers... which incidentally featured a VERY different character design for Imogen; different skin tone, different hair colour, different face structure. I'd say 2 years is plenty of time for voice overs and new cutscene renders.
Attack move is not easely microed with those small ships, its mostly about capital ships staying in formation and moving while under fire keeping their front towards the enemy. I doubt they solve half the issues since the demo. Also Imogen looks terrible, terrible cutscene compared to the ogs. Gonna wait on this one.
I can check the attack move, what do you mean specifically? That capital ships attack while moving? Because they do that. Fixing that complaint from the demo was a specific point they worked on but I'm not sure what you're asking for exactly.
@@GamerZakh What I mean Zack is that homeworld was not a traditional rts attack move, it functioned more like say a tactics game, say look at nebulous fleet command, or maybe total war. When in formation or not ships ( depending on aggressiveness ) kept cohesion and you could keep the front towards while retreating for example or strafing in other to attack more fragile side armor. Homeworld 3 does none of that and i doubt the past couple months they outright change the entire code. Its a shame but it is what it is.
SO many people complained. At least with the option people can just play how they like. That's why I like options, if people don't like something they can just change it themselves.
@@GamerZakh I think people are complaining because the vertical design of the first game is so iconic. It would be as if the next doom guy had violet armor.
@@Simonbergot Haha yeah no I get it, I really understand how if you've been seeing the ship one way for 2 decades it's really weird seeing it the other way. I don't know the full reasoning for why they switched it but probably to try set it apart because it's actually a different ship from Homeworld 1 and 2. The start of the campaign here is the first time this ship is launching.
Not sure how that level of performance at 1080P on your machine is anywhere near acceptable. It should be at least a locked 60fps 99% of the time. Drops down into the 30s is atrocious.
Keep in mind I maxed everything. Ray tracing, shadows, detail, the works. My GPU is a generation old and it's rumoured the RTX 50 series is releasing this year, making my GPU almost 2 generations old. Also, I could use DLSS to do resolution scaling to get better performance. I have a friend who's on a 1060 and he's getting solid 60 after dropping options.
@@Jayy997 I mean, you're not supposed to max everything if you don't have the latest hardware. The fact that I get solid 60 at any point is already good when my hardware is almost 2 generations old. And I get solid 60 on most maps and when it's 1v1. It only drops to 35 on super detailed maps like the first campaign mission or if I'm doing a 6 player skirmish and everyone is maxed out. It's not as optimised as Manor Lords, but I'd say it's generally good.
While some of these changes are quite good, I really don't understand most of the complaints people had. They're petty to an extreme. Peak "ackshually" nonsense.
Some complaints are valid, some are rightfully upset at how some things were handled through development and those feelings are leaking into the rest of their criticism, and there's always those who just want everything to fail and they take joy in that. You can even see in the comments here in just the first hour, we have thought out expressions of preferences and comparisons to the Homeworld universe, and someone who says this looks exactly the same as the first game 25 years ago and they'll 'pass' on this despite us knowing how this game looked for almost a year now. Unfortunately for this game particularly, some effort is needed to discern where these comments are coming from.
Which is ridiculous when you remember how pixelated the old Homeworld textures were, and the skyboxes were very abstract in their use of color. If anything, the game looks like a much more high resolution, Homeworld 2.
@@Kyle7565 That's the thing, people don't remember. They are chasing something that doesn't exist because they themselves have changed too much since they played, in this instance, Homeworld 1. And so they can never be satisfied, no matter how many changes and tweaks BBI implements.
This game looks tedious and slow. Am I missing what is fun about this game? I bet this is going to be a flop. Not interesting enough to entice new players, and veterans of the franchise probably will prefer the old games.
I only played Deserts of Kharak and found it rather slow. Homeworld adds another axis to the battlefield which seems to just complicate movement and keeping track of your units, which doesn't look enjoyable to me. That's just my experience though. I love many other RTS games.
I am curious what will be made. I just checked and surprisingly there's 1 mod already, someone made a mod to unlock all units in War Games so you can produce everything.
