CoH 3 German Campaign!!

I literally said I don't think it's a moral issue, it's an economic one

Its just plain wrong. Its what usually is circulating around the air, simply because big companies are
uncapable of bringing interesting story.

When big companies are bringing campaign from the german perspective, they actually have to think out of the box, because ofcouse they wont portray germans are super heroes like they usually do with allies, therefore they actually have to create an interesting story.

If it wasnt always "allies liberators fighing idiots in gray uniform", noone would have ever complained. This mainstream "safe" approach towards allies just leads to a generic and boring campaigns.

Not to mention that there wasnt even a single case of "economic" problems coased by including german campaign. I mean sure, there are knuckleheads who masturbate on allies just as much as some masturbate on germans, and the game industry prefere to not upset allied fanboys (while objectively non was upset up to date). CoH2 soviet campaign created more shit storm then every single german campaign ever created combined, because of the shit story telling.

Thats why videogame companies are trying to appeal to knuckleheads as much as possible, creating non-offensive generic allied campaigns. And normal people are actually fed up with this generic approach. Sure playing US vCoH campaign was fun 15 years ago, but since every single ww2 game\movie was doing the same. I mean I can play medal of honor\call of duty\BF5\BF1 allied campaigns and they are always the same.

But big manager cats probably indeed think that if they bring something usuall it will suddenly destroy everything, but in reality their approach is what turns games into a pile of shit.

BF5 The last tiger was the best example of it. When the game which almost everybody hated, from start to finish, hated the campaigns, hated the gameplay, hated because it pushed agendas noone asked for.

But suddenly a german side campaign in a mainstream game didnt recive any hate, even from ppl for whom german in ww2 = super nazi for a concentration camp who killed 1 million people with his bare hands.

Which could have been put at the end of the Soviet campaign in CoH2 but it wasn't for very obvious reasons that there would be an even bigger uproar from the Russians as they only want to be portrayed as heroes in media.

The series is called Company of Heroes, not Company of War Criminals. Russian outrage was justified.

The series is called Company of Heroes, not Company of War Criminals. Russian outrage was justified.

I honestly think it wasnt intentional to shit on soviets. It was just plain bad writing and story telling. Soldiers actually were shown as heroes, but commanders as assholes. Probably to show the more darker side of war, but heroism was a background, not nessesry in your face, while shit was always on the front page.

If you cut 50% of the bad part in the soviet campaign and replace it with actually showing heroism which was in it, you end up with a campaign that looks more realistic and belivable then US one from vCoH, which was all about "yolo time to pushed krauts back to Berlin".

I mean obviously but you said that it's hard to make an Axis campaign without doing the holocaust which is just lol since like I said there's been plenty of German campaigns that never dwelled into any war crimes.

Right but expecting big budget studios to do it like EA is very different. They get more scrutiny, both from the press and from shareholders. Of course a market for it exists, it's just much much smaller than the appetite for nazi-killing games

But suddenly a german side campaign in a mainstream game didnt recive any hate, even from ppl for whom german in ww2 = super nazi for a concentration camp who killed 1 million people with his bare hands.

"Campaign?" It was like 20-30 minutes of gameplay where you get to control one of the most famous tanks in the war. And like you alluded to, the rest of the campaign sucked so bad that people got attached to the one story that didn't have all of EAs agenda stapled to it

I'm not sure what you're even saying the rest of the post. You guys can really stop venting now. I want German campaigns too, I'm just telling you why larger American companies don't make them that often

"Campaign?" It was like 20-30 minutes of gameplay where you get to control one of the most famous tanks in the war. And like you alluded to, the rest of the campaign sucked so bad that people got attached to the one story that didn't have all of EAs agenda stapled to it

I'm not sure what you're even saying the rest of the post. You guys can really stop venting now. I want German campaigns too, I'm just telling you why larger American companies don't make them that often

Well you can call it "chapter", doesn't matter. I was saying that when the companies tend to make people think that its a bad manner to make german campaigns\story arcs and a lot of the people think that its wont get financially successful.

While in the reality it all comes to the fact that it forces game devs to think out of the box in order to create a story. Since if for allies you can always slap a generic "heroic" story line, where the main difference between game would be the locations it takes place and for soviets you can slap "enemy of the gate" clone story wise, for german side its much harder.

You cant make a game with the "play as heroic germans shooting dump allies", it would be a bad taste. You cant make a game with "play as germans and commit warcrimes" because it would be even worst taste (but for soviets its acceptable for some reason).

Therefore devs actually have to create something half-decent in a story department, which more of often then not players will actually really like. But it takes at least some efford and if executed poorly you can end up in a shit storm like soviets in coh2 did.

