People forget the COH2 release

[Krude]

When you compare COH2 with it's what decade almost of content updates and patches to a new game in the series, you do the game a disservice.


COH2 at launch was horrible, but look where it ended, flawed in many ways fundamentally that this game feels isn't.

As a foundation, this game feels really good, and sure for many it might not have as much content as they'd want, nor does it have the content coh2 has, but if you go beyond shortsightedness you should be able to see that this game has so much potential.

The devs care about how it runs, that it should run well for you, the attention to detail in some things is insane, it's not over bloated, streamlined in a good way and yes, streamlining is a good thing.

They could've put a bunch of bulletins in like coh2 that every hates and it'd look like "content" to many of the haters while they'd also come to forums and say they hate it. I'm glad that feature is gone.

It's stuff like that, that you gotta really think about, because sometimes less is more.

And I'm really hopeful and excited to see what becomes of this game in the future with releases like new factions, more sections, maps, cosmetics etc.

I'm loving what they'd done with being able to put infantry on tanks, towing, bringing back coh1's tech tree, and honestly how no fuss the game can be at times.

No grind, no unbalanced bullletin bs, just a good game.

Like this was hell of a lot better than COH2's launch, and yet a lot of the haters are talking absolute crap about this game using that as a comparison, ironically that game got compared negatively to COH1.

[[SF] MooMan]

Yeah. I havent bought this game yet but COH2's launch was ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ awful and everyone seems to forget that just because of the end product

[Düsenkröte]

Yeah I remember how they also said that CoH 2 was a graphic downgrade and what not...while comparing its content to a game that already had 2 standalones.

[Rafsmen]

Well, don't you think the game should be judged based on current state not hopes of patches and balance? Otherwise Star Citizen is 10/10.
Just compare the UI of CoH2 and CoH3 - I hope I'm wrong, but this game looks like it has been done on an inadequate budget, not sure it will be patched to a reasonable state.

[Krude]

Originally posted by Rafsmen:

Well, don't you think the game should be judged based on current state not hopes of patches and balance? Otherwise Star Citizen is 10/10.
Just compare the UI of CoH2 and CoH3 - I hope I'm wrong, but this game looks like it has been done on an inadequate budget, not sure it will be patched to a reasonable state.

Does the game run well for majority of people? yes.
Did the game get made in good faith, with a insane period of time being essentially beta tested by a chunk of the community? yes.
Did the devs listen to the community? yes.
Does the game represent what we were previewed and shown in livestreams, trailers, news? yes.

I get where you are coming from but the product is literally what it's always looked like, no one was hating on it two weeks ago, a year ago, etc

Feels more like people enjoy hating on launch day, which I know is a big part of steam culture and I get that but sometimes it's a bit much, or unfair. In this case it truly is unfair, how is this game mixed reviews when it's perfectly solid. Even reviews think so from news sites.

If anything it's only fault is being somewhat mediocre in terms of say maybe we could've used some more customisation at launch.

Unlike star citizen, there's no doubt in anyone who is impartial, this is a full game.

If the foundation is good, they can add onto this and it'll only soar.

Another comparison I see which as a total war fan I found hilarious is people saying to give the IP to creative assembly, which is really telling of how swept up in the emotions some people are:

CA, the company who nearly destroyed itself releasing buggy and poor performing games, pissing off it's community by not listening until they released total war warhammer and won back everyone?

Who did so doing exactly what these devs have done, listened to the community, total war warhammer a game that was barebones at launch and imo didn't become a gem until the release of it's first two dlc's that added RoR's for first time?

The company that's since launched some mediocre one drop games like thrones of britannia that no one plays and troy which has barely anyone playing, both games that my friends and I quit because they randomly crash to desktop?

The same company that released three kingdoms and then had it in eternal "release dlc, fix a couple bugs, add several, rinse repeat" cycle before saying "we know you all love 3k but we are dropping support of the game for "reasons"" ????

