That’s why you delve into the Ondie space and avoid 90% of the AAA games (aside fo the good ones that came out long before all those studios fell off).
The "big name" part of the games industry is pretty much falling apart these days. We're basically in the midst of a major industry crash, though it probably won't be anywhere near as catastrophic as '83. Unfortunately pickings are still slim in the RTS space regardless of whether you look at AAA, AA, or indie spaces. There are a few games on the way that might change that, of course (Tempest Rising, for example), but they're still quite a ways out.
I agree. Relic really lost their touch after DoW2. As you said, their games became less cinematic and immersive, but sterile and mechanical instea. Supposedly, some of the devs went to create Blackbird Interactive, but given how Homeworld 3 released, they may have already moved on again
Relic updated the game with a store first, ported the game to console, and then added highly requested features such as replays and improved graphical fidelity.
Technically, the full experience of CoH2 would cost slightly more because of the amount of commanders you'd have to buy; iirc there's no bundles too. If the CoH3 "DLC" (which is just a glorified Battlegroup bundle) adds to the overall price of the game, then the separate commander purchases should also be taken into account as they are essentially the same thing. In regards to the industry-wide layoffs; all I will say is that honestly studios should not and shouldn't have increased the amount of devs they need especially if they plan on making games one at a time. "Too many cooks in the kitchen all working on one dish" so to say. Still sucks for those who got fired but regardless still the fault of the higher ups and management decisions overall. To me, ideally games would only need about 100 - 150 for triple AAA; maybe even less. All those extras could better be used making other games or projects. Of course, this is also with the idea that these studios actually take time to make their games rather than rushing and crunching it out. If Indie games and double AA games can match the quality of triple AAA nowadays with just a handful of devs, funds, and time, why does a studio need that many people if they are only focusing on 1-2 games every so often. Anyways, moving from that, I got like 700+ hours in CoH3 and I honestly just play it cuz it runs (and personally looks) better than CoH2 and has more quality of life features than both previous games. Not to mention it's really the only type of niche in the RTS genre apart from Iron Harvest and I lean more to those games and not the simulators like MoW or GoH. The game's still fun to play but I will agree that the campaigns are overall lacking. Genuinely, not a good purchase for full price but I'd say maybe at 50%+ off it's a decent purchase. The Hammer and Shield Battlegroup is outright not worth it because it adds nothing of value and the 2 Multiplayer battlegroups from that DLC can be grinded for; to put into perspective, it released in Dec 2023 and I was able to get the Advanced Infantry BG around Feb and then the Italian Coastal BG this May. Luckily, the devs are still planning to update and tweak the campaigns unlike in CoH2 which got left in close-launch state. If you are wondering about the North Africa Campaign, it's decent to above average in regards to gameplay but my god the narrative and story is a meh. Simply put, it's very dissonant from each other. Narrative focuses on an African citizen talking about how the war affects them and is mostly Allied leaning, but the gameplay and missions is focused on Rommel and the Afrika Corps. Your review is what I expected someone's first impression of the game. Sad that you don't plan on visiting the game anytime soon again and it's understandable. I will say though, as much as CoH2 now is a "full game", at least CoH3 didn't take as long to straighten itself a bit unlike that which took 3-4 years; and it looks like the devs are still invested (for now) in keeping the game alive and cleaning up their mess, so at least they got that going.
Most CoH 1 players have moved to Gates of Hell Ostfront. CoH 3 is simply a disaster for anyone who wanted a gritty WWII RTS. The game is as shallow as a puddle and the visuals should be taught at art schools as an example of what not to do.
@@DWTerminator It's not perfect, but as far as WW2 RTS/RTT go, it is arguably the best. Though be prepared for a lot of micro. Not ADHD 500 clicks per minute kind of micro, but direct-control a soldier and manually resupply ammo, throw grenades and heal the wounded kind of micro. It is pretty much Men of War with (very) few QOL features. Oh and unlike CoH 2 & 3, Gates of Hell is 95% about the singleplayer and editor. The devs do try to balance the multiplayer, and there is a small playerbase for it, but most people play this game for the campaigns.
