An Unpredictable Day With A Company Of Heroes

Company of Heroes is looking to be RTS master Relic\'s finest hour. In the run up to its release, Aaron McKenna speaks about the tension and excitement that the game invokes, with an After Action Report from the multiplayer beta.

Nice article.

Any word on the SLI issues from the single player demo? Does the multiplayer demo have the same issues? Is everything resolved for the release? I want this game but won't buy it until SLI works 100%.

Looks amazing, graphics are great, play control is good ... didnt hold my attention for that long. I have only played Beta ...

is there a way to hide twitchguru from the homepage as a customization? the articles just keep getting worse it seems like.

It is not a wargame. It is a totally different genre of game... accept it for what it is.

“It is not a wargame. It is a totally different genre of game... accept it for what it is.”

Hmmm, the game set in a historical period, the players manipulate military units, and the action involves the application of organized violence by a state to achieve objectives (a fundamental definition of warfare), and yet it is not a war game … right.

I do accept that the game is succeeding brilliantly at not being a very good war game. But still does not address why the designers would create a game like this and put it in the context of WWII; only to not go to the logical next step of either using historical scenarios, or at least plausible scenarios.

MxM, you are correct, and that is, in my opinion, a fundamental failure of RTS games when inserted into a historical context.

"This idea of full realism being a MUST if you dare to make a game about WW2, or any other conflict, is simply stupid. Hardcore wargaming is a niche area because consumers don't want that in the whole …"

I find your assertions ludicrous. You imply that consumers don’t want realism. I think that consumers have no problem with realism; they just don’t want tedious, difficult play game mechanics that are also slow paced. Technology and good game design should take care of this. Further, just because you wrote for some rag does not mean that your definition of historical wargame, let alone a good one, are correct. There are plenty of wargames that are not about translating hexes and other artifacts of old board games into computer code. Chess being the classic example, or the table top miniature rules by H.G. Wells. I totally accept the concept of a beer and pretzels game in the same vein that not all music must be serious to be well made and enjoyable.

I believe that if you are going to treat a period with respect, you should attempt to remain somewhat faithful to the subject. Otherwise the game could be grand theft auto XXX with the various gangs set in WWII uniforms. What is the point in that? It is a form of mental laziness. In the past, realism often meant sacrificing game playability at some level. Now, computers can build “realism” into the game by transparently taking care of the minute details, and speeding up play that made “traditional” board games such a chore. A game can have reasonably realistic concepts, simple play mechanics, AND be very enjoyable. These things are not mutually exclusive. Various air to air combat simulations, which can be both fun to play and very realistic are cases in point.

I have no problem not buying this game. I find it very sad that manufacturers focus so much on graphics, and so little on the substance of their product. Manufactures have largely failed to create and market games that are both enjoyable to play, and not having silly contrivances built into the mechanics. The assumption is that if the graphics are state of the art, all else follows. If that does not work, add some sex. It reflects mainstream media focus on form over function/substance.