No, this game works, it does what it promised, it has a great foundation and I'm sorry but COH3 I reckon will in time become the best COH of them all if the devs carry on with good intentions in heart and looking forward to a potential bright future.

Rampant misremembering of the past, unfair hate, trolling etc isn't feedback to the devs, it's just damaging, what happens if this game fails because of said hate?

I dunno about you all, but I loved dawn of war more than any other RTS, dow3 was a disgustingly bad game, and it was ditched and the IP, an IP that was huge, is now dead.

Wanna risk edging towards that reality? Look up what a self fulfilling prophecy is.

there is no way this game deserves mixed reviews, nor does it deserve the hate, it deserves constructive criticism while fairly pointing out what it does right.

That's my opinion on it at least.

[ShrapnelGrant]

Nope. i skip this for it.

[ShrapnelGrant]

Call me Legendary

[DPK[???_????]]

OP should join the sales team, you are good at selling the future!

[KaBandha]

Originally posted by Lokieys:

You're all actually low INT. Coh2 launched over ten years ago. The industry advances in technology make it so there is ZERO excuse in any way shape or form to launch a game like this. Plus it stings even more because this is clearly built with console players in mind.

Just for a frame of reference here, if we take post world war america for example so mid 1950's and tack on 10 ish years that was enough time for us to put a man on the moon. From early jets to space tech in less than 15 some years.

So please look me in the proverbial eyes and tell me there is any excuse to release a worse game than was launched over ten years ago? They had the literal key to success in their pocket and they blew it. Coh2 may have launched in a piss poor state but that does not excuse coh3 from launching in this state.

Just like they blew Age of empires 4.
Just like they blew dawn of war 3.
And now, just like they blew company of heroes 3.
54% positive rating - sub 24k concurrent on launch day and doesn't appear to be climbing back to its previous record.
compare this to sons of the forest, while yes it is a different genre they managed to produce a fully functional game with minimal bugs, beautiful graphics, a living world, and an actual endgame, minimal marketing, and with a 5 man dev studio. Props to all indie developers completely outshining any and all triple A studios.

How many people does relic employ?
https://growjo.com/company/Relic_Entertainment
As of last years statement from their company just under 350.

350 individuals managed to fumble the bag this hard. But lets be reasonable and assume half of those 350 are working on age of empires 4, and maybe an extra 10-20% doing various projects and bug fixing and what not. That still leaves around 100 odd people to continue working on company of heroes 2. Over ten years now.

See how this is all starting to add up? They ignore feedback from the beta, game barely functions much better than the beta. Steam is full of threads of people who can't even open the game and if they are lucky enough to open it the game runs like crap or it bug splats. Faction balance is vehemently broken. Commanders are inbalanced. The color palate sucks. The graphics are atrocious for 2023. This isn't fornite. Many people cried for the game to be delayed again, because contrary to my tone here i WANTED coh3 to succeed oh so badly.
With just under 3k hours in 2 and untold amount in 1 I really wanted 3 to be the next big step in the right direction. Instead it was 2 backflips and a sick kickflip backwards.

(i won't even dig up all the dirt on the forum mod here who was constantly banning people weeks and months prior to the games launch to anyone who dared to speak negatively about the games future.)

So now you want to tell me its justifiable to pay 60 dollars to get bent over and railed by a company of incompetent chimpanzees, but not only that people actually go out of their way to personally defend the multi million dollar corporation on steam forums?

:SkullNBones:

TL;DR
Piss poor behavior in the past does NOT excuse it in the present. If a company has failed to grow itself properly within a span of ten years and can barely put out something that's not even a shell of its former titles then there is a clear and present issue here. Please stop defending the million dollar corpos.

Pretty much sums it all, completely agree.

[Blu3|Lightning]

Originally posted by Lokieys:

Originally posted by Plastic.Luv:

Does the game run well for majority of people? yes.
Did the game get made in good faith, with a insane period of time being essentially beta tested by a chunk of the community? yes.
Did the devs listen to the community? yes.
Does the game represent what we were previewed and shown in livestreams, trailers, news? yes.