Sounds decently up my alley, I suppose. I do have the "basic" version of Call to Arms already (the game Ostfront is based on) but haven't really messed with it yet. We'll see how it goes.
@@DWTerminator Gates of Hell is great. I played that gem since beginning and now it's much more improved game with ton of content and mods. You really should check out FPS mods or TPS wich give you option to control every unit like action shooter game wich gives much fun and open many new tactical options. Beside GoH I also play alot MoW Assault Squad 2 with mods especialy mods with whole campaigns from other games: Cod 1,2, Medal of Honor, Brothers in Arms...they are great, Assault Squad 2 is like father of GoH and run on the same engine (older version) but it's also much better experience than COH3. CoH and COH2 are still much better games than newest one unfortunately.
Do you think you’d ever cover the weird Lego Rock Raiders rts? Haven’t played the original game since it’s before my time and is finicky to get working. Some guy made a fan remake called Manic Miners that fixes a lot of the little issues with the game, while keeping it mostly faithful.
COH3 gameplay was much more enjoyable for me then COH2 ( Yes 3 is still a mess ) but in COH3 there are no super tanks or units that can bounce 4-5 shoots from a tank destroyer ( even on rear armor ) ( Churchill, Tiger, KTiger for example ) in COH3 the units are simple and fair, in COH2 the RNG is to much even on normals units skirmishes. ( Its retarded in COH2 how you have to sent RIFLES in melee almost to finish a skirmish faster so it will not take 5 minutes to shoot one at the other.) they also look really goofy then they are in melee with the enemy and see them missing half of the shoots. COH2 is better if you eliminate the uber tanks ( Heavy tanks that are retarded expecially in 3v3 or 4v4 ), in terms of fairness i like COH3 more, as an example, if you are a USF player in COH2 whatever unit comp you go or commander you cannot have the 3 ( Arti , elite infantry and heavy tanks ) you can have 2/3 with specific commander but never all 3, on the other hand every other faction can have these 3 via commander call in or faction base.
Why people put on rose tinted glasses on CoH 2. It took several years for the game to be ok, still suffers from CoH 1 cheese exploits. Avoided CoH 3 from the nightmare CoH 2 was for many years.
CoH2 was damn near unplayable in terms of performance when I first started messing with it and to this day I still don't enjoy the game. "Rose-tinted glasses" certainly doesn't apply here.
@@DWTerminator It does, because nobody talks about the early state and how long it took to be ok. Edit: Just showing a trend that is plaguing "long awaited" titles.
... I literally said I had technical problems and issues with the microtransactions in CoH2 within the first minute of the video, and that I'll be taking another look at the game now that they've sorted a lot of those out.
@@DWTerminator Why do you think a general question is directed towards you? Although I appreciate the participation, the question is a general one. Not intended towards you personally. It is not a critique on your opinion. It is simply a question that needs to be asked and hopefully others can remove themselves from the nostalgia and be real with it.
You didn't ask a question. You made a statement about people having "rose-tinted glasses" toward CoH2 considering how long it took Relic to fix it, then responded to me saying rose-tinted glasses doesn't apply in this video with "it does." So not only are you directing your statement (again, not a question) at me and my video, you are now lying about making that statement. I suggest stopping before you dig yourself any deeper.
Of all the WWII tactical games that I played, Companies of Heroes is really, really hard, but fun, but I couldn't get the mechanic to play it to well, and the fact that the original Company of Heroes campaign begins in D Day really don't help much, to much U. S. centre, what about the British or the Russians and if you really want to twisted the NAZI, I known that they come in DLC, but you cant select them as player factions in the main campaign.