In other words we dont see playble germans in the games more often exclusively because whole SP contenten became a gimmic. Its not like it costs more or some might no like it or be offended, its just the fact that game companies dont have any reasoning behind creating something decent story-wise, since games are sold for MP most of the times these days. They just slap generic campaigns, say that their games have SP content in them and they are good to go.

And back in days of first MoH and CoDs this whole concept of "heroic ww2 action movie", wasnt overused and it was alright, but decades later game companies just continue to use this formula which is not working since we saw it 10000 times over.

The series is called Company of Heroes, not Company of War Criminals. Russian outrage was justified.

Hey, he said it'd be hard to make a German campaign without the holocaust so I'm just saying.

You won't ever even see the reality of what actually happened in any other Russian media either and you know it's going to be bad if the Soviets didn't even sign the Geneva Convention, same as Japan.

Even so I really like stuff like the Brest Fortress, the Battalion of Death and Generation War.

They try to show the soldiers' perspectives without all of the political bullshit, at least for the most part from what I've noticed.

The first is a somewhat sad and dramatic love story of a boy orphan and his brother being stationed in a relatively old Russian fortress during the invasion of 1941, the other is about the first and only I believe woman's Battalion made from volunteers for the Imperial Russian Army during WW1 as a last ditch effort by the government to raise morale and it dwells a bit in the hardships that the women needed to endure, including a bit of politics.

While the last one is one of the rare and few media pieces from the German soldier's view point during WW2 where again it doesn't dwell into the politics too much but it shows some of the bad stuff that did happen and how many disagreed with it, same as in the 1993 Stalingrad movie which is the truth.

As a soldier you sign up to defend your country and family but end up doing it in reality for the men next to you, not about some politician back home yelling his lungs out how war is justified and I believe that's for all Soldiers, be it Russian, German, American, Japanese, British, Italian and so on and so forth.

Right but expecting big budget studios to do it like EA is very different. They get more scrutiny, both from the press and from shareholders. Of course a market for it exists, it's just much much smaller than the appetite for nazi-killing games


"Campaign?" It was like 20-30 minutes of gameplay where you get to control one of the most famous tanks in the war. And like you alluded to, the rest of the campaign sucked so bad that people got attached to the one story that didn't have all of EAs agenda stapled to it

I'm not sure what you're even saying the rest of the post. You guys can really stop venting now. I want German campaigns too, I'm just telling you why larger American companies don't make them that often

As I said obviously they'll be treading on thin ice with it but how the CoH and BF German campaigns were done were pretty good and didn't really promote anything but show the struggles of war.

Same with the American and British campaigns I'd say, I was personally heartbroken when MacKay died.

Ah yes, all those Germans defending their country in France and Russia. Sure, there was some dissent from the rank and file but there were clearly a good majority of soldiers, not just in the SS, who were okay with things like using human shields and executing prisoners.

I really don't want to see any romanticization of the conflict but that's somewhat of a lost cause.

Ah yes, all those Germans defending their country in France and Russia.

do you always bunch up complex historical issues which usually fill out dozens of bookshelves in a few sentences?

Sometimes the issue doesn't merit further discussion when it's in flagrant defiance of all the actual historical work that's been done on the subject in the past few decades. This forum (and, not coincidentally, forums of games like Steel Division or Hearts of Iron) is the only place where I see anyone peddling the "clean Wehrmacht" nonsense that no proper historian would touch.

Sometimes the issue doesn't merit further discussion when it's in flagrant defiance of all the actual historical work that's been done on the subject in the past few decades. This forum (and, not coincidentally, forums of games like Steel Division or Hearts of Iron) is the only place where I see anyone peddling the "clean Wehrmacht" nonsense that no proper historian would touch.

1. you do it again lol

2. yawn

Sometimes the issue doesn't merit further discussion when it's in flagrant defiance of all the actual historical work that's been done on the subject in the past few decades. This forum (and, not coincidentally, forums of games like Steel Division or Hearts of Iron) is the only place where I see anyone peddling the "clean Wehrmacht" nonsense that no proper historian would touch.

Maybe you want to agrue that Allies are clean to begin with?

If you are against romanticization that much, then why dont we show all the BS allies had made. If you are such fighter against warcrimes, then you really should say "dont portray anyone as heroes" since every army did dirty things.

If you say "Well sure they did, but not everyone", then there is no reason not to show german side, ofcouse if you dont have double standarts.

And tell please, was you offended somehow by PE campaign in vCoH or maybe by the last tiger chapter in BF5 maybe? Did they do something wrong, aside from showing german side? I mean if you are offended by them just because they are about germans, there is a problem, but not with the fact its about germans.

