Advertisement
Dawn of War coming to 360? News
PC
Xbox 360
PlayStation 3
Wii
News
by
Ellie Gibson
Speaking to our sister site, GamesIndustry.biz, Relic Entertainment boss Ron Moravek has revealed that forthcoming PC RTS Company of Heroes could make it onto next-gen consoles - along with previous hit Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War.
When asked about the likelihood of a console version of COH, Moravek replied: "We're keeping a close eye on it. We've done a lot of work to see how we would do it, and we same to the same conclusion as I think the Lord of the Rings guys did; we're watching Lord of the Rings going to 360 very closely.
"If it's successful, I think there's a good chance we could bring Company of Heroes and even Dawn of War over."
But while Relic is keen to support both the Xbox 360 and PS3, the studio has no plans to develop any titles for the Wii at present.
"We make more mature-rated games, and more high-end graphical games, and the Wii is going in a little bit of a different direction; they're not going to play the same game as the 360 and the PS3," Moravek explained.
"You never know - if we came up with something cool we could do it, but right now our plan is not to... You can't do the same types of games on the Wii because the power is a lot different. It's a different type of technology."
However, Moravek is confident that the Wii will sell well despite the fact it's less powerful than rival consoles: "I think it was really smart for Nintendo to break out on their own and do their own thing. The platform's going to be really successful."
You can read the full interview over on GamesIndustry.biz. Look out for a full preview of Company of Heroes soon.
Advertisement
Are you excited about Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War - Dark Crusade on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Thanks!
Related Games
Warhammer 40,000: Fire Warrior
Warhammer 40,000: Fire Warrior
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Company of Heroes
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War - Winter Assault
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War - Dark Crusade
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
0
"We make more mature-rated games, and more high-end graphical games, and the Wii is going in a little bit of a different direction; they're not going to play the same game as the 360 and the PS3," Moravek explained.
"You never know - if we came up with something cool we could do it, but right now our plan is not to... You can't do the same types of games on the Wii because the power is a lot different. It's a different type of technology." Another day, another dismissal of the Wii from a 3rd part developer. And his snivelling platitudes to Nintendo ring hollow when his studio can't even be bothered to put their money where their mouth is, and develop for the Wii. |
|
absolutezero
28/07/06 @ 17:22
0
Its more like they can't create straight PC conversions for the Wii, which pretty much means that the developer simply just can't be bothered with the Wii.
I know its alot more complicated than that, with money etc etc. |
|
0
@ Furby
Of course he nailed it. There will be four major gaming platforms this generation. PC, Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and Wii. Three of them are graphic and physics powerhouses. Now, if 3/4 machines are powerful, who do you think most games will be made for? The Wii will be condemned to odd-one-out status, because it lags so far behind the others. Do you think that developers are going to favour the Wii for exclusive games? Not when the PlayStation brand is so strong, and Xbox 360 already has a healthy lead over the Wii. Therefore, Nintendo's machine will be reliant on a stream of 1st and 2nd party games, as well as hoping that some 3rd parties will bother their arse to scale down Xbox 360 and PS3 games to fit the technical constraints of the Wii. In analogical terms, Nintendo has cut off its nose just to spite its face, in shying away so melodramatically from processing power.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 28/07/06 @ 19:10
|
|
0
I'm not in the least bit interested in this game, but the more diversity of genres, the better. Can't say pleased I am with where the 360 looks to be going over the next 12 months. There's great epic games, great Arcade games, strong Live implementation, loads of exclusives, high 3rd party support, plenty of RPG's, choice of genres, and so on. Games like this can only add to the fun.
Although I definitely won't be buying it! |
|
mike_mgoblue
28/07/06 @ 19:10
0
This makes sense because the Xbox 360 is the most popular and most powerful videogame system there is. The Playstation 3 is of similar power, although it isn't nearly as popular because of the expensive price. The Wii is less expensive, but it also lacks High-Definition graphics. Heck the Wii can't even use true Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, which the 5-year old original Xbox used!!! I think Relic is doing the right thing and making the correct decisions. Xbox 360 should be the primary platform, PC should be second, Playstation 3 should be third, and Wii should be last for them.
|
|
bigbadbeasty
28/07/06 @ 19:29
0
To be honest, it has nothing to do with graphical power. The Wii would be able handle DoW easily. I think it is a pity that these companies do not have the balls to try something new. I think an RTS with Wii remote would be a great way to play.
|
|
0
"I think it is a pity that these companies do not have the balls to try something new. I think an RTS with Wii remote would be a great way to play".