Worth noting that CoH1 came out in 2006 and was more or less trying to capture the vibe of the Band of Brothers miniseries, which explains the focus on US forces and the lack of an Axis campaign. The Opposing Fronts expansion added the British forces and included campaigns both for them and the Wehrmacht. The Tales of Valor expansion also had both Allied and Axis campaigns.
Biggest disappointment RTS for me this year,false advertising,broken on release now maybe fix later,bare bone experience,buy''DLC''platform,online rush,downgrade everywhere so many steps back or stagnation... aka modern gaming. PS just go back to COH/COH2.
Depressing this.sigh. Im so wanting to get this, for sp play only. I love the idea of the dynamic campaign, mixed with rts. But if ai isn't good enough to be interesting, and the strategic layer of it is poor, them not much use, better i wait it to be cheaper and improved further hopefully, and expanded even. The other campaign seems short and very average. So there's only the skirmish with ai left, that needs good ai too, and varied maps, objectives. Idk y they didn't vary the number of ai in skirmish in the dynamic campaign depending on how u play the strategic map etc.
That’s really too bad that the game is aggressively mediocre and verges on being a dumpster fire. So glad I just bought the first two when they were on sale. What I’ve played so far of those was pretty fun.
CoH1 is definitely great. 2 was rather divisive though, especially with all the severe technical problems it had on launch. I really need to get around to messing with it more seriously again now that they've patched the hell out of it and expanded the content.
@@DWTerminator Okay, fair opinion. I think game is okay-ish and somewhat fun to play.. definitely not worth the full price, that's for sure. But it's simply not as bad as people say it is...
I spoke with some of my friends who play proper competitively (top players in Europe and Oce) and they all say this game really lacks skill expression, with things like vaulting and auto re-enforce it lowers the skill celling. its now less about how you manage, keep on top of your units, outplay your opponent and more about following specific metas. its just really boring. I feel that lack of grit in the game, I think it mainly comes from the art style they chose and the animations. it really just feels too cartoony to create a proper atmosphere, whereby in coh2/1 it felt like I was a commander moving my units on the frontline, 3 just makes it feel like toy soldiers and tanks moving around.
Obviously this "opinion" comes from a pre-conceived bias. Not liking Coh2, not expecting relic to perform, etc. i respect it, but it disqualified you in my eyes for someone whose comments on RTS games can be taken seriously. This is rather rambling for views. :)
I expect sequels to improve upon the previous games rather than be worse or simply stagnate. After all, if the sequel's no better than the previous game then why should anyone play it in favor of the previous one? Just because it's newer?
Play the free weekend just so you could talk trash on the game instead of actually trying to learn the game and play multiplayer because that’s where company of heroes has always been at it takes weeks to get your grips on multiplayer, but once you understand the game, just like to do multiplayer to stand out edition of the game and worth the price alone, the factions of varied and all are very unique and a lot of those design issues with company of heroes to balance have been done away. This is the best game in the franchise for multiplayer. Now I can’t speak on the campaign and all that shit I don’t really care about that and most people don’t even then to my understanding the campaign offers a lot for the price along with the North Africa campaign, and two additional free battle groups. This is a game you need to take your time with if you’ve got a proper review, this is not it.
