Company of Heroes Review

By Kieron Gillen Published 25 September, 2006

In the Company of Ico, Deus Ex...

Version tested: PC

The initial reference point has to be to Knights of the Old Republic.

Before Bioware's role-playing game arrived, anybody who didn't sleep in Yoda pajamas was thoroughly sick with all things Star Wars. Between a string of uninspiring-at-best games and a couple of dreadful films, the galaxy that was a long, long way away wasn't long enough away for most. Then KOTOR appeared with a lot of style and even more vision and made everyone like all this lightsabre nonsense again, unreservedly. The universe had its romance renewed.

For the last half-decade, World War 2 has been similarly run into the ground. The grand conflict between the allied and axis powers is, in videogame terms, the biggest single licence that isn't actually a real licence. Make a WW2 game, and you've got an inbuilt audience, background, world-class character designs, interesting situations and probably the best villains the world has ever seen. But because anyone can make a game set in WW2... everybody did. It's got to the point where we feel as if we've done it all before. How many times have we crawled up the shingles of Omaha beach? If you added up all my virtual deaths in those bloody shallows, it's entirely possible that I've lost more lives than were lost in the real assault. Turn to the comments thread in any World War 2 game preview, and you'll see a string of people shrugging. Bored now! Bored now! Seen this before! What's next?

To make a WW2 game that matters, you need to make something special enough to cut through that armour of cynicism.

Company of Heroes: something special.

At first glance it's a standard RTS... actually, scratch that. "At first glance" Company of Heroes is immediately special. It's more that on paper Company of Heroes sounds like a standard RTS. A string of single-player missions. Skirmish mode against the computer (with co-op partners too). Online multiplayer. Opposing sides with differentiated forces. The usual. In fact, since Company of Heroes only has two separate sides instead of the genre-standard three, on paper it could be taken even as inferior.

"Inferior". That's the last time you'll see that word here.

Company of Heroes is inferior to nobody.

'Company of Heroes' Screenshot smoke

The rest-smoke suggests a cannon strike is about to hit this position. Perhaps luckily for the soldier.

For a start, while it limits its format to the genre basics, it does them as well or better as anyone else. The Skirmish AI is agreeably vicious, for a start. While many of the bigger RTS this year - Rise of Legends, and Battle for Middle Earth in War of the Ring mode, come swiftly to mind - have attempted to step aside from the "linear string of missions grouped around a story" traditional model, Company of Heroes single-player campaign sticks close to it. There's a little addition in having secondary medals you can earn through better performance, and carry your surviving veteran troops onwards to give you an edge, but primarily it's dealing with tasks with a relatively small fraction of the total tools. Essentially, it acts like a slow introduction to the various unit types in the games, making sure you grasp the idiosyncrasies of each one, and putting them together in interesting combinations. It enlivens things in terms of presentation - the in-engine cut-scenes panning out seamlessly to the normal-camera view is immediately engaging and with pretty much perfect pacing.

But it's in the absolute fundamentals where Company of Hero takes the expected and pushes it into the realms of the extraordinary. Not since Total War have we seen a primarily mainstream strategy game decide to base its mechanics so firmly on real life. Most RTS still base themselves on the idea that attacking an opponent will reduce their health by a certain amount, simply modified depending on whether their unit is a counter to the other. In most, troops with swords can still hack down castles. Company of Heroes takes a more naturalistic approach, which makes things more dramatic, compelling and... well, tactical.

Take the machine-guns as an example. A machine-gun, when it opens up at a group of soldiers isn't just a thing which reduces their health bar. A group under machine gun fire is in clear mortal danger. Company of Heroes picks up where Relic's previous Dawn of War left off with its morale system, but extends its effects. Different weapons will cause a unit to become suppressed at different rates, where they'll be forced to fall to the floor and take cover. If fire is maintained, they'll become pinned, where they're unable to return fire and will just cower taking and be wiped out swiftly unless fire is removed (i.e. someone rescues them or the enemy pull back) or they're ordered to retreat (a command which makes the unit in question leg it all the way back to the base). In Company of Heroes, a machine-gun is a weapon which suppresses large groups of incoming troops very quickly. Charging up to a machine-gun position with troops isn't even an option. Almost all troop types are going to revolt if you try it, ending up falling to the ground. Immediately, machine-guns have a specific tactical use which you'll bring to bear according to your tactical needs. Put a machine-gun here and there's absolutely no way anyone on foot is going to come from that direction.

'Company of Heroes' Screenshot bees

The allies' swarms of bees prove difficult to counter. Someone nerf them.

(Of course, machine-guns are entirely useless when applied against a heavy tank. Though it's telling that unlike many other games where a unit can't harm another one, it doesn't stop the machine-guns from firing at it. That they'll open up when it's hopeless is just one of a Company of Heroes many great atmosphere maintaining touches.)

You may have missed something implicit in that paragraph. "That direction". When you set up a machine gun unit, you say which direction you want them to face, which leads to a specific cone they're able to fire at. If something's out of the area, they'll have a delay as they take apart their gun, turn around, and reassemble it. So if you find yourself facing a machine-gun unit as foot soldiers, you'll looking at the terrain and working out if there's any way you can flank it. Or maybe there's enough cover to get near enough to lob a grenade over to clear it...

