Dissapointed

jaggeh

The single player game got 8 hours out of me (sergeant difficulty) and the multiplayer is truly woeful.

There were a few nice set peice battles towards the end but tbh meh think i got 38000 campaign points.

Gummy Panda

Haven't tried online yet but campaign isn't great. seems very bland. I defo miss DoW 1

Companion Cube

How exactly is the multiplayer truely woeful?

the single player is bland i agree, but the multiplayer is the best thing about this game.

jaggeh

no base building
no maintenance
no RPS
too few units, gone is the epic battle feel from dow
its impossible to come back from the brink with a plucky constructor secretly building a second base

They took a giant leap backwards with this game.

SP captain difficulty doesnt increase the AI of the enemy just makes your units out of paper and increases the hitpoints and special power recharge of the enemy.

Companion Cube

Base building is a staple of every single other rts on the market including its predesessor, its a good thing they broke away from it and did something different.

That "epic" feeling you are mentioning, that just chucking one mass of enemies at another, without caring how they are positioned or if they can actually kill the enemy. And who cares if they die, just mass produce some more.

If you want that zerg fest then once again every other rts has done it.

DOW 2 makes you care if you loose each individual unit, i take micro management over mindless base building any day.

humanji

I have to side with Jaggeh on this one. It's definietly not the game I was hoping for. It's still not that bad a game though. The single player campaign is a bit repetitive, but it's fun and I liked the story. The multiplayer is good too, but I felt it was a bit too fast and furious. It's good to have a developer try new ideas and ways of playing a game, and it worked for the most part here. Unfortunately, I was looking for a sequel to Dawn of War and not a spin-off.

TerrorFirmer

Companion Cube wrote: »

That "epic" feeling you are mentioning, that just chucking one mass of enemies at another, without caring how they are positioned or if they can actually kill the enemy. And who cares if they die, just mass produce some more.

No offense but obviously you're not very good at the first game. It's pretty demanding and competitive - and nothing like 'chucking one mass of enemies at another.' Yes it has base building but it revolves around tactics and speed. A very good player in DOW would easily wipe out 4 weak or new human opponents within 20 minutes - and it's nothing about numbers.

Companion Cube

You guys are nuts, relic should be thanked for mixing up the formula a bit.

We all have starcraft 2 coming this year, you cant get more trational, why should they both be trying to do the same thing?

But dont listen to me, the vast array of reviews say you guys should give the multiplayer a decent shot, a whole percentage higher than the original.

grizzly

I have to agree with Companion Cube, Relic were right to make a departure from DoW1. Making the game on such a small scale makes online so much more intense. The action starts seconds after you send troops out and can be over in 10-15 very hectic minutes. Which is missing in a lot of other online RTS, like in Starcraft where games take an 30mins - hour.

Nody

Companion Cube wrote: »

You guys are nuts, relic should be thanked for mixing up the formula a bit.

They have not mixed up anything, what they have done is a weak sauce copy of Call of Heroes which has better balance, control and well pretty much everything else as well. Nothing new in DoW2 except your commander choice so I don't see how Relic has "mixed up the forumula a bit". If there was something really new and never done before I'd agree but so far I've yet to see, or hear, anything to match that. And you don't even want me to get started on the Window gaming requirement for online play...

We all have starcraft 2 coming this year, you cant get more trational, why should they both be trying to do the same thing?

Because it is a sequel? Because they want to sell boxes? Check the poll, half the people testing the beta said they would not buy it. In fact I'm going to go out on a limb and say that DoW2 will sell worse then DoW1 and that Relic will have even more trouble selling their expansions to DoW2 (assuming they don't do a radical game change in it towards DoW1) as many bought DoW2 hoping for a follow up to DoW1. DoW2 will become the Conan of the series (for reference Conan sold a million boxes in rapid succession only to have the game collaps on itself rapidly and is today a shadow of it's former self, all under 6 months time).

DoW1 kept selling because people raving about how good it was; check this forum and the only once posting positive comments are, well you and now finally Grizzly. The rest are all posting complaints from minor to major, that should give you a hint behind my forecast for DoW2. I've yet to be on a non Relic game forum where I've seen people rave about how good DoW2 is, the best I've seen is single player is to short, online could be done better and if you like it play CoH, don't bother to buy it unless you're a fanatic.

