For me, 2013 was the year of the Two Colossal Disappointments: Rome II and Company of Heroes 2. Rome II was a buggy unplayable mess at release. But the true "Et tu, Brute?" betrayal was not Rome II, it was CoH2. Company of Heroes was (and remains) one of my favorite games of all time. So, my expectations for CoH2 were, shall we say, high. In the couple of weeks after it released, as it gradually sunk in just how far CoH2 fell short of the mark, I put it aside. Never in the field of RTS conflict was so little delivered to so many by so few.
Histrionics aside... I fired up Rome II a few weeks ago and found that it no longer crashed on me every 5 minutes. What's more, it was actually a really fun game. Glad I bought it after all!
Which got me to thinking: was it possible that CoH2, too, had been redeemed?
Is anyone playing this? The complete lack of mods is a giant red flag. But the thing has been patched a bunch of times since it released last summer. So maybe it's not quite as terrible as I remember it? May I live in hope?
I originally bought it during first access for $60....then refunded it before release because it played too fast and furious for me.....saw it on sale for less than $10, picked it up again. Played around for a bit, still too fast for me, but I think in the end I can get my few dollars out of it....
You were a smart man, Grim. In what was probably the biggest facepalm decision in my gaming life, I shelled out $100 for the super-duper-fanboy-collectors edition of CoH2 when it came out. In retrospect, that was not a wise decision. ::)
Imma take the relative lack of response to this thread as an indication that, no, not many Grogs are playing CoH2. 'Course, it could just be that y'all don't like me very much...I'll try not to take it personally.... :'(
I played some last night, for the first time in months. The game is certainly more stable now, at least for me. No annoying "Bugsplat!" CTDs, so that's in itself a big improvement.
Still, the game is a twitch-fest. The AI even on 'standard' is pretty challenging for me, and kept me on my heels. But mostly it was a product of the AI rush-Rush-RUSHING units. To say that the AI values capping points more than the lives of its virtual soldiers is an understatement. 90% casualties are OK as long as that point was taken... for 2 minutes. Not even the NKVD was this ruthless with its own troops. *sigh*
Gameplay involves way too much fending off zergs of infantry spam. Ultimately that's just not enjoyable. At all.
SEGA clearly made a decision to disallow mods, which is maybe the biggest tragedy of all. Unclear if that's a permanent decision (...Sega's Rome II is open to modding, after all), but I have the sense that only mods can save COH2. And the first mod that needs to be developed: a SLOWER UNITS mod...
I liked the original COH and tried the open beta for COH2 and it was mildly entertaining, but I just knew there was no way I was paying full price for this game. This is a 5 dollar bargin bin bear and pretzels game for me.
I here you about jumping into games early because of nostalgia or being a fan of the franchise. I jumped into the new il2 early access for almost a hundred bucks and then the Ukraine / Crimea happened. I keep getting this sense of dread that a cancellation for political reasons is coming and that will be money down the drain. I think what's keeping it going is the fact that the devs all live in Moscow but the producers are 777(US based).
They're modding it to western front
The original COH was as good as any RTS game.
Not playing 2 from the bad karma of the high pizzaz ads. It seemed like flash with no gold. Waiting on reviews.
The Western Front thing is going to be a stand-alone addition -- but MP only. Pass.
The way Sega has prevented community content for COH2 (beyond maps) is really pretty appalling -- all so they can peddle their endless micro-DLCs. Why allow modders to provide free new skins for units etc. when Sega can charge customers for the same.
CoH2 has a 'pay to play' feel that I just never would have anticipated, given the greatness that was the original game and the expansive mod content that was available for it. It really feels like they took a great franchise and decided they would turn it into a cynical vehicle to soak fans for all they are worth. Extremely disappointing.
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 28, 2014, 09:24:22 PM
The Western Front thing is going to be a stand-alone addition -- but MP only. Pass.
The way Sega has prevented community content for COH2 (beyond maps) is really pretty appalling -- all so they can peddle their endless micro-DLCs. Why allow modders to provide free new skins for units etc. when Sega can charge customers for the same.
CoH2 has a 'pay to play' feel that I just never would have anticipated, given the greatness that was the original game and the expansive mod content that was available for it. It really feels like they took a great franchise and decided they would turn it into a cynical vehicle to soak fans for all they are worth. Extremely disappointing.
I think you're being a little extreme here. It may not be our cup of tea, but there is no denying that it's still a very popular franchise. I don't think it is fair to expect the developer, who expended time, money and effort in making a game, to make it freely available to anybody for modification. They made the game and they have a right to capitalize on its development with DLC through the life of the game. While permitting others to develop free content would make some people happy, it would be a tremendous business mistake as it would reduce DLC sales. It's one thing to not like the game because of the way it plays, but to attack the developer by saying they are trying to "soak fans for all they are worth," as if they should just be giving out free shit, is quite unreasonable in my opinion.
What I don't understand, then, is why the double standard between COH2 and Rome II -- both AAA titles for the same big publisher. Yet there is a ton of high quality mod content for Rome II -- everything from unit skins to unlocking factions to full scale campaign overhauls. For Coh2, new maps are the only thing available.
Now, I assume Sega is calling the marketing shots for both games -- I.e. it's not that CA decided to allow modding but Relic didn't (in fact, from Relics own COH2 forum, there's a strong sense that the dev's are pushing to allow more modding but that the decision is not in their hands). The contrast between the way these two games are being handled is pretty striking -- for Rome, lots of free mods, and the DLC has been pretty reasonable (....'blood and gore' seemed like nickel & dime stuff, but Ceasar in Gaul and the new Hannibal campaign are substantial dlcs). For COH2, players are being asked to pay for micro stuff like new camo schemes and leader abilities. I'm not opposed to DLC by any stretch. I just don't like when the line between high quality DLC and trifling pay to play type 'enhancements' starts to get blurred. It just seems very unfortunate to me that COH2 is being driven down that route, whereas Rome II shows it didn't have to be this way.