Oh. My. God. I swear, I am sick and tired of this now. Sick and tired. Why should Relic be under any obligation to try anything new? Somebody correct me here, but is the current RTS formula actually broken yet? Especially when you consider that it has hardly been a mainstay genre on consoles traditionally, so for many console gamers, such games are still pretty 'new' and 'innovative'. Myself included. So why must they be different for different's sake? Because Nintendo said so?? And why would the game be any better were it using a Wiimote? Because you could simply 'flick' your units where you wanted them to go, as opposed to just shifting the control stick and then pressing A when the cursor is over the desired spot? Wowee. Somebody get a freestyle controller on the Xbox 360 STAT! Us control pad gamers are getting a raw deal!! It's nonsense posts like that which really boil my piss.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 29/07/06 @ 00:18
|
|
bigbadbeasty
28/07/06 @ 23:17
0
Its because gaming has become too mainstream... but thats whole different subject
|
|
bigbadbeasty
28/07/06 @ 23:23
0
@albundy
Nonsense because you say so, does not make it that. I never said it would be better to play an RTS with Wii controller, I said I would be probably be great, as in FUN! I don't give two hoots what you think is right or wrong, but i do hope your piss is boiling right now..... |
|
0
"It may' work well with a wii controller. However 3rd party Dev's normally have to take the path of least resistance. Which means they rarely take a gamble on a something that may not work. Too many video game companies go to the wall because they tried and failed".
+1 If Nintendoites are expecting the Wii to be some wholesale force for good, a harbinger of innovative and, like, totally new games MAN, then they'd best be rechecking their expectations. Because they're in for some serious dissappointment. Of course, Nintendo's first party studios will do wonderful things with the Wiimote. And their slew of second parties will be party to all the tricks of the trade. But if they're looking for across-the-board innovation from 3rd parties, I reckon they'd best set their face for stunned. Stunned at how generic many of Wii's 3rd party games will actually be. |
|
bigbadbeasty
28/07/06 @ 23:27
0
We heard all this before the DS was launched, but look how that turned out. I was sure the PSP would win.
|
|
0
"I never said it would be better to play an RTS with Wii controller, I said I would be probably be great, as in FUN!"
How in honest-to-God's-fucking-name would a Wiimote version be any more or less fun than simply using a standard control pad? It would still be the same game, wouldn't it? Only with a different user input device. Honestly. Do Nintendophiles honestly think that the Wiimote is an actual magic wand? Because I'm beginning to wonder..... |
|
0
"We heard all this before the DS was launched, but look how that turned out. I was sure the PSP would win".
Mate, DS is beating the PSP for three clear reasons. 1. PSP is too expensive for a mere handheld console. 2. The PSP is trying to squeeze PS2 games onto a control system that is two buttons short, and minus a crucial second analogue stick. 3. The PSP's games are not well fitted for short-burst hadheld play. Basically, and possibly like the PS3, Sony totally fucked up the PSP's design and ethos, and have handed the initiative to the DS on a plate. End of story. If the PSP was Ł100, I absolutely guarantee you it would be a totally different story. |
|
Clive Dunn
28/07/06 @ 23:39
0
I'm still a bit dubious about RTS games on consoles, although to be fair I haven't played BFME 2 yet. Although I'm not really holding out much hope.