Yeah I'd definitely also like to demolish the notion that America is the unequivocal "good guy" when they were producing racial propaganda on the Pacific front and subtly or overtly encouraging things like executing prisoners, killing civilian populations and taking Japanese skulls as trophies while also treating their draftees as basically expendable in some very notable battles on all fronts.

The Allies did plenty of awful shit too and I don't think it gets nearly enough attention (especially since in this game's campaign we're apparently "capturing" Monte Cassino), but I find it far more disturbing to find people trying to equate what the Allies did with what the Nazis did, or else veer into some form of apologism like I described earlier.

So yeah, have a German campaign, but maybe have a realistic one depicting a force that used human shields to enable their blitzkrieg through northern Europe, regularly executed prisoners, enacted brutal reprisals on civilian populations and employed people like the Dirlewanger brigade. I can guarantee we'd see protests above and beyond those of Company of Heroes 2's campaign, which, with a few notable exceptions, largely depicted exaggerated versions of things that actually happened at one time or another on the Eastern Front.

And no, those listed campaigns don't necessarily do something wrong, but they are contributing to the mystique that there was something special or admirable or comparable in their stories. Maybe the Panzer Elite campaign should have depicted the rampant looting that German forces engaged in during Operation Market Garden.

So yeah, have a German campaign, but maybe have a realistic one depicting a force that used human shields to enable their blitzkrieg through northern Europe, regularly executed prisoners, enacted brutal reprisals on civilian populations and employed people like the Dirlewanger brigade. I can guarantee we'd see protests above and beyond those of Company of Heroes 2's campaign, which, with a few notable exceptions, largely depicted exaggerated versions of things that actually happened at one time or another on the Eastern Front.

What is realistic depiction to begin with. It sounds like you just want to mainly show what shit germans did during the war. Point is, shit like civilians executions, human shielding and other stuff, was made by groups\divisions but not the army in general.

Even mentioning Dirlewanger brigade which is litteraly a penal unit made out of criminals, what could you expect from them. Point is, if we look over-all on german army, most of the shit on the eastern front or on the western front, was commited by either special units exlusively made for this purpose such as einsatzgruppens or rear echelon troops\police.

On top of that speaking of the Eastern Front, we shoudnt forget that collaborators from Ukrain\Poland\Baltic countries were also responsable for a lot of unnessesery violence towards civilians and accused partisans.

Does it make german clean or does it make them less responsable? No, it doesnt, because after all goverment and top millitary figures probably allow this to happen in a first place.

Does it means that we should speak overall about Wehrmacht and hell even SS like they were all part of dirlewanger brigade? Hell no we dont, because its just not true.

But point is, who would want to play as Dirlewanger to begin with, or who would want to play as rear german troops executing and raping civilians?

It can be shown to some extend, yes its a shitty coin of Wehrmacht\SS during WW2, same with Allies\Soviets having shitty side. CoH2 campaign shown only a shitty side mostly, was it enjoable to play, from a story perspective? No.

Then why its wrong to show human side of the German army? No-one sain enouth would based their opinion about german army based on a video game, especially when it has a M rating. You dont need to always show player the shit, because any educated person knows that atrocities were commited by this army.

This consept of "if its a ww2 german, then he is a concentration camp guard and the right hand of Himmler himself" is not only a bad taste to represent in video games (unless its Wolfenstein or something) but also will just frustrate people who have even basic knowlage, the same way it frustrates people that allies are always shown as the heroes and soviets are always killing each other.

What is realistic depiction to begin with. It sounds like you just want to mainly show what shit germans did during the war. Point is, shit like civilians executions, human shielding and other stuff, was made by groups\divisions but not the army in general.

Even mentioning Dirlewanger brigade which is litteraly a penal unit made out of criminals, what could you expect from them. Point is, if we look over-all on german army, most of the shit on the eastern front or on the western front, was commited by either special units exlusively made for this purpose such as einsatzgruppens or rear echelon troops\police.

On top of that speaking of the Eastern Front, we shoudnt forget that collaborators from Ukrain\Poland\Baltic countries were also responsable for a lot of unnessesery violence towards civilians and accused partisans.

Does it make german clean or does it make them less responsable? No, it doesnt, because after all goverment and top millitary figures probably allow this to happen in a first place.

Does it means that we should speak overall about Wehrmacht and hell even SS like they were all part of dirlewanger brigade? Hell no we dont, because its just not true.

But point is, who would want to play as Dirlewanger to begin with, or who would want to play as rear german troops executing and raping civilians?