Mistaken on the graphics company here is three looks MILES BETTER, and it also runs way better then company heroes to the only reason you think Company of heroes to looks better is because of the filters that they put on the game to hide the bad graphics. this is a more brightly colored theater of war, and in my personal opinion, it looks much more detailed for the animations to models the FX. They’re all better than Company of heroes two and I also think they changed up the gameplay enough to justify the 12 years of development developing a game takes a long time and for what we got so far this is good and mix of company heroes one and Company of heroes two gameplay into one good game, it creates a satisfying experience for both veterans of two and one I seriously think that people bandwagon hate this game because it’s cool when reality the Deb’s have put a lot of hard work into this game and getting it to a full release call the level which I believe are beyond that at this point with the many many improvements they have done
@@matt2.052 Even CoH veterans are trashing this sad excuse of a sequel. Over a year after release, after multiple patches and DLCs, the game is still stuck at "Mixed" review rating and the gameplay is as shallow as when it first came out. For a game that is supposedly "all about the multiplayer", it sure seems to have the least amount of maps, unique faction mechanics and it has the most stale, repetitive metas in the franchise. What you call "balance" nearly everybody else calls "dumbing down". As for the graphics, although the resolution of the textures and polycount of the assets has undeniable gone up, the art direction is terrible and everybody has talked about it. CoH 3 looks like a mobile game, the shading, level design and UI are simply terrible and borderline cartoony. The vibrancy of the colors has nothing to do with it, the problem is in the textures and shaders themselves. CoH 1 and 2 look leagues better. And finally, people loved CoH because it also had a great "cinematic" campaign. CoH 2 was reviewed very negatively for having a weak campaign, and CoH 3 was absolutely trashed for having the most boring, laziest singleplayer possible. You must be living in another universe if you think people don't care about the singleplayer.
I see you've been imbibing the copium on this one. I didn't even like CoH2 and yet I can still easily tell it's overall a better game, and definitely a far superior value proposition, than 3 in its current state. You say the devs have "put a lot of hard work into this game" and yet over a year after release it's *still* lacking basic features that were present in previous games, a lot of players are reporting frequent and severe technical problems and glitches, the balancing is a complete mess, the AI still has issues, the audio mixing is a mess, the campaign flat-out sucks, and at times the visuals are somehow worse than CoH2 despite the game having released almost 10 years after it. It's not necessarily an outright *bad* game, but it's downright obnoxiously mediocre. If the devs put so much work into the game like you claim, where did all that work go? I also never said this was a review. I said I played the game over the free weekend and wanted to go over what I experienced. If you can't tell that's not a review, I really can't help you.
![[TH] VALORANT Champions Seoul - Lower Bracket Final - LEV vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fyYkI80GG4o/mqdefault.jpg)
![[UNCUT]"ทักษิณ" โชว์ฤทธิ์-ครอบครอง "อุ๊งอิ๊ง" ประเทศไทยมีนายกฯ 1แถม1 I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 23 ส.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Uyl4y59R-Sk/mqdefault.jpg)
It seems like a lot of "big name" releases have been a big mess lately.
Games fun go play it
That’s why you delve into the Ondie space and avoid 90% of the AAA games (aside fo the good ones that came out long before all those studios fell off).
Better to stick to old games and indies. With very few occasional AAA releases.
The "big name" part of the games industry is pretty much falling apart these days. We're basically in the midst of a major industry crash, though it probably won't be anywhere near as catastrophic as '83.
Unfortunately pickings are still slim in the RTS space regardless of whether you look at AAA, AA, or indie spaces. There are a few games on the way that might change that, of course (Tempest Rising, for example), but they're still quite a ways out.
@@matt2.052 mediocre
Homeworld 3 now this. depression
Technically Homeworld 3 just came out and CoH3 came out last year.
Is h3 that poor too?
@@jacquesjtheripper5922terrible, go and read the steam reviews
@@jacquesjtheripper5922
It seemingly doesn't live up to the prequels and botched the 3D space combat.
@@ninochaosdrache3189not to mention the campaign is Disney star wars levels of bad
I agree. Relic really lost their touch after DoW2. As you said, their games became less cinematic and immersive, but sterile and mechanical instea.
Supposedly, some of the devs went to create Blackbird Interactive, but given how Homeworld 3 released, they may have already moved on again
Relic updated the game with a store first, ported the game to console, and then added highly requested features such as replays and improved graphical fidelity.
The developers stopped updating console ports. The developers are continuing to update the PC version of the game.