And that's just the interactions between a couple of unit types. It's both completely naturalistic (so instantly understandable), detailed (the simple process of deciding which way your machine-gun's going to point feels so right) and tactically compelling (the mechanics immediately make the gamer decide what they're doing next). It also shows how Company of Heroes balances the competing desires of units to be self-sufficient while including satisfying ways to interact (i.e. micromanage) them. In this case, when in position, if positioned securely, you can just forget about the machine-gun. They'll deal with anything that comes their way. However, the specifics of what area they're to defend is entirely up to you.

Similarly, the grenade throwing mentioned earlier. Grenades are an upgrade you can equip your soldiers with, allowing them to expend resources to lob a grenade. Deciding where and when it's right to reach for the explosives is an important tactical decision and... well, naturalistic, detailed and tactically compelling. Or, to expand to other units than machine-guns and foot-soldiers, vehicles take damage depending on which angle you strike them at. Tanks especially - and doubly so if struck from a distance - can take little damage from a frontal attack, even having shells ricochet away. If you can get behind them, or catch them in a cross-fire, or set up impassable barricades which force incoming armour to have to turn at a critical moment to get hit by an anti-tank gun... well, you'll take them down far quicker. Or if you have a tank in a precarious position, the art of clicking just behind it to make it speedily reverse out of trouble rather than turn around and expose its vulnerable hindquarters is enormously satisfying. Or, in short, Company of Heroes offers the gamer a lot of micro-management, if you want to. But it's fun micromanagement, whose results you can immediately appreciate.

Before we get into more dramatic areas again, a quick take on the game's resource systems. A word on expending resources: the game's economy is based on the three resources of manpower, munitions and fuel, which you receive for having control of positions (ala Dawn of War), so forcing a player to expand and enter conflict if they want to gain in power. Manpower is mainly used for recruiting, with fuel as a secondary resource for recruiting vehicles. Munitions is used primarily for upgrades or one-off attacks, like grenades. Whether it'll be best to blow all your 125 remaining munitions on a one-off calliope rocket-strike or a handful of precision grenades or anti-tank pipe-bombs is the sort of thing you'll find yourself obsessing over in your passing moments.

And another state-the-obvious time: It's beautiful, though that's entirely the wrong word. This is a war game, so the word should be "visceral" or something. Models are hugely detailed for an RTS, physics implemented impressively and so on. But relevantly, it's a functional sort of beauty (or - er - viscerality). The core facet of its appeal is how destructible each level is. Everything from hedgerows to buildings can be reduced to... well, not hedgerows or buildings. Rocket strikes turn the ground into craters - which then can be used as cover. It's clear which places have been closely fought over. Most likely, they won't be there anymore.

The buildings are particularly brilliantly executed, with foot soldiers being able to be ordered inside where they set up at the windows, dealing with anyone who comes near (it's a particularly brutal way to use your machine-guns, as they're able to change the direction they fire far quicker). In a built up area, they become hard-points of defense, slowly getting knocked down, the troops inside visibly getting more exposed. Take down the building with explosives or thrown satchel charges or the inhabitants with a carefully applied sniper, then move in.

'Company of Heroes' Screenshot cover

Any section of rubble, wall, or hole in the ground will be used as cover by your soldiers. And you would too.

Away from the buildings that are already there, your ability to build is as balanced as the rest of the game is towards giving you the most entertaining decisions at any time. Constructing your base itself is relatively basic. Conversely, the actual construction of defenses is hugely important. Engineers (or foot-soldiers, if you take a certain upgrade path) can lay down sandbags, barbed wire and anti-tank barricades to create cover, prevent the movement of infantry and prevent the movement of tanks respectively. Except, rather than most games which charge you resources for this, Company of Heroes just lets you create as much as you have time to do. This encourages much creative thinking. For example, a machine-gun can be made even less vulnerable to frontal assault by a line of sandbags. Yet again, it's the sort of interaction that's perfectly natural and completely satisfying. And returning to the campaign, the genre staple missions - like the "Defend this area for a time limit" ones - are improved hugely just by how these mechanics work. When you have all these options with these robust tools, analyzing chokepoints, creating your own and so on... it's just about as good as a strategy game gets. Which is Company of Heroes all over.

Of course, there are things I wish were different.

I wish its method for getting troops out of buildings was a little more robust.

I wish that some of its unit's types being designed as conscious counters for others were less glaring. It's mainly noticeable with the anti-armour guns, despite just being a few guys huddled behind a cannon, being a little too obviously resilient towards tanks... which hurts atmosphere a little. Momentarily.

I wish that it had an AI level beneath its "easy" for when you just want to experiment with the tech.

I wish, despite my shrugging earlier in the review, they had managed to get a third army in.

Lots of little wishes.

But mostly, I wish that we saw games this good more often.

Bored of World-war 2 games? Bored of the mainstream real-time strategy game? Just plain bored?

After Company of Heroes, you won't be.

10 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kieron.