Those cinematic cutscenes are atrocious. HW was never about showing individual characters. You never saw the Taiidan Emperor, Makaan or Fleet Inteligence. The lore, art and the setting was about telling and not showing. This already makes me lose any hype to play this
loving the game so far my only complaint is that when the ui is large you need to scroll the interface to see all build options think they should have also had tabs for build and research and also no build hotkeys but other then that loving the game so so much to the homeworld purests who bitch about everything you are the reason the rts scene is dying we should be lucky to get a game without micro transactions and no stupid adds for buy skins or crap
No they Flopped, killed the IP , just played it, biought it 80€ pack, and 13 hour later, completed the campaign, and this game is huge on it story campaign back in the day, also the game keep change your grouping , if you made a group 1 later you made the same fleet group 2 , then they react on 1 still, also the passiv mode settings is a defult, so if i change too agrassive , it sometimes change back to defult, why? also the uograde you have made, you need to click on it in that unit that has the upgrade, in order to activate the new powerfull upgrade and when your fleet is mixed , gl finding it during combat, NO mod is not a thing, WRONG . should never have mod in this IP....... so sad youtubers are bought by the drev, the game after i have played it, and compare to the first version , this one is empty, very weak story and to short, also the way the story is written is plain bad. WOKE is a thing and it is the feeling you have in this game , voice are some what mixed, well , the game in all is just bad made. i like your take on it, just do not agree to you, good gj and keep up your work.
Because people complained about the campaign being short, I went to check how long the original campaign was in the first game. Here's a video of someone beating it in 6 hours: ru-vid.comS9pT4qtaZ0w - What do you mean it was huge on the story campaign? As for unit grouping, I didn't have that issue. Must be a bug, but you can see my campaign gameplay video I used unit groupings throughout and didn't have that problem, so I couldn't report on it. The unit stance, I haven't seen it go back to passive automatically, BUT if you add units to your selection and they're on different stances, selecting them together can lead to mixed stances. You'll need to post a video of what you're talking about because I haven't seen this. I have a long gameplay video too, you can point out what you mean in that as an alternative. For the abilities, yeah I agree, it's tedious to press the button. I can micro it pretty okay but it's not a fun thing to do. And mods are not a thing? What are you talking about? The original games have been modded. Here are mods for Homeworld Remastered: www.moddb.com/games/homeworld-remastered/mods - You can even look up 'must have' mods for the old games: www.reddit.com/r/homeworld/comments/s7yyv3/what_are_some_must_have_mods/ For RU-vidrs being bought, that's why in sponsored content I don't 'review'. I just show what is. I don't give it a score, I don't say whether people should or shouldn't buy it. I showcase the game exactly as it is, in this video and the raw campaign gameplay video. No secrets and I even criticise many things in this video. So I don't know what you don't agree with me here? I say the replays are bad, do you disagree with that? I say there should be more skirmish maps, don't agree? I point out the performance stutters, do you think there are no performance issues? I say the game should have more audio sliders, do you think it should have fewer? I even make a point to tell people there's Denuvo. Gearbox gave no feedback on my video, so I posted what I wanted to post. Now I need you to define 'woke'. What in HW3 is woke? Be specific. This is important because the word doesn't mean anything and it just makes people argue in the comments, which I don't want to deal with. People have said my face is woke in the past, we need to be sure what you're actually saying here. I need you to reply to these points please.
