Company of Heroes Official Opinions

What do you think about company of heroes? 1-10 rating system. Is this game replayable or is it only a one time fun activity? How about the multiplayer? Are there Co-op campaigns? Please elaborate as much as possible.

 

Hands down one of the best rts I've played in many years. I know supreme commander gets lot of attention, but it does not compare to company of heroes. Rightfully so it is being ranked in the top games of all time pc history. This game I was playing non-stop and not getting bored. The variation in strategies and tactics you can use virtually make every mutliplayer game unique. The single player is varied enough and cut scenes are top notch saving private ryan/band of brothers style. Overall its in my top 10 if not top 5 fave games of all time.

 

SC has too much micromanagement, too much strategy, not enough fun. CoH has a good balance of both. The enemy is annoying as a mosquito and sometimes tough as a diamond, but its fun to watch the action. The graphics and physics are great and the cover indicator is something intuative.

I probably won't get bored of this game because I love to see the artillery barage rip tanks, infantry and the environment apart. Whoa mama!

 

Not to mention the Company of Heroes opposing fronts is coming in a few months!

 

Not only is CoH awesome in all respects, including looking damn good, it has a large map and mod creation community, and an expansion coming out in November adding two campaigns and two new armies. An easy 10 on my scale.


You might also want to check out Dawn of War if you haven't already.

 

I shall second the Dawn of War recommendation. I had never even heard of Warhammer 40,000 before I played it and I still loved it.

Relic is definitely the king of RTS developers right now.

 

I love Company of Heroes but I think for long term Dawn of War is much more fun. Company is much more tactical and can actually lead to tearing out of hair.

 

Company of Heroes is one of the best RTS I have ever played. I like how they did the cutscenes and all the violence, I love violence; and hate Jack Thompson

CoH would get a 10. I haven't tried Dawn of War yet, might check it out

 

I agree with your hair tearing comment, but that's one of the things that make's this game a 10. Someone always manages not to get the word and screw up. And you get that here when the troops don't do exactly what you wanted them to do.

Also, you need to coordinate armor, infantry and indirect fire weapons to be successful. All in all realistic looking, sounding and acting. Sometimes I get so caught up in watching what's happening that I forget all the other things I'm supposed to be doing.

 

me three. reason i bought coh is because of dawn of war. i have been playing rts since c&c first appear on ms-dos, and dawn of war is the best in terms of fun factor.

 

Definitely sounds like I need to try it out.

 

i would give it a 9.5. the only let down in my opinion is the fact that you can only have 2 teams. other than that its awesome. the single player campaign is a bit short. but i mainly play multi player witth mates.

 

CoH is a great RTS. i play it for the physics and visuals. im not a big expert on RTS's but i would say it is one of the top ones out right now. i played SC and it isnt a traditional RTS imo. i also just started playing DOW the dark crusade. that game is very fun as well. sure doesnt look as good as COH but its still very fun. i give COH a 9

 

hmm, 8 or 9. It's a very good RTS, with two drawbacks.
1: I am sick and tired of those endless WW2 games. What happened to coming up with new stories?
2: There are only two sides, and they're too similar (compared to DoW). This is mainly an issue in multiplayer (where DoW beats CoH hands down).

 

The best part of CoH imo is the micromanagement. Squad facings, rear armor hits, surpressed infantry give a whole new set of factors to deal with in RTSs. After AOE 3, I thought RTS were a dying breed in that you can only do the "collect resources and build units" genre only so many different ways.

Adding resources in as a territorial factor made the game truely feel like you are defending a "war front" rather than a base.

 

I second Jalf. I'm very tired of WW2 games. I was very happy when I found out that the new Call of Duty ain't WW2 themed. But as an RTS game in general, COH has one of the best single player campaigns I've ever played. The mix and match factors with units makes it icing on the cake. Graphics and physics are great too. But I'm guessing the new RTS, World in Conflict, will eventually surpass it. Multiplayer sucks though, as Jalf mentioned, the sides are very, very similar. For multiplayer, I'd personally go with CnC Generals, CnC Tiberium Wars and Warcraft III. I'd rate CoH an 8/10.

 

i find that there are plenty of differences between German and yank units. look at the tanks and the infantry. (which are the most used units) they are very different.

 

Anybody remember "Patton Strikes Back"? One of the first RTS games (1st WW2 one, I think) that had a nice, more realistic system than the "gather resources" (unrealistic) crap. Supply interdiction, etc. I loved that game. War at that level is just a series of objectives, whether offensive or defensive, and keeping your supply and communications lines secure. I don't know what's so difficult about modeling that these days.