About Kieron Gillen

Kieron is one of the founders of the lovely Rock, Paper, Shotgun and nowadays writes comics for Marvel starring characters that even his mum has heard of.

Read more articles from Kieron by visiting the Kieron Gillen archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (134) Latest comment 5 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • bicky316 #1 5 years ago

    First!

    /Goes to read review

  • Tomo #2 5 years ago

    :o

    /reads

  • Yossarian #3 5 years ago

    0 interest, but whoa at a 10/10 on this miserable Monday morning

  • BravoGolf #4 5 years ago

    omg, that's some score!

  • ecureuil #5 5 years ago

    /checks score

    O_O

    /goes to read

  • TheDifficult3rdAlbum #6 5 years ago

    >"Bored of World-war 2 games? Bored of the mainstream real-time strategy game? Just plain bored? After Company of Heroes, you won't be."

    And you can put that on the poster!

  • Shanucore #7 5 years ago

    *Nice*.

  • Yossarian #8 5 years ago

    I don't even like RTS games and this review made me want to have a go at this one

  • towser #9 5 years ago

    No. Way. OMG. might take a look at this after all....

  • old_skool #10 5 years ago

    10 ?? o_O

  • Azazel #11 5 years ago

    Different weapons will cause a unit to become suppressed at different rates, where they'll be forced to fall to the floor and take cover. If fire is maintained, they'll become pinned

    Relic really must have been getting into games workshop... this sounds like a mechanic lifted straight out of the excellent 40k Epic.

  • Errol #12 5 years ago

    What type of system spec are we looking at here (for good gaming) ?

  • rhinoxious #13 5 years ago

    It really is very good, by far the best thing I've played recently.

    What I'm really waiting for are the inevitable misson packs, so I can fight somewhere that isn't the usual normandy landings scenarios.

  • BravoGolf #14 5 years ago

    I want. You wan game? YOU WAN GAME?

  • Tomo #15 5 years ago

    Hmm. I'm not convinced I'm going to like this enough to risk buying it. I only ever really play RTS when I get into a CnC game. I'll have to wait for the forums opinion on this one I think.

  • Genji #16 5 years ago

    Nice to finally see an RTS which doesn't require you spending half of your time delegating workers to go pick berries or something. RTS games need more of the strategy.

  • bicky316 #17 5 years ago

    So I now have the choice of a HD tv for the 360 or a pc upgrade. So much to buy so little money, god damnit!!

  • baggs #18 5 years ago

    The game mechanics sound excellent, but how about the AI?

  • old_skool #19 5 years ago

    I really love Relic . Having played Homeworld and Homeworld 2 one shouldn't be suprised by this score . These guys make absolutely AAA quality games . I'll definetely be getting this .

  • Stickman #20 5 years ago

    Errol: I don't know specifics but IIRC it does need quite a ninja pc to look as lovely as it can.

    I'm soooo looking forward to this!

    edit - BG, what's the lol for?
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 12:43

  • Tejstar #21 5 years ago

    What other 10's has EG awarded (apart from ICO and Oblivion)?

  • twelveways #22 5 years ago

    Oblivion got a 10?!?!
    If thats anything to go by then this game will probably be wank as well.

  • Tejstar #23 5 years ago

    ... and Half-Life 2.

  • Tejstar #24 5 years ago

    ... and Gran Turismo 3...

  • old_skool #25 5 years ago

    And Shadow of the Collosus...

  • Genji #26 5 years ago

    Deus Ex got a 10.

  • Tejstar #27 5 years ago

    ...and Unreal Tournament...

  • Tejstar #28 5 years ago

    It'd be good if you could sort reviews by score... o_0

  • Lovemoose #29 5 years ago

    10/10? ...no. No, it's not a 10/10. Let me repeat that, it's not a 10/10 game.

    An RTS where you have to randomly kill your own troops to allow yourself the chance to adapt your force doesn't deserve a 10. Why no "send back to blighty for recuperation button"?

    Don't get me wrong - it's pretty, very playable, and sounds fucking ace, but the "S" takes a back seat to the "RT" later in the game.

    And where's the German Campaign?

  • Tejstar #30 5 years ago

    ... and Metroid Prime...

  • Tejstar #31 5 years ago

    ...The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages, Oracle of Seasons and The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past...

  • Tejstar #32 5 years ago

    ...Soul Calibur II...

  • Stickman #33 5 years ago

    Are we going to get into this tedious 'score' debate again? It's a review. It's Kieron's opinion. It's Kieron's score. It's not carved in stone. Move on.

  • Clive_Dunn #34 5 years ago

    Relic are head and shoulders above all other developers when it comes to RTS games.

    Please do Homeworld 3 - I'd buy it ( although no-one else would I suspect ).

  • Tejstar #35 5 years ago

    Bored now, feel free to add to the list if I missed any…

  • BravoGolf #36 5 years ago

    Game requirements:

    Minimum System Requirements
    System: 2.0GHz Intel Pentium IV or equivalent
    RAM: 512 MB
    Video Memory: 64 MB
    Hard Drive Space: 6500 MB


    Recommended System Requirements
    System: 3.0GHz Intel Pentium or equivalent
    RAM: 1024 MB
    Video Memory: 256 MB
    Hard Drive Space: 6500 MB

  • BravoGolf #37 5 years ago

    Full specs at gamespot: http://ww w.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/comp...

