World in Conflict or Company of Heros

Yet another game comparison thread, after starting the bio shock vs wic thread i realized I have always been addicted to RTS games. Ive heard some good things about company of heroes and at the same time every critic raves about WIC.

Your two cents guys? Which one has greater replay value for those of you who played both? Any which games more addicting and innovaive in playing style

 

I'd say company of heroes if you are mainly into the singleplayer portions. If not WiC is your best bet since it has some of the best multiplayer action I've seen on a strategy game. But WiC system reqs are rather steep, so expect to play it at low res with low-med settings on a 8600 M(Mine wasn't overclocked though).

Also WiC singleplayer part is only the campaign(which was awesome by the
way) and you cant have skirmishes with bots or extra missions unless you make a server and add bots instead of players.

As for company of heroes, it is also a great game and the system reqs are acceptable. But unlike in WiC, you have the ability to build stuff (which can get annoying sometimes) and you are limited to land based forces. I also like its campaigns as well. As for the CoH Multiplayer, I've never tried it except on LAN a few times.

Both are great strategy games that were revolutionary when they were released and both have a good-sized fanbase. So if you can, try and get both.

 

You can't go wrong with either. Both are amongst the best RTS' ever.

 

i havent played COH but the multiplayer of WiC was really good and i very much enjoyed it, i loved how you were in control of just one aspect of the army and not the whole thing.

also i love the NUKE

 

I've played both CoH and WiC offline and online but for me I like CoH a lot more than WiC. (CoH seems to have a lot more strategic depth than WiC especially in multiplayer imo.) WiC is probably more popular because of all the nice cool advertisements/trailers it had. Not too much people know about CoH when compared to WiC. I find the gameplay in WiC a bit too simple (you only get to control a few units in the whole game) and it's also too much of a team-based game imo... ie. if you don't have friends who would team up with you then there's not much point in playing it alone since you'll pretty much get owned everytime by those people who communicate and play as a team.

By the way you can always download the demos and see for yourself.

EDIT: btw check out these 2 pages for the average reviews' scores for both games! You can also click on all those individual review links and read them if you want.

WiC --> http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/932462.asp?q=world in conflict

CoH --> http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/927618.asp?q=company of heroes

 

WiC is awesome because of all the tactical aid and reinforcements concept! Haven't tried CoH myself as yet... will be doing so today.

 

World in conflict, imo. ive got both and i prefer wic.

both have great original gameplay and great story. but CoH is pretty steep in the campaign. and WiC steep on requirements. check out the reviews on d net

 

WIC imo, also if you dont like building much ^^

 

I would say they are both very good RTS games. They differ quite a lot in their approach to tactical combat, so it's pretty much personal preference which of them you like better. I haven't tried WiC myself. I have only watched when someone plays it and it looked quite intresting, but also very different from CoH, which I have played quite a lot. Just try the demos as maksin01 already suggested.

 

Forget everything you've read up until now.

Do yourself a favor and get Company of Heroes. Its the best game I've played on PC, and by far the best RTS out there.

The Singleplayer Campaign is long, grueling, and as difficult as you want it to be. Each unit is so diverse and has there own abilities in the context of WW2. The cover system, the teching to powerful units and abilities, lol, I really don't want you to buy WIC before you play COH!

The Multiplayer is something else, its so competitive, and addictive, the matches aren't too long, and they aren't short either. The ranking system is awesome (from 1v1 to 4v4, as well as arranged team automatches). Right now there are 4 factions each with 3 distinct doctrines that change the gameplay everytime. LISTEN: I have never, played a Coh game (multiplayer), thats played out the same way. Each player has there own style, and everyone thinks they are so much smarter than the other person. Its like chess, but extremely fun. If you think chess is fun, then you'll have some sort of brain/egotistical orgasm after winning some matches in Company of Heroes.

World In Conflict, I've played it, and it was generic, I found it boring, I won't play it again. I just felt like I've played it before. There is nothing really original about it, its just stale. As for people that say it has no resource building and such, thats not too big of a deal, its not revolutionary, because the game is like previous RTS's with no Resources, just give commands I guess.... The Graphics are good however, and the cinematics also, the gameplay is just plain forgettable.

Company of Heroes is timeless, don't play WIC if you haven't played Coh.

Try the demo's if you'd like (I did also, a long while back), but I guarantee you will enjoy COH more.

 

I enjoyed both immensely. Company of Heroes is more traditional RTS, but with capture points like in Warhammer. World in Conflict is more of an action RTS with the focus on keeping units alive, and also has capture points, but I think they are much harder to capture and hold.

Company of Heroes wins by an edge in my book, but both are very entertaining and original in their own way.