DoW2, WTF?

[The Madman]

I love it!

Dawn of War 2 hearkens more towards tactical games like the old Myth series or even X-com rather than a traditional rts, and personally I've always loved the tactical genre. You're up close and personally commanding a small elite squad of units in the midst of an interactive environment, where your primary concerns are more along the basics of battle.

I can see how people are disappointed. Change too much and people will complain, change too little and they'll also complain! Relic choose to innovate rather than sticking to the same formula, and I'd say it's the right choice. Multiplayer is fast and frantic with a good sense of tactics and strategy. The combat is as brutal as ever. The units few but adaptable. And most importantly it's fun!

What intrigues me most though is the potential for the Singleplayer. With these rpg mechanics and small squad based combat there's a ton of room for a more in-depth campaign than any of the previous Dawn of War campaigns. Can't wait to see what they've done with that! These are the same folks after all who created the brilliant Homeworld campaign.

 

[Neosage]

It wont even come close to competing with Starcraft 2

Well they are different games now, at least they didn't remake their first game. Unlike blizzard.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

It took FOREVER to get 9 races in the first DoW, now everyone just expects it to be instant in DoW II?

-and since when does Company of Heroes have teleporting space elves, jetpacks, and a giant fucking Zerg lizard thing that eats everything in it's path?

Sucks that people are intolerant.

It's a different kind of game. Will traditional RTS players like it? Maybe not. Do you want a large scale game like SupCom, TA, or Sins of a Solar Empire? This isn't it.

Once the full game comes out with the bigger maps, maybe that will turn out differently. Though I know of no game as massive as SoaSE.

Why did they have to go changing stuff, when the original formula was not just great, but phenomenal.

Looks to me like it's the same combat focused game with less vehicles and no bases, and more squad cap.

-and come on, if they didn't "change" anything then they'd be bitched at that too. Damned if they do, Damned if they don't. I do miss some relic units like Land Raider and such, and I bet the Basilisk will not be here when the full game comes out and the IG are added in (by expansion probably).

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

woops, double post.

 

[Elurindel]

I intend to play the beta when I get back to my computer tonight, but I welcome the chance to not have to mess around with Buildings. Sure, DoW tries to get around that problem that making such huge structures would take ages by having them brought in ready-made, but honestly, Space Marines don't bring in those kinds of production facilities to a non-conquered world in such quick time. I welcome the chance to play guerilla tactics (and to me it looks like it'll be more of a RTT, Real Time Tactics) whilst not having to worry about whether or not I need to Construct Additional Pylons.

Also, I don't see why people are bitching about race numbers. The original DoW had four, and just because Chaos are out doesn't mean it won't be a good game. These things take time to, if not balance, then at least create something different.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

Isn't it awesome that Relic is trying something totally new and totally ballsy? Don't we all always ***** about the fact that every developer pumps out the same old crap every year? Isn't that why we hate Activision? Jesus, guys. Relic is trying something new. If you don't like it, well, them's the breaks. I'm sure Relic is planning on alienating some of their fans. You can't change a game that much and not have that happen. But, shouldn't we applaud them, whether you like the game or not?

Besides, in terms of the DoW II vs. Starcraft II debate, I'm gonna have to say that Relic gets major points here. I mean, SCII looks awesome (and will probably be worth the whole $150), but it looks almost exactly the same as the first Starcraft. Just, you know, new units and stuff. I'm not saying DoW II will be "better" than SCII, but it definitely gets a few more points in the "originality" and "ballsiness" categories.

Unless of course you count "milking the shit out of your franchise" as a category. Then Blizzard wins hands down. Damn you Activision and your whoring of good, wholesome game developers.