  • Darren #38 5 years ago

    Boy, am I glad I upgraded my ancient PC to an Athlon64 X2 4200+ with 2GB of RAM and a 512MB GeForce 7900 GT graphics card 'cos the demo of this game ran a treat on it! Just need to buy the full game now...

  • Azazel #39 5 years ago

    I want to discuss scores.

    Let me just put my wank-hat on.

  • skillian #40 5 years ago

    This is actually the first RTS game I've ever played, and I have to say I love it!

    It can be very tough, but I set it down to easy and am having an absolute blast. Thank God for Havok physics - they really are fantastic in this game. You will be amazed when you first see a farmhouse destroyed by artillery fire, and soon you realize everything (from buildings to hedges to telegraph poles) can be destroyed, creating new cover and opening routes that were blocked before.

    Seriously, being an RTS n00b I have no comparison, but this really is one of the best games I've played for a few years.

  • Blitz #41 5 years ago

    "Inferior". That's the last time you'll see that word here.

    Company of Heroes is inferior to nobody.

    oops

  • Carrybagma #42 5 years ago

    Sounds a bit like World War II Frontline Command

    Never really got into that game.
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 13:18

  • RedPanda #43 5 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • ratso #44 5 years ago

    most rts games are not realy about single player, the gameplay was designed for multiplayer skirmishes.

    contrary to the above comments, i would say that this is the only rts game ive played in ages that has any real strategy and tactics. i cant go back to warcraft 3 or dawn of war after this.

    10/10 for sure, and ive been playing it at the lowest detail settings!
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 13:20

  • skillian #45 5 years ago

    By the way, it would be nice to have some screenshots that look remotely like what you'll see when playing the game.

    You guys should get a copy of FRAPS instead of just ripping shots from the press pack :p

  • Megalodon #46 5 years ago

    I don't think you guys really get the scoring system of EG. The way I see it, a 10/10 doesn't mean a perfect game. Nothing's perfect, really. Instead, a 10/10 means the spirit of the game is just about perfect, it's done amazingly, it does what it's developers probably intended it to do, and it's just plain fun, and has a higher production value than most of the games out there, and sure stands out from the rest. A fruit of some really hot, steamy, devs-lovin', if you may :p

    OK, just exaggerating a bit for the heck of it, but you get my drift.

    And besides, stop comparing every review to another. Every game is a different story altogether. And stop nitpicking, it's driving me nuts. That's why I love EG's reviews - they really look at the core of the game and really get what's making it tick instead of nitpicking about this and that like many other reviewer's sites do.

    In my opinion, an appropriate proverb in this case would be: The whole is bigger than sum of its parts.

    I'm definitely getting me some Company of Heroes after this glaring review.
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 13:32

  • D_arkTrooper #47 5 years ago

    The game ran like a complete DOG on my P4 2.5Ghz/GeForce 6800GT/1Gig RAM system on full detail.Almost totally unplayable.Switched graphics down to medium and it was like a breath of fresh air (tho still stuttered when there was a LOT of on-screen action).

    Best game for a long,LONG time.


    Tho the missing ability to disband units was a tragic oversight (imo)
    Edited by 2 at 26/09/06 @ 17:56

  • patlike #48 5 years ago

    From the <a href="http://ww w.eurogamer.net/scoring_policy.php">score guide</A>:

    "The perfect ten?

    A score of ten reflects a game that, within the reviewer's estimation, is something you must buy: this is the message we're trying to convey. On a basic level it's almost certainly the best quality game ever seen within the context of its genre, and that's why Eurogamer doesn't dish them out very often. A score of 10 usually applies to less than a trio of games in any given year.

    But all 10s are not born equal. For starters, you might consider that a ten in the RPG genre still isn't as appealing as an FPS that we scored an eight, or be mystified how we could score a football management game a nine when we only gave that survival-horror game you loved an eight. The best rule is to simply rate like with like, and use your own personal taste barometer to gauge whether the genre is of interest to you. Even so, if you're new to a particular genre then something scoring a ten is a very safe bet indeed. As a starting point, the message is you can't get a better game of this type.

    Let us make absolutely clear that a 10 is not and probably never will be "the perfect game". There's always something criticisable about a game, however small.

    A 10 will inspire the reviewer because it gets so many things correct. It will be something truly groundbreaking and aesthetically successful, be consistently enjoyable, get the balance right in difficulty terms, be technically very impressive, and be polished to a shine. It will leave the player in no doubt that they're playing something special right from the word go and will continue to inspire and amaze throughout. As we've said, this doesn't mean it's perfect, and we'll be sure to say where it goes wrong too, but maybe those niggles are just so minor that you can let it off. Look at anything under a microscope for long enough and you'll see the flaws. But would you kick a supermodel out of bed for farting?"

  • prettyboytim #49 5 years ago

    So... from the screenshots it looks like it's all played out from a soldier's eye view; is that the case? Or is it just that those were the shots supplied from the publisher?