Technically, the full experience of CoH2 would cost slightly more because of the amount of commanders you'd have to buy; iirc there's no bundles too. If the CoH3 "DLC" (which is just a glorified Battlegroup bundle) adds to the overall price of the game, then the separate commander purchases should also be taken into account as they are essentially the same thing.
In regards to the industry-wide layoffs; all I will say is that honestly studios should not and shouldn't have increased the amount of devs they need especially if they plan on making games one at a time. "Too many cooks in the kitchen all working on one dish" so to say. Still sucks for those who got fired but regardless still the fault of the higher ups and management decisions overall.
To me, ideally games would only need about 100 - 150 for triple AAA; maybe even less. All those extras could better be used making other games or projects. Of course, this is also with the idea that these studios actually take time to make their games rather than rushing and crunching it out. If Indie games and double AA games can match the quality of triple AAA nowadays with just a handful of devs, funds, and time, why does a studio need that many people if they are only focusing on 1-2 games every so often.
Anyways, moving from that, I got like 700+ hours in CoH3 and I honestly just play it cuz it runs (and personally looks) better than CoH2 and has more quality of life features than both previous games. Not to mention it's really the only type of niche in the RTS genre apart from Iron Harvest and I lean more to those games and not the simulators like MoW or GoH.
The game's still fun to play but I will agree that the campaigns are overall lacking. Genuinely, not a good purchase for full price but I'd say maybe at 50%+ off it's a decent purchase. The Hammer and Shield Battlegroup is outright not worth it because it adds nothing of value and the 2 Multiplayer battlegroups from that DLC can be grinded for; to put into perspective, it released in Dec 2023 and I was able to get the Advanced Infantry BG around Feb and then the Italian Coastal BG this May. Luckily, the devs are still planning to update and tweak the campaigns unlike in CoH2 which got left in close-launch state.
If you are wondering about the North Africa Campaign, it's decent to above average in regards to gameplay but my god the narrative and story is a meh. Simply put, it's very dissonant from each other. Narrative focuses on an African citizen talking about how the war affects them and is mostly Allied leaning, but the gameplay and missions is focused on Rommel and the Afrika Corps.
Your review is what I expected someone's first impression of the game. Sad that you don't plan on visiting the game anytime soon again and it's understandable.
I will say though, as much as CoH2 now is a "full game", at least CoH3 didn't take as long to straighten itself a bit unlike that which took 3-4 years; and it looks like the devs are still invested (for now) in keeping the game alive and cleaning up their mess, so at least they got that going.
Oldschool CoH1 player here, played until CoH3 came out, thought CoH2 was pure garbage. CoH3 is actually pretty decent now.
From what I've seen, 3 is certainly in a better state now than it was on launch... but that's not saying much.
@@DWTerminator The developers are still updating Company of Heroes 3.
I am looking forward to your reviews on Company of Heroes 1 and 2!
Hello DWTerminator, do you have anything to say about the cutscenes of Company of Heroes 3?
Not really.
@@DWTerminator In my opinion, the images look like slideshows.
At 15:38 did the units move fast randomly?
Looks like a glitch related to the slope of the terrain.
Do you have anything to say about the declining player count on Steamcharts for Company of Heroes 3?
Just that it's not remotely surprising.
@@DWTerminator I am not so sure about the player counts on console. From what I've heard, there were some people playing it even on release.
Company of Heroes 3 does not have a battle pass system.
Never understood the appeal for this studio. Dont like their Homeworld, Company of Heroes and i fucking hate their AOE4.
I think people liked Company of Heroes 3 because they had fun playing with friends and they like the gameplay.
In your gameplay footage, why are there a few units being used?
Population cap and limited resources.
@@DWTerminator Thank you for the clarification
COH 3 is now an amazing game and is improving steadily with every update, for me its better than coh2 at this point.
Most CoH 1 players have moved to Gates of Hell Ostfront. CoH 3 is simply a disaster for anyone who wanted a gritty WWII RTS. The game is as shallow as a puddle and the visuals should be taught at art schools as an example of what not to do.