What is even more worrying for Relic though is the complete and utter lack of buzz around the game in general though. When RA3 was released I saw thread up on thread of discussions, when SC2 started showing up I saw predictions that Korea would declare a national holiday on release day. When SC2 changed into three games I saw thread up and down on why this would be great because it meant three full length campaigns and how it would invigorate the multiplayer game and what unit people wanted to see (and tactical discussions based on what was already shown). On DoW2 I've usually seen one thread for the beta which had people note how this was not DoW1 and what gross imbalances existed in the game. Heck, only look at this forum which spends more time dead then alive compared to RA3 forum at the time.

But dont listen to me, the vast array of reviews say you guys should give the multiplayer a decent shot, a whole percentage higher than the original.

And that is your best retort? Listen to the reviewers who praise online gaming and because it is new (because reviewers are never bought and are always right as seen with Conan et al...)? Multiplayer is suppose to be good (if you're into that game style) but guess what, I don't care for online multiplayer DoW2 games (if I did I would play CoH instead). I played DoW1 because I had fun and enjoyed the game solo. I could fire up a map and do goofy things such as a 8 squad sniper scout set up and go wreck havoc, I can't do that in DoW2.

And you know what should scare Relic even more? Most people don't listen to reviewers as much as they listen to their peers and other gamers. With out positive reviews from players a game falls fast, no matter how inovative and technically brilliant it is. You want people to recommend the game when someone asks "What should I buy to play?" and I'm not seeing that. Even the reviewers listed on Metagaming raise the same point that Relic is most likely pissing people of with the changes, but they (the reviewers) don't mind because they wanted something new. Well most players don't want something brand new and different when they buy a sequel, because if they did they would buy something else.

Rant over

humanji

Companion Cube wrote: »

You guys are nuts, relic should be thanked for mixing up the formula a bit.

We all have starcraft 2 coming this year, you cant get more trational, why should they both be trying to do the same thing?

But dont listen to me, the vast array of reviews say you guys should give the multiplayer a decent shot, a whole percentage higher than the original.

I've given the multiplayer a shot and it's good. I just don't think it's a patch on the original. It's a different game. As Grizzly says, and I said above it's hectic and over quickly. Not everyone wants this. I liked having to spend a long time playing one battle. It's what made the game interesting to me. Quickly lashing your men out at the enemy as fast as you can just isn't as fun for me.

I've no problem with the new direction, I just wished they'd also made a game like the original, but bigger.

Mantel

humanji wrote: »

I've no problem with the new direction, I just wished they'd also made a game like the original, but bigger.

Indeed, if the engine could take it an Apocalypse expansion would be awesome.

Companion Cube

i agree on the point that if you are purchasing a sequel you come into it with a certain expectation that some of the core mechanics from the original will remain intact.

Considering however the amount of content they got through in the franchise with the 4 expansions, i think it would of been difficult to justify a sequel and (possibly) another bunch of expansions with while keeping it mostly the way it was.

Having never tried the beta i spent a good 10 hours on the multiplayer over the weekend and enjoyed every minute of it. I even found a team of two other guys and we are talking about team combinations and tactics for each map for next weekend.

The multiplayer is deep and involving, however the single player is a joke and skirmishes against the cpu are boring and devoid of any real tension.

If single player rts gaming, im all with you guys, be it either skirmishes or the story mode the game wasnt put together with alot of care.

SeantheMan

Did people not try the BETA before they spent money on it ?? ....or read some of the reviews of what ppl thought

I'm enjoyin it tbh , hope i get to use terminator squads in the campaign.

The only dissappointing thing is the campaignis Space Marines only.
Its one of the reasons i love Starcraft and Warcraft so much, that you seen the war and the story from everyones perspective

I'd have liked to see the Eldars story

humanji

I'd say that the reason for the Space Marine only campaign is because they'll release the other stories as seperate add-ons.

uberpixie

Playing the campaign co-op with my mate and we are both really enjoying the game.

Splitting up the squad control between two people def makes the game less pissy and it is very much Diablo in the 40k universe. Fun!

I would def say the campaign as a single player would get boring very quickly, however with a 2nd person its a blast.

Having played the beta I know what to expect with the multiplayer: which once I got used to I quite like, it's a nice change from the norm.

Sephiroth_dude

It would have been nice if they had added a bit of variety when it came to the missions in the campaign.

machalla

betafrog wrote: »

Nody = Knob
Companion Cube = Legend

Once again the internet fails to disappoint..

betafrog

Spear

I'm enjoying it greatly so far, though it's fair to say that it's because I followed it's development and knew how it would differ from the original. I was looking for something more akin to Chaos Gate just as this is. Though I do still miss the fun of popping chaos cultists with single bolter rounds.