I get where you are coming from but the product is literally what it's always looked like, no one was hating on it two weeks ago, a year ago, etc

Feels more like people enjoy hating on launch day, which I know is a big part of steam culture and I get that but sometimes it's a bit much, or unfair. In this case it truly is unfair, how is this game mixed reviews when it's perfectly solid. Even reviews think so from news sites.

If anything it's only fault is being somewhat mediocre in terms of say maybe we could've used some more customisation at launch.

Unlike star citizen, there's no doubt in anyone who is impartial, this is a full game.

If the foundation is good, they can add onto this and it'll only soar.

Another comparison I see which as a total war fan I found hilarious is people saying to give the IP to creative assembly, which is really telling of how swept up in the emotions some people are:

CA, the company who nearly destroyed itself releasing buggy and poor performing games, pissing off it's community by not listening until they released total war warhammer and won back everyone?

Who did so doing exactly what these devs have done, listened to the community, total war warhammer a game that was barebones at launch and imo didn't become a gem until the release of it's first two dlc's that added RoR's for first time?

The company that's since launched some mediocre one drop games like thrones of britannia that no one plays and troy which has barely anyone playing, both games that my friends and I quit because they randomly crash to desktop?

The same company that released three kingdoms and then had it in eternal "release dlc, fix a couple bugs, add several, rinse repeat" cycle before saying "we know you all love 3k but we are dropping support of the game for "reasons"" ????

No, this game works, it does what it promised, it has a great foundation and I'm sorry but COH3 I reckon will in time become the best COH of them all if the devs carry on with good intentions in heart and looking forward to a potential bright future.

Rampant misremembering of the past, unfair hate, trolling etc isn't feedback to the devs, it's just damaging, what happens if this game fails because of said hate?

I dunno about you all, but I loved dawn of war more than any other RTS, dow3 was a disgustingly bad game, and it was ditched and the IP, an IP that was huge, is now dead.

Wanna risk edging towards that reality? Look up what a self fulfilling prophecy is.

there is no way this game deserves mixed reviews, nor does it deserve the hate, it deserves constructive criticism while fairly pointing out what it does right.

That's my opinion on it at least.

I'm sorry but no, I won't even dog you on every point here for being wrong but to name a few
1. nothing changed from the beta at all. Not one balancing tweak.

2. Performance is still bad for a majority of the playerbase. Go look and count the steam threads of people who cannot even enter the game, or bugsplat on entry.

3. If the devs had listened to the community do you really think it would have launched at this approval rating? They did NOT listen. They made a shiny little PR video and addressed the bland coloring and sound design which both still suck in my opinion.

4. Plenty of people were hating on this game several weeks ago. They all got banned by unsaid forum mod who shut down any and all feedback that shed the game in a negative light, myself included.

5. relic has done itself no favors with age of empires 4, or dawn of war 3. If 2 incidents is enough to be called a behavioral pattern than imagine my surprise when it happens a third time.

It currently deserves every inch of bad reviews it's receiving.

Not to mention they did not market this as early access. This is marketed as the full 1.0 launch of company of heroes.

Does this feel like a 1.0 launch to you?

When AOE4 is such a bad game, why does it have mostly positive reviews?

Haters gonna hate…

[Alezul]

I see this argument so often that it blows my mind.

The point of a sequel is to build upon what was there previously, not start over.

What's the point of a sequel if you take one step forward and one step back?

If they can't release a game that's 100% better than what we have at the current time(not coh2 launch, but right now), why are they even releasing it?

[Blu3|Lightning]

Originally posted by Lokieys:

Originally posted by just|Blu3™:

When AOE4 is such a bad game, why does it have mostly positive reviews?

Haters gonna hate…

Now go look at its concurrent players, and compare it to age of empires 3 and 2 definitive edition. You'll be surprised to learn that yet again the previous titles in the installation have a far higher player count than the current relic title does. (:

I got to disappoint you. I looked it up. At the moment 14000 ppl play AOE4 and only 4000 play AOE2:DE

[[Strike]LaserClaw]

Originally posted by Plastic.Luv:

When you compare COH2 with it's what decade almost of content updates and patches to a new game in the series, you do the game a disservice.