I've been seeing mentions of Ostfront. Guess I should take a look at that one of these days...
@@DWTerminator
It's not perfect, but as far as WW2 RTS/RTT go, it is arguably the best. Though be prepared for a lot of micro. Not ADHD 500 clicks per minute kind of micro, but direct-control a soldier and manually resupply ammo, throw grenades and heal the wounded kind of micro. It is pretty much Men of War with (very) few QOL features. Oh and unlike CoH 2 & 3, Gates of Hell is 95% about the singleplayer and editor. The devs do try to balance the multiplayer, and there is a small playerbase for it, but most people play this game for the campaigns.
Sounds decently up my alley, I suppose. I do have the "basic" version of Call to Arms already (the game Ostfront is based on) but haven't really messed with it yet. We'll see how it goes.
@@DWTerminator Gates of Hell is great. I played that gem since beginning and now it's much more improved game with ton of content and mods. You really should check out FPS mods or TPS wich give you option to control every unit like action shooter game wich gives much fun and open many new tactical options. Beside GoH I also play alot MoW Assault Squad 2 with mods especialy mods with whole campaigns from other games: Cod 1,2, Medal of Honor, Brothers in Arms...they are great, Assault Squad 2 is like father of GoH and run on the same engine (older version) but it's also much better experience than COH3. CoH and COH2 are still much better games than newest one unfortunately.
The developers improved the visuals for Company of Heroes 3.
Do you think you’d ever cover the weird Lego Rock Raiders rts? Haven’t played the original game since it’s before my time and is finicky to get working. Some guy made a fan remake called Manic Miners that fixes a lot of the little issues with the game, while keeping it mostly faithful.
Maybe if I ever find a copy.
Loved that game when I was a kid. But I think i never beat it since it was so hard in later levels.
@@DWTerminator It can be hard to find a copy
COH3 gameplay was much more enjoyable for me then COH2 ( Yes 3 is still a mess ) but in COH3 there are no super tanks or units that can bounce 4-5 shoots from a tank destroyer ( even on rear armor ) ( Churchill, Tiger, KTiger for example ) in COH3 the units are simple and fair, in COH2 the RNG is to much even on normals units skirmishes. ( Its retarded in COH2 how you have to sent RIFLES in melee almost to finish a skirmish faster so it will not take 5 minutes to shoot one at the other.) they also look really goofy then they are in melee with the enemy and see them missing half of the shoots.
COH2 is better if you eliminate the uber tanks ( Heavy tanks that are retarded expecially in 3v3 or 4v4 ), in terms of fairness i like COH3 more, as an example, if you are a USF player in COH2 whatever unit comp you go or commander you cannot have the 3 ( Arti , elite infantry and heavy tanks ) you can have 2/3 with specific commander but never all 3, on the other hand every other faction can have these 3 via commander call in or faction base.
These games have really degraded over time sadly.
Relic's quality in general has degraded severely over the past decade or so. They haven't really made a truly good game since 2011.
Relic is still updating the PC version of the game to make it better
Why people put on rose tinted glasses on CoH 2. It took several years for the game to be ok, still suffers from CoH 1 cheese exploits. Avoided CoH 3 from the nightmare CoH 2 was for many years.
CoH2 was damn near unplayable in terms of performance when I first started messing with it and to this day I still don't enjoy the game. "Rose-tinted glasses" certainly doesn't apply here.
@@DWTerminator It does, because nobody talks about the early state and how long it took to be ok.
Edit: Just showing a trend that is plaguing "long awaited" titles.
... I literally said I had technical problems and issues with the microtransactions in CoH2 within the first minute of the video, and that I'll be taking another look at the game now that they've sorted a lot of those out.
@@DWTerminator Why do you think a general question is directed towards you?