It can be shown to some extend, yes its a shitty coin of Wehrmacht\SS during WW2, same with Allies\Soviets having shitty side. CoH2 campaign shown only a shitty side mostly, was it enjoable to play, from a story perspective? No.

Then why its wrong to show human side of the German army? No-one sain enouth would based their opinion about german army based on a video game, especially when it has a M rating. You dont need to always show player the shit, because any educated person knows that atrocities were commited by this army.

This consept of "if its a ww2 german, then he is a concentration camp guard and the right hand of Himmler himself" is not only a bad taste to represent in video games (unless its Wolfenstein or something) but also will just frustrate people who have even basic knowlage, the same way it frustrates people that allies are always shown as the heroes and soviets are always killing each other.

Excuse me, but when I look at the numbers of civilian casualties in the USSR during the war:
- Intentionally exterminated: 7,420, 379
- Killed in forced labor in Germany: 2,164,313
- Killed from the deliberately brutal conditions of the occupation regime
(hunger, infectious diseases, lack of medical care, etc.): about 4,100,000

I am looking at the Decree "On the Application of Military Jurisdiction in the Barbarossa Area and on Special Measures of the Troops" which removes any responsibility from the soldiers for attacks against the civilian population, on Plan Ost. I have doubts about the statement that only small groups have done such things and, to be honest, I have no desire to campaign for the Germans. In only one specially besieged Leningrad, they died: 16,747 were killed during artillery strikes and bombing and 632,253 died of hunger. Or it turns out Army Group North which was ordered to starve Leningrad with non-military criminals?

Excuse me, but when I look at the numbers of civilian casualties in the USSR during the war:
- Intentionally exterminated: 7,420, 379
- Killed in forced labor in Germany: 2,164,313
- Killed from the deliberately brutal conditions of the occupation regime
(hunger, infectious diseases, lack of medical care, etc.): about 4,100,000

I am looking at the Decree "On the Application of Military Jurisdiction in the Barbarossa Area and on Special Measures of the Troops" which removes any responsibility from the soldiers for attacks against the civilian population, on Plan Ost. I have doubts about the statement that only small groups have done such things and, to be honest, I have no desire to campaign for the Germans. In only one specially besieged Leningrad, they died: 16,747 were killed during artillery strikes and bombing and 632,253 died of hunger. Or it turns out Army Group North which was ordered to starve Leningrad with non-military criminals?

Alright, and? I did say that the unnessesey brutality did happen and the war crimes did happen and criminal orders were given and Wehrmacht as an organisation is not clean. You are bringing statistics, the same way I could say that every single american soldier during the vietnam war was a war criminal judging by what they were doing or during the Iraq war. Still we have games about them, and have 0 problems with that.

Even speaking about Leningrad is not black and white as you want to present it. Sure it can be considered a criminal order, but at the same time Soviets didnt orginize proper evacuation since civilian defense labor was a thing, the same way soviets left god know how many people in stalingrad. As a matter of fact, from a soldier perspective who took part in Lenigrad siedge, what were they supposed to do? Shot Hitler or run to the soviets saying "Nah, its not cool".

Its not how army works, and its not "Oh but you have moral chose" this is BS on paper, in a countries with such regimes, you dont have a chose, its not a modern army where you have it to some degree, but even in them we are still having war crimes, pedophiles and sadists. With the difference being that in the army where is not punished, these human scum will be very noticable and the ones who otherwise woundn't do it, because of the possible reprocusions, will have no limits.

To repeat myself, you should understand basic difference between high command which are most likely loyal to NSDAP and gladly gave criminal orders, generals, field commanders, divisions and regular soldiers.

Company of heroes is not about high command, its about soldiers and I highly doubt people would want to play and as a commander who is commiting a war crimes, thats why we dont have it.

Alright, and? I did say that the unnessesey brutality did happen and the war crimes did happen and criminal orders were given and Wehrmacht as an organisation is not clean. You are bringing statistics, the same way I could say that every single american soldier during the vietnam war was a war criminal judging by what they were doing or during the Iraq war. Still we have games about them, and have 0 problems with that.

Even speaking about Leningrad is not black and white as you want to present it. Sure it can be considered a criminal order, but at the same time Soviets didnt orginize proper evacuation since civilian defense labor was a thing, the same way soviets left god know how many people in stalingrad. As a matter of fact, from a soldier perspective who took part in Lenigrad siedge, what were they supposed to do? Shot Hitler or run to the soviets saying "Nah, its not cool".

Its not how army works, and its not "Oh but you have moral chose" this is BS on paper, in a countries with such regimes, you dont have a chose, its not a modern army where you have it to some degree, but even in them we are still having war crimes, pedophiles and sadists. With the difference being that in the army where is not punished, these human scum will be very noticable and the ones who otherwise woundn't do it, because of the possible reprocusions, will have no limits.