COH2 at launch was horrible, but look where it ended, flawed in many ways fundamentally that this game feels isn't.

As a foundation, this game feels really good, and sure for many it might not have as much content as they'd want, nor does it have the content coh2 has, but if you go beyond shortsightedness you should be able to see that this game has so much potential.

The devs care about how it runs, that it should run well for you, the attention to detail in some things is insane, it's not over bloated, streamlined in a good way and yes, streamlining is a good thing.

They could've put a bunch of bulletins in like coh2 that every hates and it'd look like "content" to many of the haters while they'd also come to forums and say they hate it. I'm glad that feature is gone.

It's stuff like that, that you gotta really think about, because sometimes less is more.

And I'm really hopeful and excited to see what becomes of this game in the future with releases like new factions, more sections, maps, cosmetics etc.

I'm loving what they'd done with being able to put infantry on tanks, towing, bringing back coh1's tech tree, and honestly how no fuss the game can be at times.

No grind, no unbalanced bullletin bs, just a good game.

Like this was hell of a lot better than COH2's launch, and yet a lot of the haters are talking absolute crap about this game using that as a comparison, ironically that game got compared negatively to COH1.

Relic didnt learn from their mistakes and we now all suffer...

[Blu3|Lightning]

Originally posted by Lokieys:

Originally posted by just|Blu3™:

I got to disappoint you. I looked it up. At the moment 14000 ppl play AOE4 and only 4000 play AOE2:DE

that would be aoe3 de. aoe2de has 20k in game currently but nice try troll. moving on.

Because it’s running on any potato PC. You don’t even need a dGPU for it. And you must be the troll with multiple game bans…

[Krude]

Originally posted by Lokieys:

Originally posted by Plastic.Luv:

Does the game run well for majority of people? yes.
Did the game get made in good faith, with a insane period of time being essentially beta tested by a chunk of the community? yes.
Did the devs listen to the community? yes.
Does the game represent what we were previewed and shown in livestreams, trailers, news? yes.

I get where you are coming from but the product is literally what it's always looked like, no one was hating on it two weeks ago, a year ago, etc

Feels more like people enjoy hating on launch day, which I know is a big part of steam culture and I get that but sometimes it's a bit much, or unfair. In this case it truly is unfair, how is this game mixed reviews when it's perfectly solid. Even reviews think so from news sites.

If anything it's only fault is being somewhat mediocre in terms of say maybe we could've used some more customisation at launch.

Unlike star citizen, there's no doubt in anyone who is impartial, this is a full game.

If the foundation is good, they can add onto this and it'll only soar.

Another comparison I see which as a total war fan I found hilarious is people saying to give the IP to creative assembly, which is really telling of how swept up in the emotions some people are:

CA, the company who nearly destroyed itself releasing buggy and poor performing games, pissing off it's community by not listening until they released total war warhammer and won back everyone?

Who did so doing exactly what these devs have done, listened to the community, total war warhammer a game that was barebones at launch and imo didn't become a gem until the release of it's first two dlc's that added RoR's for first time?

The company that's since launched some mediocre one drop games like thrones of britannia that no one plays and troy which has barely anyone playing, both games that my friends and I quit because they randomly crash to desktop?

The same company that released three kingdoms and then had it in eternal "release dlc, fix a couple bugs, add several, rinse repeat" cycle before saying "we know you all love 3k but we are dropping support of the game for "reasons"" ????

No, this game works, it does what it promised, it has a great foundation and I'm sorry but COH3 I reckon will in time become the best COH of them all if the devs carry on with good intentions in heart and looking forward to a potential bright future.

Rampant misremembering of the past, unfair hate, trolling etc isn't feedback to the devs, it's just damaging, what happens if this game fails because of said hate?

I dunno about you all, but I loved dawn of war more than any other RTS, dow3 was a disgustingly bad game, and it was ditched and the IP, an IP that was huge, is now dead.