  • EmiliasHorse #50 5 years ago

    Are people so messed up in the head that they are disputing giving out 10's? The same happened with Oblivion which went on to win PC Gamers No.1 game of ALL time last issue (PC Gamer are without a doubt the highest authority on PC gaming).

    This game was made by the same folks would gave us the wonderful Home World. I am not suprised it's good but this good? Excellent I was always going to buy it but that score just seals the deal.

  • rudedudejude #51 5 years ago

    Perfect game!

    Though 2 sides is enough for me at the moment.

  • ralphwolfenstein #52 5 years ago

    I might add that Company of Heroes is currently tracking at 95% on Metacritic, after a 94% from PC Gamer UK, 93% from PC Zone, 96% from PC Gamer US, 10/10's from GameSpy and 1UP and 9.4 from IGN

    It seems pretty unanimous!

  • whome #53 5 years ago

    the camera can be shifted to any position you want, it's possible to get v close to any unit... and you'll want to just to enjoy the detail.

    the default view is just like any other RTS.

    as for not being able to suicide units to replace them, that's a plus afaic as it makes you think carefully about production when you start rather than just churning out units.

    superb game, I would have to be VERY picky to find any real faults, deserving of the score IMO.

  • Lacero #54 5 years ago

    Worth pointing out to anyone who missed it that this game requires XP, at least the demo does and the game says it does. I was hoping to at least last until vista came out :/

  • UncleLou #55 5 years ago

    Fantastic game indeed. Been playing it in every free minute since I got it a week ago.

  • SentientNr6 #56 5 years ago

    When I read this review it reminds me a lot of the Close Combat series.
    Which was also a WWII title but also had excellent game mechanics and AI.

    Definately will give it a try and see how much it compares.

  • Steroyd #57 5 years ago

    10!?! o_O

    And they said PC gaming is dying!?!
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 14:16

  • Lovemoose #58 5 years ago

    Ok, score-discussion pedants, let me clarify my position from further up the comments. Much like your much-loved argument that "it's Kieron's opinion that it's worth a 10", it's my opinion that it's not.

    What I did not mean was Kieron's score is wrong, I just disagree with it.
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 14:16

  • SwedBear #59 5 years ago

    So far I've only played the beta and the single player demo but those two really made me want this game. I'm actually quite pissed I have to wait 2 weeks in comparison to my US friend since he will get more time to practice kicking my butt.

    It's been a while since I've been looking forward to a game on the PC.

    /B

  • KingOfSpain #60 5 years ago

    wow...just wow

  • Tomo #61 5 years ago

    It requires XP? What about 2000?

  • whome #62 5 years ago

    system requirements state XP or Vista.

  • Tomo #63 5 years ago

    Oh that is a joke. Decision made then :/

  • Errol #64 5 years ago

    Oblivion the best PC game ever ?

    LOL ! Don't make me laugh. Morrowind was better for a start.

  • PearOfAnguish #65 5 years ago

    I have to partly agree with my swashbuckling friend, here. Oblivion is definitely not the best PC game ever. It's a very good action game, but a poor RPG.

  • mazzl #66 5 years ago

    wow a 10... very well done. THQ is on a roll lately releasing a lot of good games.
    will we see this on xbox 360 and ps3?

  • UncleLou #67 5 years ago

    Really, really needs a mouse. It can become very fast-paced and hectic.

  • PlugMonkey #68 5 years ago

    Wow, that one came out of nowhere.

    And just last night I had a strategy itch and fired up Jagged Alliance again. Excellent timing.

  • matrim83 #69 5 years ago

    Superb review.

    Must buy this.

  • Amazing Bryan #70 5 years ago

    Easily the best RTS ever - even if it is World War 2 based. I spent the whole of last weekend just playing it on multiplayer with my Dad. The amount of thinking that has to go into beating the computer is immense. Certainly is better than just building a load of tanks and rushing the enemy, as even this tactic isn't always guaranteed to work.

    Great review by the way Brem X :p

  • Perry #71 5 years ago

    All you guys saying it can't be a 10 because of this and that.

    Grab a fucking life

    He thinks its a 10. End of STORY

  • Kostabi #72 5 years ago

    After playing the demo I was impressed with how they managed to get the detail of a turn-based strategy game (firing arcs, supressive fire, morale, etc) into an RTS but the frantic pace really ruins it for me.

    It's a great game, but like most RTS I find it a bit too frantic to successfully plan out a decent strategy before getting rushed. Now a turn based WWII game with the CoH engine would be superb...

  • Dynamize #73 5 years ago

    Was looking forward to this, then got Faces of War and my enthusiasm's just sort of dwindled.
    I can't shake the feeling that fundamentally it's just Dawn of War re-skinned, and that the less realistic approach to battle and/or clickfest style will grate after Faces.
    I'll probably still grab it come Friday/Saturday, but the reviews I've read, though overwhelmingly enthusiastic, haven't got me excited. Which is annoying because by all accounts I should be excited.

  • Lovemoose #74 5 years ago

    "He thinks its a 10. End of STORY"

    I think it's an eight or a nine. End of my STORY.