Although I appreciate the participation, the question is a general one. Not intended towards you personally. It is not a critique on your opinion. It is simply a question that needs to be asked and hopefully others can remove themselves from the nostalgia and be real with it.
You didn't ask a question. You made a statement about people having "rose-tinted glasses" toward CoH2 considering how long it took Relic to fix it, then responded to me saying rose-tinted glasses doesn't apply in this video with "it does." So not only are you directing your statement (again, not a question) at me and my video, you are now lying about making that statement.
I suggest stopping before you dig yourself any deeper.
Of all the WWII tactical games that I played, Companies of Heroes is really, really hard, but fun, but I couldn't get the mechanic to play it to well, and the fact that the original Company of Heroes campaign begins in D Day really don't help much, to much U. S. centre, what about the British or the Russians and if you really want to twisted the NAZI, I known that they come in DLC, but you cant select them as player factions in the main campaign.
Worth noting that CoH1 came out in 2006 and was more or less trying to capture the vibe of the Band of Brothers miniseries, which explains the focus on US forces and the lack of an Axis campaign. The Opposing Fronts expansion added the British forces and included campaigns both for them and the Wehrmacht. The Tales of Valor expansion also had both Allied and Axis campaigns.
At 23:06 a sodlier is turning fast
Biggest disappointment RTS for me this year,false advertising,broken on release now maybe fix later,bare bone experience,buy''DLC''platform,online rush,downgrade everywhere so many steps back or stagnation... aka modern gaming. PS just go back to COH/COH2.
Its not as bad , as it looks like.For me COH3 is actually a better game then COH 1,2. Thats for sure
@@marekkos3513 😂😂😂😂 amazing joke
@@sheepfly no joke
Depressing this.sigh.
Im so wanting to get this, for sp play only.
I love the idea of the dynamic campaign, mixed with rts.
But if ai isn't good enough to be interesting, and the strategic layer of it is poor, them not much use, better i wait it to be cheaper and improved further hopefully, and expanded even.
The other campaign seems short and very average.
So there's only the skirmish with ai left, that needs good ai too, and varied maps, objectives.
Idk y they didn't vary the number of ai in skirmish in the dynamic campaign depending on how u play the strategic map etc.
This game is avaliable on consoles and gets updated. In addition, players can play with a keyboard and mouse on an Xbox Series X.
Why people forget that coh2 was also not perfect on release. Community in 2013 say same things like what people sayings about coh3
That’s really too bad that the game is aggressively mediocre and verges on being a dumpster fire. So glad I just bought the first two when they were on sale. What I’ve played so far of those was pretty fun.
CoH1 is definitely great. 2 was rather divisive though, especially with all the severe technical problems it had on launch. I really need to get around to messing with it more seriously again now that they've patched the hell out of it and expanded the content.
Its not as bad , as it looks like.For me COH3 is actually a better game then COH 1,2. Thats for sure
Same here... I actually like it quite a bit... yes, some things might be better, but still... game is getting updated and plays smoother that CoH 2...
@@TheHrt5 I know what you mean.
It's not "bad." That's the problem. If it were bad it'd be more interesting. Instead it's just annoyingly mediocre.
@@DWTerminator Okay, fair opinion. I think game is okay-ish and somewhat fun to play.. definitely not worth the full price, that's for sure. But it's simply not as bad as people say it is...
I spoke with some of my friends who play proper competitively (top players in Europe and Oce) and they all say this game really lacks skill expression, with things like vaulting and auto re-enforce it lowers the skill celling. its now less about how you manage, keep on top of your units, outplay your opponent and more about following specific metas. its just really boring. I feel that lack of grit in the game, I think it mainly comes from the art style they chose and the animations. it really just feels too cartoony to create a proper atmosphere, whereby in coh2/1 it felt like I was a commander moving my units on the frontline, 3 just makes it feel like toy soldiers and tanks moving around.
This video is the perfect example that every person has an opinion. Doesn't mean that all opinions have any validity. This guy is completely clueless.
