Why did the HoI series succeed, when MotE failed?

[C.N.]

Seeing the failure of March of the Eagles, and reacting skeptically when someone suggested a WWI game, made me wonder.

Why are we at HoI 4 with DLCs constantly being released, while other single war games are very niche and not successful at all?
What makes people invest, both as buyers and developers, time and money into a game series with difficult to implement mechanics and AI?
Why did the series not die at HoI 1?

Sure it's WWII, but that can't be the whole answer.
Is it the challenge of overcoming history, and do better?
Is it the possibility to go wild, and conquer the whole world?
Is it the possibility to go totally off-track and do something totally different compared to history?
Is it the grand scale of the game with multiple large fronts across many continents?

Anything else that I have missed? What do you think?

 

[Zwirbaum]

Seeing the failure of March of the Eagles, and reacting skeptically when someone suggested a WWI game, made me wonder.

Why are we at HoI 4 with DLCs constantly being released, while other single war games are very niche and not successful at all?
What makes people invest, both as buyers and developers, time and money into a game series with difficult to implement mechanics and AI?
Why did the series not die at HoI 1?

Sure it's WWII, but that can't be the whole answer.
Is it the challenge of overcoming history, and do better?
Is it the possibility to go wild, and conquer the whole world?
Is it the possibility to go totally off-track and do something totally different compared to history?
Is it the grand scale of the game with multiple large fronts across many continents?

Anything else that I have missed? What do you think?

Short general answer -

World War II is pretty popular topic, in media as well as in-gaming. It's also global scale - where many people can take their own country and steer them and see how would they fare in this time period.

March of the Eagles was - pretty niche, 'mini-game' sorta EU 3.5 (prelude to EU IV, same as Sengoku being CK 1.5, or prelude to CK II). Unfortunately game being abandoned pretty early on, didn't help the game. It was also pretty limiting, both in scale, and what you could do in-game.

Like if you wanted to play as anyone but the 'major' and you would find yourself strapped for unit types or leaders - that also did limit it's replayability. This lead to the failure of the MoTE and IMO that didn't had to go this way.

If MoTE would be released today, and there was more support for it, it could be more popular. As it is right now, you can install it, from time to time, and enjoy it for couple hours, and then let it go for another couple years.

 

[Tom D.]

Like if you wanted to play as anyone but the 'major' and you would find yourself strapped for unit types or leaders - that also did limit it's replayability. This lead to the failure of the MoTE and IMO that didn't had to go this way.

I don't know MotE so I can't judge on that but personally I do love the re-playability of HOI4 and other Paradox games. Also the ability to do whatever you want, within the context of WW2, is something I really like (and why I support the extended German focus tree added in WtT to include bringing back Monarchy to Germany).

 

[Wasted Shampoo]

Wonder to yourself: why is call of duty super popular and red orchestra is not?

 

[Oliver Twopence]

Wonder to yourself: why is call of duty is super popular and red orchestra is not?

This is starting to get silly.

MotE is in no way to HoI, what Red Orchestra is to Call of Duty.

 

[Zwirbaum]

Wonder to yourself: why is call of duty is super popular and red orchestra is not?

Because Call of Duty is much older franchise, that build upon itself and growed (now declines) in popularity upon subsequent yearly releases.

It also has strong cinematic single-player aspect, and it made CoD popular in the first place (recreating scenes from popular movies, like Stalingrad missions, looking almost identical to the Enemy at the Gates). It also had backing of AAA publisher, who could afford to spend 'loadsa' money on marketing.

It also built it's reputation on first robust and enjoyable experience, who anyone could pick up (especially when there was no big competetion in WW2 multiplayer market) - and it was very popular in internet cafe - similiar like it was with Counter Strike.

Later CoD 4 introduced/popularized whole 'customize, progression system, unlocks etc' and it was huge success.

Red Orchestra is game more focused towards mil 'simish' approach of FPS (which aren't that popular to begin with), have no Single Player (playing with bots isn't proper SP experience here), it's available only on PC, have veeeeeery steeep learning curve and there was basically no noticeable marketing towards it. Also, it's quite buggy to this day

 

[Wasted Shampoo]

Because Call of Duty is much older franchise, that build upon itself and growed (now declines) in popularity upon subsequent yearly releases.

It also has strong cinematic single-player aspect, and it made CoD popular in the first place (recreating scenes from popular movies, like Stalingrad missions, looking almost identical to the Enemy at the Gates). It also had backing of AAA publisher, who could afford to spend 'loadsa' money on marketing.

It also built it's reputation on first robust and enjoyable experience, who anyone could pick up (especially when there was no big competetion in WW2 multiplayer market) - and it was very popular in internet cafe - similiar like it was with Counter Strike.

Later CoD 4 introduced/popularized whole 'customize, progression system, unlocks etc' and it was huge success.

Red Orchestra is game more focused towards mil 'simish' approach of FPS (which aren't that popular to begin with), have no Single Player (playing with bots isn't proper SP experience here), it's available only on PC, have veeeeeery steeep learning curve and there was basically no noticeable marketing towards it. Also, it's quite buggy to this day

All good points, you forgot one though. Red orchestra is played by hardcore gamers and it has been for 6 years the most realistic ww2 FPS on the market (waiting for post scriptum to claim the throne).
Call of duty is for kids and YouTubers and for who has no interest in ww2. But I’m sure you knew it already and must have slipped out when you posted.

Do you see where I want to get with this example?

 

[grandad1982]

MotE had a difficult birth as far as I recall. It feels like in game that there are meant to be more differences between the units and there isn't or if there is it isn't apparent.

One feature of MotE I really liked and would love to see reused is the supply system. Maybe it would fit well in vic3.....

 

[Wasted Shampoo]

A really good WW2 series is Gary Grisby's War in the East and War in the West. Not fancy graphics but extremely well done and realistic.

In terms of the Hoi series, Darkest Hour was the high water mark. Hoi4 seems more akin to EUIV than prior Hoi games.

GG war in the east is great, simply great. Darkest hour still outclasses HOI4, it’s much more immersive and moreover historical.

You know what, I recently realised how much time I wasted on EU4 chasing some history. After all the DLC I bought, man I feel so stupid.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Do you see where I want to get with this example?

I haven’t played either game so what I get from your post is they made call of duty easy to play but designed Red orchestra like a game from user interface hell.

So you are saying it’s UI design.

 

[hkrommel]

HOI is designed around WW2. Its mechanics and systems are designed to give a WW2 experience.

MoTE was not designed around the Napoleonic Wars. It had a few systems EU3 didn't but other than that it felt like a mod for EU3. It was frustrating to play and didn't really give the player the impression that they were in the Napoleonic Wars.

Basically HOI is deep and completely designed around WW2. MoTE is shallow and more an EU3 addon. There's tons to do in HOI and not much to do in MoTE. HOI games feel "full" whereas MoTE games end extremely quickly comparatively.