To repeat myself, you should understand basic difference between high command which are most likely loyal to NSDAP and gladly gave criminal orders, generals, field commanders, divisions and regular soldiers.

Company of heroes is not about high command, its about soldiers and I highly doubt people would want to play and as a commander who is commiting a war crimes, thats why we dont have it.

Of course.
It is supposed to surround the city with a tight ring and by shelling from artillery of all calibers and continuous bombing from the air to raze it to the ground. If, as a result of the situation created in the city, requests for surrender are announced, they will be rejected, since the problems associated with the stay of the population in the city and its food supply cannot and should not be solved by us. In this war waged for the right to exist, we are not interested in preserving at least part of the population.

This is not a criminal order and the army executing it is not criminals.

Of course.
It is supposed to surround the city with a tight ring and by shelling from artillery of all calibers and continuous bombing from the air to raze it to the ground. If, as a result of the situation created in the city, requests for surrender are announced, they will be rejected, since the problems associated with the stay of the population in the city and its food supply cannot and should not be solved by us. In this war waged for the right to exist, we are not interested in preserving at least part of the population.

This is not a criminal order and the army executing it is not criminals.

You are funny, litteraly in my first centance I've said that the criminal orders were given, even said that the whole aproach towards Leningrad could be considered one, but what it have to do with soldiers and their stories?

But again how soldiers on the individual level are responsable for this? I'm failing to understand that. Army is an army, its an organisation, without face and without identity. When we look at einsatzgrupps which exterminated civilians, then yes. Because there was no bystanders in them, but a people who were wilingly doing that.

Should we also claim that every single red army soldier is a war criminal because Katyn or for soviet partisans in Finnland killing military and civilians alike? Or maybe US\UK for civilian city bombings where they knew what they were bombing?

I will repeat myself for a twentieth time, organisations from all sides called "army" commited shit during the war. Organisation called "Wehrmacht and SS" did it aswell, due to the nature of the goverment it was part of and due to the nature of war. But to blindly call every single soldier\company\division a war criminals just because they were a part of the organisation is just childish.

What is realistic depiction to begin with.

A realistic depiction is showing an army that, yes, was composed of people of varying levels of fanaticism and belief in the Nazi party that nonetheless carried out orders which ran contrary to not only the laws of war but of general morality. This wasn't a couple times, it wasn't perpetrated exclusively by SS units, it was a common theme from beginning to end, and even "heroes" like everyone's precious Rommel are complicit for carrying out these orders or tacitly allowing them to proceed in the name of victory at any cost. Note that even Rommel was more than willing to support Hitler until the war started going south.

There are certainly ways to do such a campaign - maybe the ordinary soldier protagonists are asked to raze a village of civilians. Maybe the player is forced to comply with a horrific order (the light version of this was not received well in Company of Heroes 2). Thing is, I don't trust Relic to do anything interesting with a German campaign. It's okay to show the struggles of a common soldier but I personally think that the player should be made to feel uncomfortable to some degree when taking the reins of a murderous and criminal regime.

But Relic will probably whitewash it all as they usually do and focus on "good guy" Rommel while ignoring how far he was up Hitler's ass after the Fall of France. But the Nazis have been romanticized since the end of the war itself (and maybe even during it) so I can hardly blame them, but I can hope for better even while expecting garbage.

You are funny, litteraly in my first centance I've said that the criminal orders were given, even said that the whole aproach towards Leningrad could be considered one, but what it have to do with soldiers and their stories?

But again how soldiers on the individual level are responsable for this? I'm failing to understand that. Army is an army, its an organisation, without face and without identity. When we look at einsatzgrupps which exterminated civilians, then yes. Because there was no bystanders in them, but a people who were wilingly doing that.

Should we also claim that every single red army soldier is a war criminal because Katyn or for soviet partisans in Finnland killing military and civilians alike? Or maybe US\UK for civilian city bombings where they knew what they were bombing?

I will repeat myself for a twentieth time, organisations from all sides called "army" commited shit during the war. Organisation called "Wehrmacht and SS" did it aswell, due to the nature of the goverment it was part of and due to the nature of war. But to blindly call every single soldier\company\division a war criminals just because they were a part of the organisation is just childish.

If a person sees how things are going, he deserts. It's simple if a person does not want to participate in crimes. But let's be honest, the Germans did not like to disperse, at first the ideology was strong and many German veterans after the war believed that everything was right or they were afraid that they would be tortured after being taken prisoner / deserted. Obviously because these soldiers saw what was happening around and were afraid of retribution.