Pyr0

It's annoying that the difficulty increase just ramps up the HP and damage of enemies which turns your terminators into paper, having your whole squad wiped out by one warrior with a venom cannon is just a joke tbh. I've no other major gripes with the game really, it's enjoyable but some inbalances need to be sorted out in MP (Tyranids i'm look at ye :pac:). The annoying population cap bug is headwrecking also. The typical response when complaining about this is "Well just don't reach the cap level, it's not that hard". The point is I shouldn't have to avoid reaching the cap to enable the bug, the problem shouldn't be there in the first place !

If the game had a few of the little features CoH had it'd be brilliant, I don't find anything wrong with incoperating features of a game that has had great success, a game which Relic themeselves developed.

grizzly

What's the max at the moment? 8 units?

The problem with lifting the pop cap would be that once a player gained advantage with resources it would be impossible to turn the tables. He would just spam units and roll over you.

jaggeh

i gave the game a little more time, halfway through captain difficulty, iron halo can take 1 maybe 2 hits and its gone, then my captain dies in another 2 maybe 3 hits, versus a Nob or bigger.

also a single frag grenade killed my tactical squad... i dread to think what it will be like when i

reach the ork boss who spams grenades or even the avatar with its huge AOE attack

once again the multiplayer dissapointed, im all for departures and adding new features but seriously this game is not Dawn of war 2, its Warhammer 40k: Company of diablo.

GO_Bear

I must admit i was septical when i heard they where scrapping the building production , that was something i enjoyed alot in DOW1 , as a massive part of the game was getting a good build order and the game comming down to who get a good foothold in tier 1 , ( me and a mate played alot me as eldar and him as imperials :> epic games that only lasted till tier 2 0.o )

At the moment the multiplayer is annoying cause every person i come across is the dam buggies and me orczies can't keep up xD i equip burna'a and still get raped , well anyways i am probably doing it wrong never played the orcs not even in DoW1


However having said all this i am really enjoying the single player its different to DoW1 where all you had to do was turtle for a few mins tech up and mass and army .

But i guess i am enjoying the RPG side of it a bit to much a bit that really impressed me was when

You find your first piece of Terminator armor and try to figure out who you wanna put it on xD

Anyways that my two cents

Singleplayer :):):)
Multiplayer :mad::mad::pac::):mad:

Galvasean

Spear wrote: »

I was looking for something more akin to Chaos Gate just as this is.

Glad I'm not the only fan of that game.

Cuddlesworth

Nody wrote: »

DoW2 will become the Conan of the series (for reference Conan sold a million boxes in rapid succession only to have the game collaps on itself rapidly and is today a shadow of it's former self, all under 6 months time).

That's not a fair comparison. AOC tanked because they released it with more then half of the content missing. The end level stuff simply wasn't there, the much vaunted and main selling point of the game to my knowledge still hasn't been released and even if it has I couldn't care because of the horrific bugs and horrible customer support that they offered.

Its a good game, the problem with it is that it is geared towards pro RTS players of which base building was a annoyance and the real game was in the micro on the characters. That was a mistake.

titan18

Didnt bother to buy it after the beta.If the single player was crap, this game would be useless to me.1st game was brilliant, hated the beta on this, didnt suit me.Its just build units quickly and send them off to die quickly.

1st game required way more skill to play through teching etc.It was generally the 1st guy to Tech 3 who won.Anyone good was there in under 5 minutes, so games were still finished quickly.

Asav

Having played all the original installments and lurked on multiplayer on and off for a very longtime, I can say that I was one of those people that could destroy 4 weaker players in 20 min, as has been said in this topic,
and I treated DOW2 with a large bit of annoyance beacuse I didnt see a hybrid of COH working out to be frank.

Single Player:
Anyway my views of the game is that the single player isnt as good as id hoped for, to be frank the story itself isnt bad, not really compelling like reading a good book come to life but intresting enough to keep me playing, but the single player is in reality just a diablo with guns copycat, and thats not exactly bad if you like diablo :pac: and it does link the fact that in this era of warhammer, the imperium is stretched thin and the space marines are few in number with one 'company' consisting of fewer than 100 men most of the time, that always made me cringe when I saw dawn of war one with one company consisting of what seemed to be a limitless number of space marines.

Anyway the single player conisits of 4-5 odd intresting story objective ridden missions, the other 30 or so are, go from point A to point B killing hordes of enemies to kill boss C. Feels like playing in a WoW raiding guild fighting the bosses as they all follow the general 'avoid the aoe' tank and spank boss fights. Overall the single player is pretty bland and unimaginative, however what saves it from complete damnation is the fact you can co-op it with a friend I dare anyone to play on primarch difficulty with a friend and not call it fun. Because the sheer tactical needs of it mean you will needs some VOIP system to chat because text typing or using the dreadful windows live com system, you will just lose lose lose.