TW has a long history of mod campaigns. It would be hard to turn it off. The backlash would be huge. CoH had expansions when I got it. I never saw any mods.
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 28, 2014, 11:19:45 PM
What I don't understand, then, is why the double standard between COH2 and Rome II -- both AAA titles for the same big publisher. Yet there is a ton of high quality mod content for Rome II -- everything from unit skins to unlocking factions to full scale campaign overhauls. For Coh2, new maps are the only thing available.
Now, I assume Sega is calling the marketing shots for both games -- I.e. it's not that CA decided to allow modding but Relic didn't (in fact, from Relics own COH2 forum, there's a strong sense that the dev's are pushing to allow more modding but that the decision is not in their hands). The contrast between the way these two games are being handled is pretty striking -- for Rome, lots of free mods, and the DLC has been pretty reasonable (....'blood and gore' seemed like nickel & dime stuff, but Ceasar in Gaul and the new Hannibal campaign are substantial dlcs). For COH2, players are being asked to pay for micro stuff like new camo schemes and leader abilities. I'm not opposed to DLC by any stretch. I just don't like when the line between high quality DLC and trifling pay to play type 'enhancements' starts to get blurred. It just seems very unfortunate to me that COH2 is being driven down that route, whereas Rome II shows it didn't have to be this way.
It's a good point you raise, assuming the same studio is calling the shots for both games. Consistency in approach would be nice, but it's not required in my opinion.
I played CoH 2 for about a week and the game play was simply too frenetic for me. I wanted to enjoy it because I love learning about WWII's Eastern Front but the speed was just too much of a turn off.
Quote from: Gusington on March 29, 2014, 06:13:33 PM
the speed was just too much of a turn off.
This, and the troll-like AI that knows every gap in your defense.
Such a shame, because it's a beautiful looking game. I only wish Combat Mission looked this nice.
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 28, 2014, 11:19:45 PM
What I don't understand, then, is why the double standard between COH2 and Rome II -- both AAA titles for the same big publisher. Yet there is a ton of high quality mod content for Rome II -- everything from unit skins to unlocking factions to full scale campaign overhauls. For Coh2, new maps are the only thing available.
Now, I assume Sega is calling the marketing shots for both games -- I.e. it's not that CA decided to allow modding but Relic didn't (in fact, from Relics own COH2 forum, there's a strong sense that the dev's are pushing to allow more modding but that the decision is not in their hands). The contrast between the way these two games are being handled is pretty striking -- for Rome, lots of free mods, and the DLC has been pretty reasonable (....'blood and gore' seemed like nickel & dime stuff, but Ceasar in Gaul and the new Hannibal campaign are substantial dlcs). For COH2, players are being asked to pay for micro stuff like new camo schemes and leader abilities. I'm not opposed to DLC by any stretch. I just don't like when the line between high quality DLC and trifling pay to play type 'enhancements' starts to get blurred. It just seems very unfortunate to me that COH2 is being driven down that route, whereas Rome II shows it didn't have to be this way.
Keep in mind that Relic and CoH 2 were one of the properties scooped up from the ashes of THQ about 80% of the way through development. I suspect maybe the game was being set up for the current model before SEGA made the buy, and they could either release it along the same lines or prepare to sink millions into re-developing the entire mess.
Quote from: Gusington on March 29, 2014, 06:13:33 PM
I played CoH 2 for about a week and the game play was simply too frenetic for me. I wanted to enjoy it because I love learning about WWII's Eastern Front but the speed was just too much of a turn off.
Yep, way too fast for my old reflexes:) Other thing that was kind of a turn off was seeing the soldiers run up to each other and tanks and fight and point blank range. I am sure some might enjoy, just not my fancy, although I still fire it up now and then since it can look pretty.
I am hoping the new Wargame: Red Dragon game will learn from CoH2 and offer a speed adjustment at some point.
Quote from: Arctic Blast on March 30, 2014, 12:52:56 AM
Keep in mind that Relic and CoH 2 were one of the properties scooped up from the ashes of THQ about 80% of the way through development. I suspect maybe the game was being set up for the current model before SEGA made the buy, and they could either release it along the same lines or prepare to sink millions into re-developing the entire mess.
Good point.
I guess the thing that has taken me by surprise (and not in a good way) has been how aggressively COH2 pushes its DLC on the player. I appreciate what Jarhead says about how devs are not obliged to allow mod content, and that it does cut into DLC revenue. That's all fair and good -- the devs deserve to make money on a product they put enormous time and effort into. Still, there was a great tradition of modding for the original COH, and it's disappointing to see the franchise put such a premium on DLC at the expense of modding.
I've played COH2 a fair bit this weekend, and I have to say, I've enjoyed it more than I expected. It seems to be very stable now (not a single crash in several hours of play; in the past, I seldom got through any quick battle session without a CTD). And I'll give Relic credit for this: the AI is actually challenging. It builds a decent variety of units (there is inevitable infantry spam, but it also churns out mortars, AT guns, MGs, and armor). I'm able to handle the AI on "Easy" but on "Standard," I stand a good chance of losing.
The thing that makes it least enjoyable is just how relentless it is. The AI is constantly probing your lines and launching assaults. That's good, of course, because it's challenging. But there's almost no break in the action, and it gets wearying.
It's harder than the original COH, I think no question. But the original is still a much, much better game.
CoH 2 needs a Blitzkrieg Mod.
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on March 30, 2014, 02:11:46 PM
CoH 2 needs a Blitzkrieg Mod.
Very much this. Original COH + Blitzkrieg (or Normandy 44) mod >> COH2