@@GamerZakh Well you are right , about the modding , but that was many years later , not sure if that was when they made the remastered which i never Got into Also , if you play the game when it was released, there is no RU-vid , that Can show you the original game play , the game i have if i still Got it that is, Can not run on the modern pc , like many other game from my youth , but what i re-call i had gameplay for over 4-5days of fun and you know you make a mistanke and the game crush you , , yes the story was more indebt and just better , the UI were i see everone Else has the same issue , if grouping into a nummer 1 or what ever , that bind Will be there is for that Unit when give g the group 2 , then it Will be 1and 2 , and 3 if that the case , so that making the grouping messy,so what i enden up with was a Unit fleet with every thing in it , all the upgrade is not showed on the mothership , Also she flyvs tiltet now , not like it use to be , i know you Can click and she get back up, but as defult, that wrong , simpel or call it woke, what ever , but that my take on it , it is very very short and weak , story,,,,but yes the grafik looks amasing compare to what it was, Also other aspekt of it , but this game was a story of US finde a new place to live and on the Way we found relic and new craft , here we just hammer head with some other mad race , they use to have a elderen race , Well now we have this crap nothing , if you play a newer version Of the original , i do not know what they might have done to make it 6 hour game , because that false , me and my friends played for days , but it just a game and again i just do not agree to what you Think of it , but i Think you make good videos and content, again stress that and HW 3 is still crap no one Can ever make that change , why pay for something that is not a finshed so that some one Else Can try remake , never understod that idea , just that pure money in the end it is what it is . Best regards
@@clubjrgaming2610 Yeah I remember as a kid playing some games for months, but then I play it today and I finish it in 8 hours. That's because we were kids and sucked at games. Homeworld 1's campaign is normally finished in 6-12 hours. You finished Homeworld 3 in 13 hours, that's actually longer. As for the story being better or worse, I don't mind people saying either way. But is it shorter or longer? Then it's definitely not shorter than the original games. I showed you a link to a 6 hour video fully playing Homeworld 1: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-S9pT4qtaZ0w.html - They don't even skip the cutscenes. There's another, 9 hours: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-IWvPvN0LWlM.html Homeworld 3's campaign is not shorter than the old games, that's just a fact. Better or worse sure, shorter no. And what you're complaining about for unit grouping is actually what most people specifically ask for. Units existing in multiple groups is very important for proper micro. That way you can have your main army on 1, but your frigates on 2, small ships on 3, and support frigates on 4. That way you can go 1-click to move your army, then 2-click and 3-click to make sure your small and big ships do what they're supposed to do, the 4-click to pull back your support. Then 1-click to retreat everyone. People want that and specifically ask for it. RTS without this kind of grouping is considered bad, but besides the other problems, Homeworld 3 does this correctly. If you think the game is bad, I have no problem with that. But you are wrong on some points. Also, define 'woke'. Why did you ignore that? Just tell me what you mean by 'woke'. This is important.
@@GamerZakh Well if the grouping need to Work like that, just gotta say, that weird, but that Also make my point even more on point , if i’m bad player rts then the campaign just so much shorter ,have seen so fare is 7,5 hours Also it make no sence to have grouping like that , i do see what you mean but in the mother of why , you do the same and it faster to just do 8 grouping and move Them around , that how we played in the 1998 , and served me Well up to 2004 were gameing became more like a hobby and have been like that ever since, explaining, woke Well my man look it up on Google , please do so , for what i Think , Well it just personal and i have not been personal , regarding to your link i’m looking at it , and that is not the original version but a remastered , so fare looks how i remember the Unit , i just have a hard time to see how 6 hours is that game , perhaps the remastered has been shorten but i Will see , because i have some Old pictures from few of the mission from the version i Got my Hands on , Well i was in my late 19 when i played this game so not sure what you ment . Bit i’m not a pro player either rts or any game , but that do not mean 80 € is a 13 hour gamplay worth , for me that very to little and Also 25 years has gone since the next version because this is the next version ,
@clubjrgaming2610 No I need you to define what YOU mean by 'woke'. Because people have said directly to me that 'I' am woke because my dad is dark skinned and my mom is white. That makes 'me' inherently woke. Is this what you mean? If I look it up, I see definitions like that and other weird definitions. The remastered Homeworld 1 was not shortened either. Look at this playlist: ru-vid.com/group/PLlmEEm6A0j5BYS-8R184qAZBZEllQ-O4y - ORIGINAL 1999 'perfect' playthrough, 10 hours. C'mon man, the campaigns were short. How many more playthroughs do you need to see? There are many more. I don't mind you saying HW3 is bad. No problem or issue there. But the campaign is longer and you need to define 'woke' for me. What do you mean by 'woke'?
![Did Homeworld 3 Fix The Problems? | 2024 Space RTS [AD]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
