Login

russian armor

Why is a new campaign bad?

13 Aug 2014, 18:49 PM
#1
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

Like, honestly, what about this is bad? All it will bring is new features and new content (maps, commanders, maybe even units!) FYI they have seperate teams working on seperate things. There is one team that works on balancing for example. This campaign being developed doesn't mean they're not also working on War spoils, etc.

Besides, new things are going to be announced friday, this isn't the only big thing they're going to show at Gamescom.

Just because you like playing multiplayer doesn't mean everybody else does.
13 Aug 2014, 18:54 PM
#2
avatar of morten1

Posts: 368

Thats cool but i still have no idea why your bringing this up
13 Aug 2014, 18:56 PM
#3
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

No one says its bad.

Its just not what we expected.
13 Aug 2014, 18:56 PM
#4
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

Because I see plenty of people being ignorant and thinking that this somehow means that multiplayer issues will never be fixed.


EDIT:

If it wasn't what you expected then what did you expect it to be? New factions? 2 Months ago an expansion with new factions was released. War Spoils fixes? They themselves said that wasn't happening + why the hell would you go to Gamescom just to talk about War Spoils? Balance patch? Again, not something you go to Gamescom with. The promo image implied it was going to be a campaign.


+ Like I explained in the OP it's not like this is the only thing they're announcing.
13 Aug 2014, 19:06 PM
#5
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

i personally find single player campaign rts is boring as hell. the ai is always totally retarded. don't get me wrong, there can be single player, but, not at the cost of the multiplayer/skirmish. co-op against hordes of soviet zergs as germany with tiger aces, would be fun, though.
13 Aug 2014, 19:08 PM
#6
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

i personally find single player campaign rts is boring as hell. the ai is always totally retarded. don't get me wrong, there can be single player, but, not at the cost of the multiplayer/skirmish. co-op against hordes of soviet zergs as germany with tiger aces, would be fun, though.


It's not really at the cost of anything though, that's what I'm trying to say. :)

13 Aug 2014, 19:08 PM
#7
avatar of MadeMan

Posts: 304

I don't play the single player, and won't be playing this, but I'm all for new content. Relic has been supporting MP so heavily recently (WFA was a huge update) so I don't mind them giving SP some love too.

I thought this would be the new Italian and Australian armies expansion.
13 Aug 2014, 19:08 PM
#8
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Buy it if you want it.

I wont. Cos I don't.
13 Aug 2014, 19:11 PM
#9
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

Buy it if you want it.

I wont. Cos I don't.


Oh I have no problem with that. What I'm talking about is people saying this will somehow stop War Spoils from being improved, observer mode from being implemented, etc.

It won't.
13 Aug 2014, 19:14 PM
#10
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Resources are finite.

Stands to reason that significant resources where put into this single player standalone, which instead where not expended elsewhere.

And since this is pretty much all they had to announce at Gamecon, well, thats that, really.
13 Aug 2014, 19:15 PM
#11
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9

Your thread, Zupadupadude. You're moderating it. :)
13 Aug 2014, 19:16 PM
#12
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

Resources are finite.

Stands to reason that significant resources where put into this single player standalone, which instead where not expended elsewhere.

And since this is pretty much all they had to announce at Gamecon, well, thats that, really.


It's not all they're announcing at Gamescom. They're announcing another big thing on Friday, which I assume is something multiplayer related.

Your thread, Zupadupadude. You're moderating it. :)


Is that a good thing or a bad thing? :D
13 Aug 2014, 19:17 PM
#13
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Oh?

Well, will have to see what that is then.
13 Aug 2014, 19:19 PM
#14
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561

It's just that COH2.ORG is a multiplayer community, so obviously everyone is rather apathetic about it.
13 Aug 2014, 19:23 PM
#15
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

People complain about everything.
Give them $10 for playing the game they will still say it sucks.
13 Aug 2014, 19:24 PM
#16
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

It's just that COH2.ORG is a multiplayer community, so obviously everyone is rather apathetic about it.


I know, but there will be another announcement on Friday, and I doubt this had much effect on things being fixed and features being developed for multiplayer. According to Cynthia this was in development for a while and balance patches were still being released, no? I just think some people here are getting angry (as far as I can tell) over nothing.
13 Aug 2014, 19:38 PM
#17
avatar of FestiveLongJohns
Patrion 15

Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2

This is on topic, i'll just post what I did on the announcement thread.

While the announcement was pretty dull, this will likely make Relic a lot of money. WFA added about 3-4k new players to the game, and many of them are likely interested in single player content. The campaign offers new players the opportunity to learn the game mechanics and unit functions in an environment that is a little more interesting than a comp stomp. The campaign will help the community grow in the long run, I started out playing the vCOH campaign in 2008. Not everyone is comfortable jumping directly into multiplayer. The community at coh2.org is focused almost exclusivly on the competitive multiplayer side of the game, but Relic has more fans to cater to than just that. It is a solid business decision.

That being said, there are soooo many basic game features that have been put on hold for far too long. These need to be a priority, and I'm not sure Relic sees them as such.
13 Aug 2014, 19:45 PM
#18
avatar of OnCe_Ov3R

Posts: 195

all new content comes at the cost of something else, there is limited resources/manpower.

For me singleplayer is not a good use of time in RTS, the AI is usually so bad, it only becomes challenging if they give the AI massive benefits
13 Aug 2014, 19:55 PM
#19
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9

Belated protests considered and overruled.

Please remember guys,that there are at least two sides to the CoH community. viz: the single player and the multi player ( and that is without breaking down the multiplayer faction)

Iirc, the single player base on vCoH outnumbered the multi player base - there is no reason why that has changed on CoH2

Respect for all sides point of view, please. :)
13 Aug 2014, 20:00 PM
#20
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

I get that, but the thing I'm talking about is people thinking this will stop or delay relic from finding a solution to War Spoils or fixing balance issues, which it won't. I don't mind if someone doesn't like singleplayer.

And also something that is most likely multiplayer related will be announced Friday, I just don't really see what some people here are upset about.


EDIT:

Or were you agreeing with me

I'm not sure lol
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

636 users are online: 636 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49186
Welcome our newest member, 12betripp
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM