Company of Heroes

[/b]Having had my beady eye on this game since its conception, I'm pleased to say judging by what I've seen playing the demo it exceeds expectations, its what RTS always should have been and am surprised these boards aren't full of praise and excitement.

Since Combat Mission there has been nothing to match the sheer realism and gameplay and in depth tactical and strategic management. Well CoH has that in spades and with the most spectacular graphic artwork and eye for detail that is to be seen in a game, not forgetting the audio, with cinematic surround sound its like war has broken out for real.

As I've just shelled out on a new rig which adequately does it justice, the purchase of the game will have to wait a bit to let the finances recover. As always Gamershell Download service was fantastic, great download speed, no wait, no file corruption, no disconnect and great choice of titles.

Thanks for the great service fellahs

PS I was BombsAway16 but had to re-register as the system didn't recognise my details B)

hearing it's the cs of rts makes me not wanna play it

Well, I really like the game. I am not so hyped about the mp and sure as hell don't consider it the Counterstrike of rts. They should learn to balance some more before they can achive that status.

Anyway, graphics,sound and some parts of the gameplay are awesome. All in all a good game even if you don't really like the rts scene.

its indeed a fine piece 'o sleeper hit. I quote my monthly gaming magazine: 'The Multiplayer for this game is the CounterStrike of RTS. Amazing.'

Well, having and holding supplypoints (or bases in any other rts) is kinda the backbone of the genre. I doubt they are gonna change that soon although it does sound interesting. I know there's a mod for Blitzkrieg 2 that does that, if you have the game then look for it here.

Anyway, any game holding your interest for 2.5 hours is great, takes me back to my pre-starforce problems day in which I used to be playing (EDIT: BK2) that game online 24/7. Doubt I'll be doing that with COH but the game is more good enough to hold my attention for 2.5 hours too.

Normally I despise all RTS's and I avoid trying them, but when I saw COH it seemed a little different so I gave it a try. I played the demo and fell in love, so I took a risk and bought the game. The singleplayer is amazing, full of scripted events and wonderful visual effects that immerse you in world war 2. The game really never gets boring and the missions are fun even if you are losing. As for the multiplayer, it is also extremely fun even though I have not won a battle yet. I have been in a game for 2.5 hrs online battling it out in a 6 person game slowly losing more and more troops. Any game that can still maintain intensity after 2 hours of back and forth fighting is a good book in my mind. The only thing I wish they would change is resource capturing online. The focus of online revolves around capturing resource points and holding them, then attacking the enemy. I wish they had an option to have fixed resources and let players just go at it without focusing on resources. I do think it would change the gameplay if that happened, and possibly for the worse, but it would be a nice feature.

I'm not an RTS fan either, but I was drawn to buying COH too. And I dont regret it. I think it's the attention to detail and the tense atmosphere it manages to create which makes it entertaining.

Each level has an epic theme/objective to it, and a different slant on the strategy for that mission. So it's not just build build build build aattaaaack! (like a lot of rts's are) You can have fun with the strengths of different units, and have to plan which of them would be best for the job. Some units are flexible too, like engineers who can build and fix stuff, can also man anti-tank cannons etc if they happen to be around and you're in a moment of weakness.

The sound is something else! A decent setup can make you feel as if you're there.

I quite like the territory capturing theme that runs through the game. Each territory captured gives you a boost in different types of resources, which make building stuff easier as you go along. One mission can last hours, so when you capture each area, it really gives you a sense of achievement and progression, and so you want to keep playing towards the end goal eg destroying a german V3 launch pad which may seem impossible from the start.

One other thing I really liked in one mission was when it even had the balls to get the player to painstakingly build a stronghold guarding 3 bridges, have you fight it out for an hour and then script in an enemy artillery bombardment which slowly makes you realise you're fighting a losing battle, and therefore have to plan to retreat to an earlier location. It's not just Allies beat Germans, therefore we rule!

It's an intelligent game overall, and I reckon Relic have done a great job here. I'm sure you'll love it Lonestrider.

Originally posted by LoneStrider@Oct 16 2006, 08:00 PM
I was replying to the fact that company of heroes, while praised in the media, was a bit below the radar because of Faces of War, Silent Heroes, Call Of Duty 3 and the like. I haven't noticed its greatness only when the demo was released. in my eyes, so not that it means it is, its a sleeper hit.

also, on the cs part, its supposed to be the cs of rtses in terms of popularity, not cs's gamestyle. after all, everyone knows CS sucks.

Actually, Faces of War and Silent Heroes were well below the exposure level of Company of Heroes.

I can tell you as Community Manager for a WWII RTS that Company of Heroes was well, well exposed. The buzz there was far, far greater than Faces of War. As for Silent Heroes, it was practically unknown.

Now as for CoD 3, I have no idea. But I haven't seen to many people talking about it.

Also, I am not talking about just the media (which was a gigantic effort). I'm talking about buzz and forum activity. It was huge. Really huge...

For 2006, I can hardly think of another game that truly surpassed CoH in terms of buzz (and non-sleeperness). Some did surpass it but hardly by a significant margin.

Originally posted by LoneStrider@Oct 14 2006, 09:03 PM
its indeed a fine piece 'o sleeper hit. I quote my monthly gaming magazine: 'The Multiplayer for this game is the CounterStrike of RTS. Amazing.'

Sleeper hit?

Only if it was you that was sleeping (under a rock).

This game has been everywhere. The marketing fellas did a very thorough job with this one.

And just in case you are curious, I think it is a good game.

But I do disagree with the term "sleeper". ;)

I was replying to the fact that company of heroes, while praised in the media, was a bit below the radar because of Faces of War, Silent Heroes, Call Of Duty 3 and the like. I haven't noticed its greatness only when the demo was released. in my eyes, so not that it means it is, its a sleeper hit.

also, on the cs part, its supposed to be the cs of rtses in terms of popularity, not cs's gamestyle. after all, everyone knows CS sucks.