Wanna risk edging towards that reality? Look up what a self fulfilling prophecy is.

there is no way this game deserves mixed reviews, nor does it deserve the hate, it deserves constructive criticism while fairly pointing out what it does right.

That's my opinion on it at least.

I'm sorry but no, I won't even dog you on every point here for being wrong but to name a few
1. nothing changed from the beta at all. Not one balancing tweak.

2. Performance is still bad for a majority of the playerbase. Go look and count the steam threads of people who cannot even enter the game, or bugsplat on entry.

3. If the devs had listened to the community do you really think it would have launched at this approval rating? They did NOT listen. They made a shiny little PR video and addressed the bland coloring and sound design which both still suck in my opinion.

4. Plenty of people were hating on this game several weeks ago. They all got banned by unsaid forum mod who shut down any and all feedback that shed the game in a negative light, myself included.

5. relic has done itself no favors with age of empires 4, or dawn of war 3. If 2 incidents is enough to be called a behavioral pattern than imagine my surprise when it happens a third time.

It currently deserves every inch of bad reviews it's receiving.

Not to mention they did not market this as early access. This is marketed as the full 1.0 launch of company of heroes.

Does this feel like a 1.0 launch to you?

Not going to read past point 1.

I know for a fact that things have changed in past tests, I got a feeling you think I'm talking about the tech test and network test.

There's a whole thread on reddit about a month or so ago where people predicted that people will be pissed at visuals but will come around after a few weeks realising a lot of it is just that visuals is the first thing you see and not how impactful it is on gameplay. It's fascinating to see them predict this.

Remember even in 2021 they were beta testing this game. From what I've heard from people who participated there have been changes so dunno where you coming from looool

[Krude]

Originally posted by Lokieys:

Originally posted by just|Blu3™:

Because it’s running on any potato PC. You don’t even need a dGPU for it.

same can now be said for aoe4. Yet it still dwarfs in comparison to an even older game in the series. You seem to be uncultured so i reccomend you go watch some of the drama videos surrounding aoe4 and why it flopped so hard when relic was hoping it would be the

"next biggest esports streamed game on twitch"

also pay attention to their habit of ignoring player feedback, and putting out very slow and painfully average updates while also adding very minimal stuff to the game. Maybe you'll start to see the patterns here.

This is the issue with bad faith actors, they just say stuff even if the facts and even context speak otherwise.

I play AOE4, I like AOE4, there's people who don't like it and they all say the same thing: the visuals.

It seems like the easy blow when you want to hate on something lol, AOE4 isn't ugly tho, it's pretty gorgeous and like coh3 has focused on more subtle details, like for example in AOE4 the tiles around buildings show gardens and clothe lines, roads get created between buildings, mud tracks show where villages would travel a lot, it's fascinating bit of tech.

And it's IMMERSIVE. which imo is more important than hyper over the top graphics for RTS games.

In fact as a spectator game, visuals need to be easy enough to register for players AND viewers.

AOE4 is enjoying great success, how is that determined? The one most elusive thing a game could dream of, long term growth, if a game is good, it grows over time. Hell there are even plenty of good games that don't grow over time but the fact it's growing is a hard sign of success.

To go so far as to say AOE4 is failing, when it's got the most tournaments of all AOE games right now, the biggest prize pool tournament too. Player growth healthy over time.

You are mental, you are so bad faith, congratulations to spread misinformation. Hell last year the highest prize pool for aoe4 was 100,000 usd higher than the next highest aoe2 one.

How do I know this, I looked it up when someone was talking crap about aoe4 saying that it was a failure and mythology was where things were, looking back that guy was clearly trolling now I think about it lol.

Like I don't get how you can say AOE4 is a failure when it's on game pass and yet still enjoys monthly growth on steam. Actually wild what some people will pull out the air.

Some of you are trying way too hard to make what you WANT to be true into a reality by lying to everyone.

Like why even hate on the game this hard, if you don't like it? don't play it LOL