    And I totally agree with Kostabi about the pace... some of the later missions are frantic, to say the least.
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 16:04

  • BremXJones #75 5 years ago

    Kostabi: Have you tried playing with the pause key? No use in multiplayer, of course, but pausing in single player or skirmish should let you get through.

    (The key in question is "Pause".)

    KG
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 16:15

  • Erinan #76 5 years ago

    Definitely deserves a 9 and even a 10.

    Oblivion got a 10? Blah :/
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 17:16

  • cooper #77 5 years ago

    Saying Oblivion's the best PC game *ever* is absolutely ridiculous no matter which crazy criteria PC Gamer may have used.

  • Ihya #78 5 years ago

    I wish my PC could play this...

    CoH and Dark Messiah are convincing me it is time for an upgrade...

  • Merefield #79 5 years ago

    £19.99 at PC World on da web inc. VAT & delivery, peeps!!!

    Outstanding value

    /faints
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/06 @ 18:13

  • Fixxxer #80 5 years ago

    If I couldn't even begin to understand Rome: Total War how will I feel about this?

  • wellsie #81 5 years ago

    Has anyone mentioned that you get dawn of war with it for FREE!

  • Mr_Brown #82 5 years ago

    Does anyone think this will get a Xbox 360 release at any point??

  • MrCarrot #83 5 years ago

    For all your 'slowing down the game' needs.

  • Kostabi #84 5 years ago

    Have you tried playing with the pause key? No use in multiplayer, of course, but pausing in single player or skirmish should let you get through.

    As stupid as it sounds I hadn't thought to give that a try, mainly because I'm so used to games hitting me with a faded and useless screen during the pause. It definitely helps in this case though, thanks.

  • Merefield #85 5 years ago

    @wellsie - where?

  • Corben_Dallas #86 5 years ago

    played this at teh weekend ...def getting it!

    Its got elite unit Tiger tanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    :)

  • MightyMouse #87 5 years ago

    AnnaBanana, no one bothered replying first time, probably only I will this time. You don't think it's worth a 10, fair enough, clearly a large number of people do though.

  • bauhaus #88 5 years ago

    I`ve been playing this for a wekk now (US copy) and by god does it rock

    Not since Comand and Conquer has the RTS world been so good.

    Its kept me away from Star Wars Lego 2, Dead Rising and my missis for several long evenings, with plenty more to come. Have not even started multiplayer yet

    Seriously good fun

  • bauhaus #89 5 years ago

    Oh, for those complaining of it being frantic, use the Pause key!! It helps, until your brain expands to cope with it, once you learn to trust your troops a bit and stay focused on objectives then you use the Pause much less

  • Hypocee #90 5 years ago

    Just for reference, regarding "finding the other 10/10s" - in the past and hopefully the future, you could get to a list, sortable by score, via the slightly counterintuitive route of clicking "games" instead of "reviews" in the nav menu. Unfortunately sort-by-score is currently broken, but EG has promised (two weeks ago) to fix it "soon".

    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/forum_thread_po...

  • fawe3 #91 5 years ago

    I love rts games and in my oppinion its great game, but still realy not up to the real greats of ganre. Westwood Dune II and their C&C games, Starcraft, Warcraft II, Total Anhialation, Age of Empires 1-2 and first two Total Wars are all two grades in every aspect above this one.
    Besides cinematics during missions there is hardly anything revolutionary in this one.

  • barchetta #92 5 years ago

    Since it is Relic game can we expect a Mac conversion anytime in the next year?
    Otherwise a new intel mac/bootcamp may be in order...

  • UncleLou #93 5 years ago

    Besides cinematics during missions there is hardly anything revolutionary in this one.

    I think it's a very clever mix of basic base-building and tactical micro-managing/unit mixing, which, along with the victory points and the different upgrade paths you can take in every game, makes for a very refreshing take on the genre, in my opinion. Those ideas were already in Dawn of War, but as opposed to this one, CoH has also a brilliant single-player campaign.

    It might not be quite as revolutionary as Homeworld was, but it's pretty flawlessly executed, though I am hearing reports already that tanks play too big a role in multiplayer games at the end.

  • fawe3 #94 5 years ago

    Ah yea, I forgot Homeworld, another of the classics. Again this one is very media hiped (trully, I dont know where all this hipe came from) version of Dawn of War with better SP.

  • theweaze #95 5 years ago

    definately going to pick this up

    what they give you dawn of war aswell, dont even hesitate buying this if you like RTS. i guess the reckon itl help them flog the upcoming expansion pack.
    Edited by 1 at 26/09/06 @ 00:17

  • dryden555 #96 5 years ago

    It looks like a lot of fun for those who like RTS games. For the rest of us, I'm not sure it will win us over.

  • BremXJones #97 5 years ago

    Fawe: Randomly, has any RTS released in the last five years appealed to you?

    KG

  • urban #98 5 years ago

    its BOSH, believe me it deserves the 10, mmmm preorder ..deliver to meeee

  • sajtion #99 5 years ago

    before i couldn't get into any rts game but this one is a lot of fun great game :)

  • YourMessageHere #100 5 years ago

    I think the ONLY thing that stops me from getting a hold of this is the fact it's WWII. God am I sick of WWII. Is there anything about it that makes it implicitly a WWII game, rather than modern day? Or even DoW2?