 

[Malkavian]

I will not be getting it, I think.
Major point is that the gameplay has changed radically [brace for bitching...]
I'm not gonna be "angry" or "bitchy" about it, but I wanted a new DoW with enhaced graphics and updated gameplay. They have made a very different game, from what I hear from people, and that it is so far from DoW is enough for me to not even want to try the beta(I have soulstorm).
It's not that I'm snobbish about my DoW gameplay. But I have my MMO's and my PS3 games, and between them, my sparetime is easily filled up, what, with RL and everything. DoW would have had my money if I knew I could expect a "proper" sequel to one of my all time favourite games. Since it has changed so much, I will treat it as any other games: it could be good, but I'm not aching to find out, and don't really care about it.

I'm sure many people will enjoy the game - maybe I could too. But I don't "need" it anymore.


As for bases: DoW had a good feel to bases. The bases were never "cities" they are landing zones, quick bridgeheads where troopcarriers and the like can land and drop off their "cargo". Notice that it's not construction vehicles, and no building resources are nedded - it is pre-prepped elements, deployed and quickly unfolded. They are meant to be temporary bases, from which to launch the skirmish and to act as a secure landingzone.

 

[Dys]

LOL dow2 is nothin like coh, i played coh for about 2 years and dow 2 feels nothin like coh

Other than being on the same engine and using an evolved version of the cover system?
They are similar/ But then again, CoH was similar to dawn of war. It was an incredibly good mechanic in CoH, why the hell shouldn't they build on it?

As for the 4 armies thing I can see why you'd be annoyed, as am I, but ultimately one has to realize that building new models from scractch takes a long time. The game mechanics are completely different to those in the original DoW so they wouldn't be able to use anything from the original, to release it with all the races in the original would take far too long, although I would have liked to see at least a 5th army (provided it's not chaos or dark eldar, we already have marines/eldar and I want something else to add variety).

There will be expansions with full length campagns in the future, no doubt. They hopefully will be priced as expansions and therefore I have no problem with them (relic gets bonus points if they ditch the broken windows live shit).

I love it!
These are the same folks after all who created the brilliant Homeworld campaign.

As for this, I agree the single player will be awsome gameplay wise, but while relic did do the homeworld awsome, they also did the original DoW "I'm a librarian, purge the beast"...."I'm a librarian, I am now with chaos" (for those of you who don't know warhammer 40k, take my word that it is absurd and contradicts pretty much everything librarians are meant to be).

 

[Kikosemmek]

Remedy your disappointment: don't think of it as DoW I sans the buildings. Think of it as DotA sans the suck. I enjoyed the beta and think the game will turn out great.

 

[Howlingwolf214]

The developers decided to build on the original because they didn't want a clone. So they melded it into a hybrid and split it up.

It's now aimed more at strategists not people who build floods of units.

 

[MercenaryCanary]

I played the multiplayer beta, and it seems reeeeally simple. Limited units, no buildings, and minimal game modes make it a tough sell as a competitive RTS.

I won't be ditching starcraft for this, that's for sure.

Zerg Rushing anyway this evening?

 

[Sathannas]

Well not to bash anyone, but why are we bashing a game for having minimal basebuilding in it, when a game like World in Conflict didn't get the same amount of flak, i mean talk about a game with NO base building in it and only a limited amount of resources. It was a fun game and i will be looking forward to DoW2 with great anticipation.

I respect the fact that relic dares to make different rts's and we can see that with their game creation history, all the way back from Homeworld Relic has made different takes on the RTS genre, and for DoW2 to be so radically different, some would say go back to the roots I.E (be more like the table top game) would only be expected.

Starcraft 2 on the other hand has had 10-11 years to be developed that almost a decade and what we see is the same thing we saw almost a decade ago, granted there are some new units and a small shiny coat of graphics but thats IT, nothing else. One could hope that blizzard would have tried to be alittle more innovative, but i don't mind it because the Formula is still good C&C3 proved that.

I guess in the end it really comes down to taste, if you are abit conservative and want an oldschool RTS Starcraft 2 will diffinatly be your game.

If you want something more refreshing and with a greater emphasis on not getting your units slaughtered well knowing that you can just build new ones and a greater focus on close
combat then im sure DoW2 will be your game.