IMO DoW is still the best RTS out there, not hugely complicated but well balanced and fun - perhaps it has more chance of successfully translating to console than most of the genre. I'll still play it on PC though, mouse and keyboard ftw ! |
|
bigbadbeasty
28/07/06 @ 23:46
0
@ albundy
I do love your Nintendo hate, its very funny. It only means your going to miss out. xxx |
|
GuiltySpark
29/07/06 @ 06:12
0
@bigbadbeasty
albundy hates nintendo because he thinks RTS's won't work on the wii?? Are you a retard? Of course it wouldn't work on the wii and even if it did, like he said, it still wouldn't work aswell as a controller/keyboard and mouse.. So what would be the point? |
|
bigbadbeasty
29/07/06 @ 07:44
0
@ albundy
Again, I did not say it would be better on the Wiimote, I simply said it would be fun. Yes I think being to access troop movements with a flick of a wrist would be interesting and different to how things are currently played. I feel your comments are made because you blindly hate Nintendo, nothing more. @GuiltySpark If you read his posts, it has nothing to do with an RTS not working on a Wii. If the games will not work on a Wii, they will not work on other consoles. If you cannot see that the you could use a Wiimote to play RTS games then is indeed you that is the retard. |
|
0
"If you cannot see that the you could use a Wiimote to play RTS games then is indeed you that is the retard. "
Yeah, all those quickkeys and the very precise on-screen control prolly? :rolleyes: Talking about wishful thinking... if a Wii-rts would mean anything it would be a simplification of the RTS-genre, just the kind of thing we don't need at all and the same story as with RTS-games on other consoles. |
|
0
I think the wii remote would be no better or worse than a standard joypad. I just think RTS on a console is fundamentally a broken idea.
Then again, I'm still utterly conservative about FPS on a console, heck in 5 years consoles are probably the main platform for RTS, and there is not a damn thing I can do about it. |
|
Emilia'sHorse
29/07/06 @ 14:10
0
albundy is right. Everything he says is true.
Hating Nintendo is not the question because we don't. It is simply that they are entering the next gen with a totally outclassed machine thats one and only saving grace is a silly controller. Nintendo have given up the console war in favour of a kids play toy. |
|
Blood_and_Thunder
29/07/06 @ 15:30
0
It would have been pointless of Nintendo to simply try and match the 360 and PS3 in terms of power, they would have probably automatically failed if they did that. The only way they will suceed in the next gen race is to offer something different, and they are hoping that the Wii will attract people who have either left gaming or have never been into it before. Whether that will be successful or not only time will tell, but I think it is fair to say that someone who has never been into games is more likely to want to have a try of Wii sports than something like Halo 3 or MGS4. The controller will be easier to use for new gamers as well. Have you ever given a non-gamer a go of just about any 3D game? My friends who have tried this just couldn't get their heads around the thing, it was quite funny actually :D
The 360 and PS3 don't offer anything new, only more power. There are still going to be the same type of games out that won't offer anything new, only prettier graphics and more models on screen. They have some great games coming out for them, which is why they will both sell well, but as machines they just have nothing to excite me. Maybe HD, that will look nice, but nothing really apart from that. |
|
0
Oookay..
Firstly, I think the Wii would be great for an RTS with the controler effectively working like a light pen. Quick navigation - just like mice. Secondly, the "RTS loves PC 4EVA!" bridage make me chuckle. BFME2 works great on a console and hopefuly is paving the way for more RTSs on next gen machines. If it is: so what! Get over it! Why shouldn't your console bretheren enjoy RTS? Why are you all so precious? /wonders if it's because it's the last genre (worth playing) that's still got it's console chastity belt on and once it's cherry is well and truly popped, the old "PCs are the best gaming machines" argument will be running on fumes (some would argue it already is ;) P.S. What's wrong the PS3 and 360 offering nothing new but more power? If I'm not mistaken, the entire history and evolution of video-gaming has been built on just that: more power in each generation. Heck, tell PC gamers shelling out Ł300 for a graphics card that more power is a cop-out! Next-gen literally means "more power". If you believe otherwise, you're both kidding yourself and falling victim to Sony/MSs hype machines.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 29/07/06 @ 17:28
|
|
Blood_and_Thunder
29/07/06 @ 16:27
0
"P.S. What's wrong the PS3 and 360 offering nothing new but more power?"
