Análises recentes de GCVos

It seems like the game is getting a lot of undeserved criticism.

The game isn't perfect, but it brings in a ton of improvements and additions compared to the original.

Let's start with what most people are complaining about: performance. I'm playing on a Ryzen 5 5600 with a 2070 Super and I'm getting good framerates with a 40K population right now. All you need to do is tweak some basic settings.

The graphics are a big improvement over the original. Texture quality is great and models are very detailed.

The simulation has a lot of depth now. There's no more pocket cars. Citizens have to actually find a parking spot. Electricity now has low and high voltages you have to account for. Goods can now have deficits or be overproduced. There's new services like internet, on top of the usual ones like police and hospitals.

Unique buildings have become signature buildings, which are very similar to RICO from CSL1. Most service buildings are now modular, and can be expanded with modules.

The roads tools are the best part of the game. It's like they added NEXT, Precision Engineering and Anarchy mods to the base game.

There's a large variety of zoning types now. From medium density American row houses to tall office skyscrapers, you can add a lot of variety to your city.

My main gripe so far has been demand. You don't get much demand for medium or high density buildings until you've reached 25-30K populations. That means you'll mostly be building low density suburbs at first, until population density is high enough for other demands to kick in.

I have yet to dig into everything that's new and may update this review when I run into anything else.

Far from perfect, but greatly improved since launch! This game got a lot of negative feedback during its first few months and in many ways the game was barely playable. The game still needs a lot of work and the playerbase has become quite small, but World War 3 has become a lot more enjoyable over time and is slowly being improved.

People seem to forget this game is created by a relatively small studio and I think they don't deserve all the hate they have gotten so far. So here is my honest review.

The gunplay is quite good and feels more hardcore than Battlefield 4, more similar to games like Squad. At close range, guns are very deadly, but at range, they become inaccurate and it takes more effort to hit your targets. My main gripe here is the inconsistent damage model. Because of character armor plates and helmets, some shots deal only minor damage, while others almost instantly kill you. This can make snipers quite annoying and gunfights somewhat unpredictable.

Character movement and animations are still kinda clunky. Instead of vaulting over walls smoothly like in Modern Warfare or Battlefield 5, you often get stuck in front of a barrier. Vehicle movement is manageable, and not nearly as bad as the iceskating tanks in BF4.

The graphics and engine performance have greatly been improved over time. I think they've done a really great job recreating real world locations and the maps feel large and looks fairly detailed. The environments definitely aren't as finetuned as the ones from other triple A games, but are definitely above average with good lighting and nice quality textures.

At the moment there are only four maps in the game. I think this is one of the main issues right now. The game needs more maps. For a game based on real locations the level design isn't bad. I do think the objectives on some of the maps are placed too far from each other, and teams can get spawntrapped pretty easily. The devs have improved this problem by adding more spawn locations, but this problem still exists especially when teams become too unbalanced.

Weapon and character customization is really awesome! I'd say the gun customization is even better than what we have in Call of Duty. There's a ton of different scopes, barrels, rail mounts etc. and all of them have a clear impact on how a weapon performs, changing recoil, weight and accuracy.

This brings me to my last point, which is the user interface. The main menu isn't bad, but some menus are a bit hard to navigate and take some getting used to. I do like the fact there's a regular old server browser, which many shooters no longer have.

So overall this game isn't as bad as it used to be, and I think the developers are doing a good job improving it. The game does need a lot more content though, and I hope the devs will look at how other studios approach community feedback. If they can take a more open approach to user feedback I think WW3 can become more popular again.

Very cool RPG, takes some getting used to after Division 2. I really like the gameplay and environments. Not a big fan of having to drop gear to increase my score, but I guess that's just part of the grind...