((Awesome amount of text! ))

 

[Z4N5H1N]

I played the multiplayer beta, and it seems reeeeally simple. Limited units, no buildings, and minimal game modes make it a tough sell as a competitive RTS.

I won't be ditching starcraft for this, that's for sure.

Zerg Rushing anyway this evening?

Hehe not at the moment, but I could be convinced to do so fairly easily. You on bnet?

 

[MercenaryCanary]

I played the multiplayer beta, and it seems reeeeally simple. Limited units, no buildings, and minimal game modes make it a tough sell as a competitive RTS.

I won't be ditching starcraft for this, that's for sure.

Zerg Rushing anyway this evening?

Hehe not at the moment, but I could be convinced to do so fairly easily. You on bnet?

I always end up as the victim of zerg rushes, so not at the moment. I remember when I just got frustrated so I quit and joined another match as zerg. I decided to zerg rush them and then I got countered rush by 3 teams. I haven't played since.

 

[The Lyre]

I...really like it...

No, really, sure there's only one all-purpose building, but it still maintains an (admittedly watered down) tech-advancement system, the features they've...'borrowed' from CoH work brilliantly, and the combat is now solely based around territorial advancement - never again will I have to throw my Orks against a base filled with nothing but turrets over and over again.

If you're playing Space Marines, and you're used to being able to take your time advancing up a huge tech-tree, then I understand, but the other three races are fantastic in DoW2.

The combat is clearly where they have focused, and I think it shows - you actually have to use your brain now, it's become a game of tactics, rather than a game of 'who has the most tanks' which is no bad thing in my books.

 

[CoffeeMonkey]

Well, to me at least, DoW2 is a great alternative to the classic RTS. It's more like a Real Time Tactical game, really. I don't know if it has anything to do with the design process, but DoW2 catches the feel of the tabletop game much better than the original DoW (and that shouldn't really be an argument for making the game anyway). But it's great! I recognize the brutality of the setting and the feeling of each of the races in that game.

And comeon guys. Yeah - cutting the races from 9 to 4 is rather.. well... Logical I guess. I can't think of a single RTS that came with MORE than 4 races to start with. The time it takes to develop and balance each race against eachother rises exponentially with each new race added. (AND of course they want to make room for expansions). It was exactly the same for DoW1 - they could've implemented all the races from the beginning but they didn't. And everything from Dark Crusade and on was just milking the cow anyway. In my opinion, I really don't think that's a valid point of criticism.

Anyways:
I play the DoW2 beta and I like it.

 

[Cowabungaa]

EDIT: Wait, you can still rush in DoW2, rush to cap VCs and then set up defences? A good rush at 1 lane can have you winning the game.

Definatly not, I tried that yesterday. Had a really nice defence on a VP, as Eldar. And just when you think you're ok there (and gearing up for an assault on a different VP) POOF a Warp-Spider commander with a team of Banshees teleports right behind my shuriken cannons and finishes my whole defencive force in a matter of seconds. Was overwhelmed, couldn't do anything, but damn it was good.

 

[Yuriatayde]

I'm actually kinda happy with the route they took. They're trying something new, trying to be more true to the tabletop, uhm... which is great... I don't like it, personally, but neither do alot of people... and y'know what that means? Means I can get Soulstorm without having to worry that it'll be depreciated right away as it's sequil comes out ^.^

That said, I'm always in favor of gaming companies trying new things. Wish they'd stop making 90% sequels though... But creativity and manly spheres are in short supply thesedays, I guess.

 

[nikomas1]

Holy shit! A game were tactics matter!? Why!? Why can't I spam units like in the first one? Why do I have to be tactical!? Why!?

God I'm tierd of hearing that already...

 

[Useful Dave]

I miss having freakin' defences.

Sure, you say that they have a Defence guy who builds turrets, yet I'm stuck to him 24/7 because everyone elkse is supposed to attack?

Company of Heroes had some form of defences at least, sandbags, trenches, vickers emplacements, 17 pounders. What was wrong with that?