Theres nothing wrong with it, I look forward to playing games using that extra power, I just sometimes feel that its the only focus in games design when more innovation in the design of the actual games would be just as useful. If you take the jump from 8 bit to 16 bit, then 16 bit to 32 bit and so on, the jump from current to next gen doesn't have anywhere near the impact increasing the power did back then. There's just not as much difference between the current and next gen, the power increase doesn't really allow for new types of games to be designed. It's innovation from console and games designers in the next gen that will be of more interest to me, not the next big FPS with better graphics but the same gameplay that I can get on my current machines.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 29/07/06 @ 17:35
|
|
0
Fair comment, but I feel as though gaming has reached the same point that music and films have: we've pretty much exhausted ourselves in terms of variety, but that's cool as long as directors/artists/developers apply tried and tested techniques in creative and well-considered ways (Micheal Mann/Coldplay/Bungie etc.)
Re-inventing the wheel is an overrated concept that 99% of the time results in poorly designed solutions that are done for the sake of it and primarly for the enjoment of the creator, not the end user (Tom Yorke's solo work for example compared to Radiohead's 'The Bends'). And no, I don't bracket the Wii in this group. Only time will tell if it's novelty lasts however. Don't forget though that as 'innovative' as the Wii may be, it will (probably) simply allow us to interface with tried and tested genres in a new way, rather than define any genres of it's own. Let's see, eh?
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 29/07/06 @ 17:41
|
|
Blood_and_Thunder
29/07/06 @ 16:46
0
Thats fair enough, I understand where you are coming from there. To clarify a bit more what I mean when I say innovation in games, I'll use an example:
I would love to see a co-op defensive squad based multiplayer game on a FPS. A mode on any good FPS where you and several other players have to defend a location against increasing numbers of enemies. You could choose different equipment for each player to counter different enemies (one of you with a rocket launcher for example) and fall back to different rally points, that kind of thing. It would be fairly easy to include a mode like that on a FPS (Call of Duty anyone?) but all we seem to get is the same old deathmatch and capture the flag instead. I agree with you when you say re-inventing the wheel is mostly a hollow promise, what we need IMO is more innovation along the lines of the above. Resident Evil 4 was a good example of this, took an established genre, kept the core idea but had enough new stuff to be seen in a totally different light. |
|
0
Agreed! Hopefully better broadband will allow us to experience smoother and more imaginative co-op gameplay. Maybe I'm getting old, but I tire of head-to-head online play.
Hang-on! There was a mode on the original Unreal Tournament called Assault, which allowed you (pretty much) to do such defensive scenarios. I'm still gutted that they left it out of succesive versions of the game. If only a dev would build a game focused around said experience... Based on their expertese with amazing AI, perhaps Bungie could take up the challenge?
Edited 3 times,
most recently on 29/07/06 @ 18:03
|
|
Blood_and_Thunder
29/07/06 @ 17:16
0
UT2004 brought it back, and it was pretty sweet. But as far as I know, no-one has done a defensive mode where you only fight AI. I suck at deathmatch really bad, so this would be far more fun for me than most online modes.
A Halo 3 mode like this would be cool, a 5 man squad of spartans fighting increasingly more powerful waves of AI covenant! Would be awesome! |
|
0
/wonders if it's because it's the last genre (worth playing) that's still got it's console chastity belt on and once it's cherry is well and truly popped, the old "PCs are the best gaming machines" argument will be running on fumes (some would argue it already is ;)
It's because PC gamers are afraid RTS gaming will suffer, isn't that obvious? The inferior controls with a pad in an RTS game will influence the complexity and the difficulty level. So unless these games are developed seperately for PC and consoles, they'll be a compromise. Not a coincidence that BFME2 is the first candidate, a masterpiece in mediocrity. Couldn't care less whether they're on consoles or not if the consoles have mouse/kb support. |
|
0
I get your point but have to disagree. Why? Because I'm playing Halo2 right now and if I'm not mistaken I was listening to the same points when FPS first appeared on consoles. Agreed, BFME2 is mediocre, but it's EA and pretty much all of their stuff is aimed at the middle ground. It would be unfair to judge the capacity of RTS on consoles based on the nature of one publisher.
I wouldn't worry about RTS 'suffering' on PCs as some games will always be develoepd exclusively (or at least first) for PCs. FPS is a truly cross platform (as in PC/console) genre and has been for a few years now: years that have seen some truly amazing examples of the genre appear on both platforms. |
|
GuiltySpark
30/07/06 @ 16:42
0
"If the games will not work on a Wii, they will not work on other consoles."