Obviously this "opinion" comes from a pre-conceived bias. Not liking Coh2, not expecting relic to perform, etc. i respect it, but it disqualified you in my eyes for someone whose comments on RTS games can be taken seriously. This is rather rambling for views. :)
I expect sequels to improve upon the previous games rather than be worse or simply stagnate. After all, if the sequel's no better than the previous game then why should anyone play it in favor of the previous one? Just because it's newer?
You are literally wrong on every level this is the best game in the franchise take the rose tinted glasses off
Play the free weekend just so you could talk trash on the game instead of actually trying to learn the game and play multiplayer because that’s where company of heroes has always been at it takes weeks to get your grips on multiplayer, but once you understand the game, just like to do multiplayer to stand out edition of the game and worth the price alone, the factions of varied and all are very unique and a lot of those design issues with company of heroes to balance have been done away. This is the best game in the franchise for multiplayer. Now I can’t speak on the campaign and all that shit I don’t really care about that and most people don’t even then to my understanding the campaign offers a lot for the price along with the North Africa campaign, and two additional free battle groups. This is a game you need to take your time with if you’ve got a proper review, this is not it.
Mistaken on the graphics company here is three looks MILES BETTER, and it also runs way better then company heroes to the only reason you think Company of heroes to looks better is because of the filters that they put on the game to hide the bad graphics. this is a more brightly colored theater of war, and in my personal opinion, it looks much more detailed for the animations to models the FX. They’re all better than Company of heroes two and I also think they changed up the gameplay enough to justify the 12 years of development developing a game takes a long time and for what we got so far this is good and mix of company heroes one and Company of heroes two gameplay into one good game, it creates a satisfying experience for both veterans of two and one I seriously think that people bandwagon hate this game because it’s cool when reality the Deb’s have put a lot of hard work into this game and getting it to a full release call the level which I believe are beyond that at this point with the many many improvements they have done
I smell a sperg babyman raging like Chris Chan did about Sonic Boom’s blue arms (you😂)
@@matt2.052
Even CoH veterans are trashing this sad excuse of a sequel. Over a year after release, after multiple patches and DLCs, the game is still stuck at "Mixed" review rating and the gameplay is as shallow as when it first came out.
For a game that is supposedly "all about the multiplayer", it sure seems to have the least amount of maps, unique faction mechanics and it has the most stale, repetitive metas in the franchise. What you call "balance" nearly everybody else calls "dumbing down".
As for the graphics, although the resolution of the textures and polycount of the assets has undeniable gone up, the art direction is terrible and everybody has talked about it. CoH 3 looks like a mobile game, the shading, level design and UI are simply terrible and borderline cartoony. The vibrancy of the colors has nothing to do with it, the problem is in the textures and shaders themselves. CoH 1 and 2 look leagues better.
And finally, people loved CoH because it also had a great "cinematic" campaign. CoH 2 was reviewed very negatively for having a weak campaign, and CoH 3 was absolutely trashed for having the most boring, laziest singleplayer possible. You must be living in another universe if you think people don't care about the singleplayer.
I see you've been imbibing the copium on this one.
I didn't even like CoH2 and yet I can still easily tell it's overall a better game, and definitely a far superior value proposition, than 3 in its current state.
You say the devs have "put a lot of hard work into this game" and yet over a year after release it's *still* lacking basic features that were present in previous games, a lot of players are reporting frequent and severe technical problems and glitches, the balancing is a complete mess, the AI still has issues, the audio mixing is a mess, the campaign flat-out sucks, and at times the visuals are somehow worse than CoH2 despite the game having released almost 10 years after it. It's not necessarily an outright *bad* game, but it's downright obnoxiously mediocre. If the devs put so much work into the game like you claim, where did all that work go?
I also never said this was a review. I said I played the game over the free weekend and wanted to go over what I experienced. If you can't tell that's not a review, I really can't help you.