    Oh yeah, and why the hell DO people still buy WWII games?

  • TheEnd #101 5 years ago

    It's an arcade RTS with WW2 window dressing.

    Combat Mission > CoH.

  • UncleLou #102 5 years ago

    I think the ONLY thing that stops me from getting a hold of this is the fact it's WWII. God am I sick of WWII. Is there anything about it that makes it implicitly a WWII game, rather than modern day? Or even DoW2?

    Oh yeah, and why the hell DO people still buy WWII games?

    It's hardly the most original of settings, but have you really played so many WWII games? Last I played was Call of Duty 2, about 9 months ago. Before that - I can't even remember, to be honest.

    And as far as I know, their more original games weren't really big sellers. Homeworld 2 was a in the bargain bins pretty quickly, and Impossible Creatures didn't sell at all (well, maybe it wasn't the best game, too, admittedly), so it's pretty understandable that they were ooking for a popular setting when they started devlopment on CoH.

  • Reapergold #103 5 years ago

    hehehe my sparkley new alienware arrives in 3 days. Just in time for this lovely nugget of gaming.
    And by the way oblivion was amazin u bunch of biggots. Its bug ridden yes. short lived yes(if only main story is followed) and hdr effects are all screwy on it. But it was still amazin.

  • Ryuken #104 5 years ago

    I can't help but think that this game is getting so much credit, just because it's a StarCraft-esque fast-click kind of game, blended with the spectacle/gameplay elements of Soldiers: Heroes of WWII. And that it's made by a well-known developer who easily sticks to the Band of Brothers/Saving Private Ryan-sentiments instead of providing attention to a German campaign too like any decent WWII-game should do imo. The latter is the kind of thing that kills most mainstream-WWII games for me, I am not asking at all for a krauts-worship and all that but I think it would easily be as gripping as telling the story from the allied side. If it works in movies and the "oh-so-terribly-boring" previous WWII rts-games, then why not here?

    Ah well, prolly better than passable titles like BfMEII, EaW and RoL anyway, until Dark Crusade arrives of course.

  • krudster #105 5 years ago

    lol@AnnaBanana

  • djchump #106 5 years ago

    lol@Bored_Gamer
    :-P

  • fawe3 #107 5 years ago

    BremXJones: Of course, where did I say I dont like new rts, Im just saying that this one is far from hipe its getting. Its not the best ever bye a long way.

  • marine_fran #108 5 years ago

    El juego pinta genial, pero OTRO juego de la 2ª GM!! No, lo sieto, pero por ahi no paso.

  • BremXJones #109 5 years ago

    fawe: I ask because you say it's not up to a list of RTSs, all of which are at least five years old. It implies you think nothing worth talking about has been done in the RTS genre for the last five years.

    (The fact you leave out AOEIII and Rome: Total War, while naming their earlier iterations kind of adds to that impression)

    KG

  • stoopidgreg #110 5 years ago

    simply outstanding game, got it yesterday and been playing it non stop.

    my only complaint would be that it can get a little overwhelming having to manage all your troops in the heat of battle as there's so much you have to consider. maybe a pause feature would have been an idea ala soldiers: heroes of ww2.

    oh yeah, and the intro video is just fucking spectacular, and it's genius how it blends into the in-game engine before letting you take control.

  • bauhaus #111 5 years ago

    There is a pause key Stoop, its the one with Pause written on it, top right hand side of ya keyboard!!

    (tooke me a couple of days to find the bugger)

  • PhakeDC #112 5 years ago

    Me bored of WW2.
    Me crave Killzone RTS.
    Me likely wont get.
    If it success, you will be execute!

  • MrCarrot #113 5 years ago

    oh yeah, and the intro video is just fucking spectacular, and it's genius how it blends into the in-game engine before letting you take control.

    Agreed, and the little Thief-esque animated segments between missions are superb, too.

  • Khab #114 5 years ago

    I was prepared to love this game. Then there was a timed mission.

    Teh lose.

  • UncleLou #115 5 years ago

    I was prepared to love this game. Then there was a timed mission.

    Teh lose.

    The battle where you have to capture the hill? That isn't timed, you just earn a medal if you od it within the given time.

    Quit before you even reached the time limit, did you? ;)

  • Khab #116 5 years ago

    Yes! Because I messed things up horribly by rushing through everything - I got flanked and wiped badly, leaving my undefended (beacuse I didn't think I had time to fortify it) rear as prime bait for the Panzers. Then I went and had a look at GameFAQs to see if I could at least skip the mission or something, and realised it was just the medal objective! :)

    I love again!

    /will take that hill tomorrow

  • UncleLou #117 5 years ago

    All is well again, I see. :)

    Admittedly, I thought it was a time limit as well, till nothing happened. Took me two damn hours to capture the friggin' pile of dirt.

  • Errol #118 5 years ago

    The campaign missions seem superior to general multiplayer/skirmish play.

  • UncleLou #119 5 years ago

    I am not so sure about that, I had some great skirmish battles. It's also a lot harder than the campaign on the same difficulty level.