Ok then..wii cant do oblivion, does that mean no other console can do it? (not sure if I just took that quote out of context, but whatever) The whole point of the wii is the different control system, and therefore different games. The wii would need a totally different type of RTS to work properly, because of the difference of the controls. Porting from a mouse and keyboard to a controller is managable in most cases, but porting from m/k to a lightgun? How will that even work? |
|
bigbadbeasty
30/07/06 @ 18:00
0
"Ok then..wii cant do oblivion, does that mean no other console can do it? (not sure if I just took that quote out of context, but whatever)"
You took it out of context, I was referring to the RTS genre directly. |
|
manic_mouse
30/07/06 @ 18:50
0
Al is right about the Wii being left out of many ports because of it's lack of horse-power. Devs have the Xbox 360 and PS3 to work to as their standards, and the Wii is outclassed significantly by both. So games designed to make any use of the extra power (like Oblivion) will simply never see the light of day on the Wii. Basically games will have to be made specifically for the Wii from the ground up, ports will be rare.
As for Dawn of War (and other RTSs on the Wii), how well do you think they will control in SD? When you have lots of units, lots of icons and lots of information on screen, but very little screen real-estate to display them in? |
|
0
Ports may not be as rare as you think. Games will be made for the PS2 'standard' for a long time to come and then 'polished' for other platfroms. The Wii may well get more than you think. At the end of the day, fancy input or not, it's still all about up, down, left, right and pushing buttons.
Sad that the amazing success of the PS2 may well hold back widespread next-gen development for a long time to come. Good point about RTS in SD though. I do feel that Nintendo are being short-sighted with regards to HD. OK, Sony and MS are perhaps going a bit to far the other way, but giving the Wii 720p would have been a good compromise. As more an more people get HDTVs over the next-gen life cycle, the Wii is going to look increasingly dated. Shame.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 30/07/06 @ 21:36
|
|
bigbadbeasty
30/07/06 @ 20:49
0
"Sad that the amazing success of the PS2 may well hold back widespread next-gen development for a long time to come."
This a very important point, and well said. Certainly mainstream gaming has limited the evolution of the industry. I am still unsure about the HD issue with the Wii. It is still is a small market, like around 1% of the population with a HD TV. It would be nice to have it, but the increase in cost per unit would be quite large, and before you know it they will be competing wih the 360 and PS3. As long as customers see the Wii as good value, it will be successful. |
|
0
There are two main reason that left the RTS on the PC platform: 1) the resolution and 2) the keyboard + mouse control system.
1) With HD, an RTS could be now played on a tv screen. Some game won't work well, but Dawn of War has the potential to work on an HD screen. On a standard screen... I doubt it will become to fuzzy to be any good. 2) The control system requirement is something you can't just change. If you have played any RTS multiplayer for some time, you already know why you just can't play these games without a mouse and a keyboard: an RTS is FAST, and you need all your shortcut keys at hand to play well. Not to mention the fact that any micromanagement is pure utopia without a mouse. So you just can't have a good RTS without a keyboard and a mouse, because you're effectively stripping out a lot of the elements that makes you good at playing an RTS. The point number 2) applied to FPS too. And while an FPS like Halo 2 was fun to play multiplayer, a dedicated PC FPS is a much more rewarding experience for whoever thinks that requires much more technique and finesse to be mastered. |
|
0
Have to disagree there I'm afraid. Yes, console FPS is not as 'lightening quick' as a mouse and a keyboard, but when everyone is using the same controller the playng field is level and (as with a keyboard and mouse) it boils down to individual skill at using the controller. As someone who has ranked very highly in the world on both Unreal Tournament on PC and Halo 2 on Xbox, I can honestley say that both experiences require a high degree of skill and one is as good as the other.
If that applies to FPS, I'm positive it can apply to RTS. |
|
0
So the RTS has to change a bit for the console experience. So what? A proper strategy game doesn't need so much going on that you need to battle the control system to stay on top of it. Just look at Advance Wars.
Actually I think you could make the Total War series on a console, they're easy to control. |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
