Reviews

[donjas]

I was talking about single player but if you are so interested in multiplayer then they are plenty of games that focus better on multiplayer. Warhammer is a good example. And Dawn of War.

I can't take a game seriously where you can produce human beings off a production line. A world where ammunition is unlimited. And that is what COH is.

You talked about my artillery usage, but why shouldn't I when it gets me easy victories.
I think we two belong in two different gaming universes. You belong to the camp of which of which warcraft and Age Of Empires are the prime examples, I of which Myth 2 Soulblighter is the prime example.

We both have our tastes and each of us is right on our own way.

[Evilsausage]

I think you belong in an own universe all together.

Learn to read, i play both MoW and CoH. Thats why i said both games are good in thier own way.
You know people can like several games even if they are different.


"I can't take a game seriously where you can produce human beings off a production line"

Dawn of war dose the exact same thing. And DoW is bassicly a more simple version of CoH. Its even made by the same company.


"You talked about my artillery usage, but why shouldn't I when it gets me easy victories."

Yes like you said, you play single player. CoH is not good in SP and never has been and if you only play it in single player your arguments mean nothing.

Seriously your free to think and talk shit about any game out there, but atleast have some ******* VALID ARGUMENTS!



Case closed.

[donjas]

Originally Posted by Evilsausage

Seriously your free to think and talk shit about any game out there, but atleast have some ******* VALID ARGUMENTS!



Case closed.

I think you are talking nonsense. When did I say in my original post that I was talking about multiplayer. You assumed erroneously.

There are a multitude of good multiplayer games out there, many of them much better than COH because they make no false pretenses of being single player experiences.

Dawn of War and Warhammer are much better than COH on any day, because their main focus is never on single player, and they work fine online without having a shred of realism between the two of them.

If you cannot see that, you are living in cuckoo land.

Case Reopened

[Evilsausage]

Originally Posted by donjas

I think you are talking nonsense. When did I say in my original post that I was talking about multiplayer. You assumed erroneously.

There are a multitude of good multiplayer games out there, many of them much better than COH because they make no false pretenses of being single player experiences.

Dawn of War and Warhammer are much better than COH on any day, because their main focus is never on single player, and they work fine online without having a shred of realism between the two of them.

If you cannot see that, you are living in cuckoo land.

Case Reopened

Okey so heres the deal...

1. You can't judge a game by only its singleplayer(like you did). And CoH has never made "false pretenses of being single player experiences."

2. You can't compare CoHs multiplayer to other games in MP if you havent even played CoH in MP.

3. Warhammer? What game is that? Warhammer online? Warhammer mark of chaos? Warhammer 40k? or warhammer dark omen?

4. You can't really talk smack about CoH and love DoW. Since they are basicallly the same game. Its like saying Counterstrike source is a Shitty game...but original counterstrike is 10 times better!

[donjas]

Originally Posted by Evilsausage

Okey so heres the deal...

1. You can't judge a game by only its singleplayer(like you did). And CoH has never made "false pretenses of being single player experiences."

2. You can't compare CoHs multiplayer to other games in MP if you havent even played CoH in MP.

3. Warhammer? What game is that? Warhammer online? Warhammer mark of chaos? Warhammer 40k? or warhammer dark omen?

4. You can't really talk smack about CoH and love DoW. Since they are basicallly the same game. Its like saying Counterstrike source is a Shitty game...but original counterstrike is 10 times better!

Answers-
1. Any game which has a large single player campaign, justifies being judged on how good that campaign is. COH qualifies on that count and fails in my book.
2. I never said I have never played COH online, only rarely. I just think the fun factor is more in games like Dawn of War and Warhammer 40k where the design focus is clearly on the multiplayer component of the game.
3. Warhammer 40k.
4. If that logic was there, we would never need a new improved game, because they are all basically the same, from the time the first Warcraft game came to the rts scene and maybe earlier.

I can appreciate your point of view though. I have been playing computer games for nearly 13 years now. I used to like arcade games like COH before, was totally bowled over by their flashy graphics, but not any more.

I need content, I need strategic options in my games so that I can put my mind to work.

[Imperial Dane]

I need content, I need strategic options in my games so that I can put my mind to work.

It doesn't sound like that in the way you post and the way you talk to people.

I never said I have never played COH online, only rarely. I just think the fun factor is more in games like Dawn of War and Warhammer 40k where the design focus is clearly on the multiplayer component of the game

.

And it isn't in CoH ? Because it sounds like you never bothered to play mutliplayer alot, or what ? Can the two never be seperate experiences ?

[Evilsausage]

"I never said I have never played COH online, only rarely."

Well true but you judged it only by its single player. Why? Cuz it has a campaign?

I mean seriously take Starcraft for example. It had a really complex campaign for its time. But starcraft isnt exactly known for that now is it?


"4. If that logic was there, we would never need a new improved game, because they are all basically the same, from the time the first Warcraft game came to the rts scene and maybe earlier."

That was not the point i was trying to make. Theres a hugh different between that and a game that is made almost exactly as CoH.

And you don't even have any real arguments on why CoH is bad. Except that it isnt good in single player. Which we already know!


"I need content, I need strategic options in my games so that I can put my mind to work."

Good because in answering threads you don't really seam to "put your mind to work".

[donjas]

Originally Posted by Evilsausage

"I never said I have never played COH online, only rarely."

Well true but you judged it only by its single player. Why? Cuz it has a campaign?

I mean seriously take Starcraft for example. It had a really complex campaign for its time. But starcraft isnt exactly known for that now is it?


"4. If that logic was there, we would never need a new improved game, because they are all basically the same, from the time the first Warcraft game came to the rts scene and maybe earlier."

That was not the point i was trying to make. Theres a hugh different between that and a game that is made almost exactly as CoH.

And you don't even have any real arguments on why CoH is bad. Except that it isnt good in single player. Which we already know!


"I need content, I need strategic options in my games so that I can put my mind to work."

Good because in answering threads you don't really seam to "put your mind to work".

Like a stuck record you simply don't get it. So let me repeat for the umpteenth time.
1.I play mostly single player and in that COH is simply not realistic enough for me. When I play multiplayer I play games like Dawn of war and Warhammer because they were designed mainly for multiplayer. They have several little nuances that make them perfect for multiplayer. But I don't play multiplayer that often so I am not a good judge of it.
2. I never said COH was bad, it is simply an arcade game and I am tired of those games. Is calling a game an arcade game an insult? If so there are many other games that fall into that category.
3. I don't consider COH a leap in improvement over the original Warcraft. It is basically the same game, but flashier graphics. But that does not mean I am calling COH a bad game, Warcraft was one my favorite games.
4. Are you some personal representative of COH that you are taking it so personally. If you like arcade games, well and good, what is wrong with that.

[DMS|Instinct]

This topic is not about which game is better, so stick on the topic and leave that discussion.

Men of War and Company of Heroes aren't even in the same sub-genre, so it's pretty much useless to compare them.

Thanks!

[Evilsausage]

Sigh this disscution was never about which game was better. Like i posted like 5 treads before.

I like both game in thier own way.

"Like a stuck record you simply don't get it."

If you would read your own damn post maybe you would figure out why.

If you could have had some valid reasons in the first post why you didn't like the game instead of a load of BS. I would't have had to waste so much time on this thread.
This forum is for MoW and not CoH after all.