Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
At least I stopped playing multiplayer almost completely and just do skirmish runs.
Alot of people say that, and i don't agree with it at all.
For me, dead in multiplayer games means not being able to find a match in a reasonable amount of time whenever you feel like playing.
And with 115 players currently online, divided into 2 sections (Multiplayer and Singleplayer) And with not everyone being in the queue at the same time It's safe to say it's dead.
In multiplayer... almost yes. There's still a few people but they're the tryhard types who minmax everything. You could do it too, I did for a bit, and have fun. But it only really lasts till you get bored of doing the exact same thing with the "better" units and upgrading the same way. Then it just feels tedious.
I'll say... this game would have done way... way... WAY better if it went much bigger both in terms of maps, unit variety, and number of units. If the story played more like a WW1 war story than an illuminati quest. And if the gameplay had been switched up so that the result would be big lines of infantry with the occasional mech trying to break through rather than the current arcade gameplay...
basically it would have been better if they didnt try to go to console