Multiplayer:
As I said before I played alot of DOW1 and have played alot of DOW2 multiplayer aswell, and both have their appeals, but ive come to enjoy DOW2 multiplayer alot more, they work in very diffrent ways and you are either going to hate it or love it based on what type of strategy you are accustomed to. In dow1 base building was key and as said before it was all tech related, however most of the time I could destroy someones base with afew mass spammed teir one tech units without much trouble just by hit and run tactics. DOW2 is far far far more tactical, whoever commented its just build units 'run in and die' is simply a poor player and clearly doesnt understand there's a 'retreat' button for a reason. Ive had games where ive come back from the brink of a 22-300 point almost assured lose to a 22-0 victory simply based on tactical outmanovering and strategic thinking, not because I play an eldar who simply warped his base to some other point on the map. What I love about it is you HAVE to acctualy plan your attacks not just simply out-tech and out-unit spam your enemy, to lose 3-4 squads in a reckless assault even if you win a victory point can mean defeat later on because you wasted so many units while your enemy preserved his and retreated to fight later on.


Now you are either simply a 'base builder' strat gamer or a 'tactics' strat gamer both have merits, but I belive that tactics strat takes a certain larger ammount of ability to win than the former, so all in all im enjoying DOW 2 alot multiplayer wise, but he story of DOW1 was far more intresting singleplayer wise.

smythire

when there so little enjoyment from the campain. i hope the multi player is good aka much better...i thought the DW1 expantion packs were pretty great

docdolittle

that was the biggest load of crap... ever....

I'm really really dissapointed, just completed it there... what a waste of time that was...

I really hope the online is better than that!! :mad:

Nody

docdolittle wrote: »

that was the biggest load of crap... ever....

Clearly you must never have tried Firewarrior...

Shiminay

After a lot of faffing about with my PC at home, I finally got around to installing it the other day. Not impressed with the campaign and Multiplayer isn't great. It's not what I'd call an RTS anymore, it's a squad based combat game.

grizzly

Kharn wrote: »

After a lot of faffing about with my PC at home, I finally got around to installing it the other day. Not impressed with the campaign and Multiplayer isn't great. It's not what I'd call an RTS anymore, it's a squad based combat game.

The I stopped playing the campaign about half way though, it just got a little dull and I lost interest. It felt a bit too linear – you unlock X unit that counters Y unit, without much scope to do things differently.

ShadowHearth

Companion Cube wrote: »

Base building is a staple of every single other rts on the market including its predesessor, its a good thing they broke away from it and did something different.

That "epic" feeling you are mentioning, that just chucking one mass of enemies at another, without caring how they are positioned or if they can actually kill the enemy. And who cares if they die, just mass produce some more.

If you want that zerg fest then once again every other rts has done it.

DOW 2 makes you care if you loose each individual unit, i take micro management over mindless base building any day.

+1!

I actually in love with dow2. I was a Wow Junky, and now i am DOW2 junky!

Single player is not best quality, but its decent enought. And again, its something different.

Multiplayer is just pure 100% awesomeness!!! And best things about is:

NO FREAKING BASE MANAGMENT! If i whant manage mine base ill buy sim city! Now you can actually make war in rts game, not freaking babysit your base.

This rts actually makes you think about what to biuld, not just mass produce **** and str+a accross map!

I was really in love with starcraft, really amazing rts, but now when i sow sc2 multiplayer fights i got dissapointed... They try to make us care about each drone you losse... But i actually dont give a **** about faceless drone pesent, which costs 40 crystals...


I think that DOW2 is best what could happen to rts games. Combining rts+rpg elements in multiplayer is best idea! I actualy care about mine army!


P.s. i whant expansion! with Necrons!

Teutorix

If you want RTS with pure combat buy a war sim like total war.

And anyone who has played TT knows that necrons are a noob army

ShadowHearth

Teutorix wrote: »

If you want RTS with pure combat buy a war sim like total war.

And anyone who has played TT knows that necrons are a noob army

well i am newb , i started seriuosly only from dow2. i am playing Dow1 now aswell ( campgain) only becouse of story.

But honestly so far, i can see that dow2 is really more better in tactical way. Its basicly steam rolling on enemy possition in dow1. Thought single player is really not bad. ( story wise).