  • kangarootoo #120 5 years ago

    @AnnaBanana

    lol@Evanescence

  • Khab #121 5 years ago

    I played a skirmish (as the Axis) to get a better idea of what the tech tree is like, but the Campaign is marvelously done. I think skirmish will come into it's own once you learned to master the entire arsenal... and the best way to do that is to play the Campaign. :)

  • #122 5 years ago

    lol@score

  • t8yman #123 5 years ago

    I have never played an RTS before (except for "The Outfit" on the 360 for about an hour - which blows) I played this last night and instantly lost 2 hours, blam, gone! Must say I am really enjoying it, I left the difficulty on normal, and have so far only reahced the start of carentan, but I am looking forward to working my way through the rest of the missions, anyone know how many levels there are?
    Highly recommended for n00bs at the VERY least.

  • whome #124 5 years ago

    think there are 15 missions in the campaign

  • Stickman #125 5 years ago

    BG, I love the way you're moaning in the forum about being GI'd, and then you come straight back in here and act like a Grade A prick again. Smart work.

  • YourMessageHere #126 5 years ago

    In no particular order, WWII games I have played or seen played and considered getting myself:

    BF1942
    Medal of honour (the first one, whichever that was)
    Close Combat series
    Return to Castle Wolfenstein
    Day of Defeat
    Red Orchestra
    IL-2 Sturmovik
    Sniper Elite
    Commandos


    See also this far from complete list:

    [link url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category :World_War_II_computer_and_video_games
    ]http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wo...[/link]

    Presently there's this, Faces Of War and that alternative history thing in imminent PC RTS games alone. Then there's that Resistance: Fall of Man thing everyone seems to be creaming themselves over on PS3. There's never-ending licenses like Medal of Honour grinding out identikit iterations every other week or so in every format imaginable. The very first thing any given mod community seems to do is a WWII version of whatever game they're modding. Then there's the interminable tide of WWII films and TV series.

    Enough, no?

    It's not even as if the entire scope of WWII has been explored either; the European theatre gets the lion's share of attention, the eastern front is a "new" discovery by compatison, the war in africa is seldom but occasionally covered, the far eastern front is even less often used as a setting and if anyone can name a game set on the Indian front I'll be pleasantly surprised. If beach assaults are the secret point behind all this, as I sometimes suspect, Normandy isn't the only one. What of Suvla Bay? Iwo Jima? Guadalcanal?

    I probably sound terribly boring but I can't help wondering how the actual veterans feel about all this. I imagine they're mostly not really aware of gaming as an activity, but some of them must have some idea. I remember reading coverage of some press event, possibly for this very game and possibly on this very site, which talked about how the PR droids wheeled out a WWII paratrooper veteran and had him speak about his experiences as part of a game promotion. I was horrified; this guy saw his friends die FFS and now he's reduced to selling versions of it for entertainment.

  • bauhaus #127 5 years ago

    That was for Brothers in Arms, the wheeled out veteran

    Probably quite cathartic for him, he sounded keen when I saw the bloke on a vid anyway

  • YourMessageHere #128 5 years ago

    Well, I only read about it and drew my conclusions that way; it's good he found it cathartic. Still, I just feel there's something a bit unethical about the whole process.

  • prettyboytim #129 5 years ago

    I wonder if anywhere on Oxford Street will be breaking the release date by a day? I fancy playing this at lunchtime...

  • commander dixon #130 5 years ago

    got this one since sunday ...
    it gave me the same feeling i had when i played the first CandC yeaaaaaaaaars ago =)

  • tiddles #131 5 years ago

    My favourite bit in WWII games is the beach landing in the original MoH: Allied Assault. Basically you died.... again... again... and again. No fun to play, but gave you a really idea of exactly how small your chances really would have been if you were a soldier landing on that beach.

  • rams #132 5 years ago

    a pretty damn good rts!

  • Inertia #133 1 year ago

    Everyone on Eurogamer is a bit queer. They bum each other; daily. And that Rauper he looks like a receiver too. Dirty little buggers and in case you doubt me look at where they work. Yeah that's right, Brighton. Case closed. Now wash your hands and give your keyboard a good rinse. Chop Chop! You may get some bad aids if you tarry.

  • Dynasty2021 #134 5 months ago

    It may have come out 5 years ago, but I still have this complete gem of a game on my hard drive. Havent played it for about 2 years now, but it still holds some of my fondest gaming memories.

    The first time you see the howitzer bombardment slamming into the ground, causing choas amongst the ranks it obliterates which were a few seconds ago completely pinned by machinegun fire, and jaw dropping at the then amazing explosion effects, and the SOUND these bombs made shaking my very room. A joyous moment to behold.

    Or being pushed back by a hard and medium AI against a co-op Axis. My friend and I constantly sending what little troops we could produce to defend each other as we had no points captured, HQ almost down, suddenly realising I could bring in 3 tiger tanks I had forgotten I had saved as a perk, and him bringing in 2 panthers, and us steam-rolling the AI with this unbeatable firepower, when minutes later we were about to give up and watch the defeated screen appear.