One part of coh2 they should scrap IMO is the stupid "allies better early game, axis better late game" because it messes up the balance across teamgames vs. 1v1 and makes some games very boring (i.e. Usf roflstomping in like 4 minutes in a 1v1 if done right or being totally lackluster in teamgames longer than 20 minutes)
+7,032
It is such a stupid concept in a competitive product I can't figure out how anyone ever tried to defend it as a feature for so many years.
The gameplay should still be similar to coh2 though. If factions are designed to be fun and flavorful (like USF for instance) coh2 gameplay reigns supreme over coh1 imo because the strategy is still there, just less with teching and resource control and more with upgrades, muni expenditure, and army comp.
Also by direct control I meant in 1st person with unit production/etc being handled via hot key.
If you took much of COH1, tweaked a few things, added trusight, added the unit status on the top and the reverse button and other QoL things, used COH1 graphics, it would probably be a superior game to COH2.
Also, if WW2 is making a comeback, it will be WW2. This is not a bad thing.
You're saying like developing a new engine from scratch is cheap, yeah more like doubling the development cost of a new game. Much better to just adopt well-functioning ones like Frostbite/Unreal and work from there.
EDIT: And please no more emplacements, just no more a la Mortar Pit or Bofors. I had enough of Sim City BS.
Please don't forget that the original "simcity" wasn't brits, it was the wehr bunkers.
Unless I misunderstand you, more flavour and options means less balance. The more stuff akin to "Commanders" and Bullentins, the more likely it will be that some kind of unbalanced s*** will show up and ruin the game for months and seasons (call-in meta anyone).
You can include compstompers in your customerbase with competitive balance - you just can't include the competitive players with an unbalance but "fun", compstomper-oriented game.
One of the strengths of CoH is that it makes sense to an audience and is enjoyable to watch - but that customer-base won't be there if the game isn't competitive and decently balanced.
Rather, let the options (which could be called meta-game choices) come from different teching options such as veterancy, supply yeard upgrades and riflemen upgrades as in vCoH. Inverse was a great proponent of this, IIRC.
I feel people underestimate the competitive scene. It isn't just the top-20 players, it encompasses the numbers-strong audience as well. I'm not just floored by the micro-tactics, I'm also floored by the macro-strategy. The better the balance, the more dedicated the players, resulting in better casters and bigger audiences. E-sports are only growing in numbers, might as well try to tap into it with such a crowdpleasing game
Inverse dealt with this in great detail and he was right. The choices in COH1 commanders had much more meaning than commanders do. But they would be much much harder to balance if used in a DLC environment.
Instead of whole commanders, and IF DLC is required financially (I don't know) they should make it unit only. In COH some people probably paid for an expansion for access to a hotchkiss, m18 or schwimwagen. Sure they might be OP or abusive (hello Stag?) but one unit is easier to adapt to than a whole commander. And also easier to balance.
It is such a stupid concept in a competitive product I can't figure out how anyone ever tried to defend it as a feature for so many years.
I think that it can work, (Starcraft is pretty competitive) but it just means that you'll be deciding in advance that either 1s or 4s will not be balanced. Besides which, the way they have been doing it (strong allies early game, strong German late game) is really dumb. If Von Runstad had decided to turtle till KT lol, he'd be shooting Germany in the foot incredibly hard when all those units needed to fight the next soviet push were busy turtling next to the U.K./US.
I think that it can work, (Starcraft is pretty competitive) but it just means that you'll be deciding in advance that either 1s or 4s will not be balanced. Besides which, the way they have been doing it (strong allies early game, strong German late game) is really dumb. If Von Runstad had decided to turtle till KT lol, he'd be shooting Germany in the foot incredibly hard when all those units needed to fight the next soviet push were busy turtling next to the U.K./US.
Yeah but Starcraft is an entirely different game, almost like it's not even the same genre. Germans did have more wacky experimental/intimidating shit so I guess that's where the whole concept came from but it doesn't translate into gameplay very well, especially with teamgames and 1s as you said.
I can almost guarantee CoH3 will be a game made for LOYAL CoH2/CoH1 fans, not Blizzard fans.
With CoH3 we can also expect more Relic support to loyal modders/community content creators.
Cobra is right, after Relic asking for feedback for CoH1 vs Coh2.
I can guarantee you they will not focus on the Eastern Front again. They will want some sort of hook to differentiate it from the other games, and setting is the easiest way to change that.
If I had to guess it will either be USA vs Japan, or Brits vs Germans in Africa. The second one makes the most sense, they could easily churn out an expansion for that with USA vs Italy.
We've had a Western Front France and Eastern Front Russia. I'm expecting a Germany vs Allies in Germany. What would be really cool is an alternate history US vs Soviets 1950s-60s game.
We've had a Western Front France and Eastern Front Russia. I'm expecting a Germany vs Allies in Germany. What would be really cool is an alternate history US vs Soviets 1950s-60s game.
The Eastern Front was not fully disclosed in CoH2, in VCoH Western Front was discovered very well, CoH2 is a repetition of the previous game. So it would be nice to fully open the topic of the Eastern Front in the next part. And I agree, the alternative history of 1945 - 1960 is cool.
No DoW3 credits included. So they have been working on other unannounced projects/games since they gave up on their five years COH2 plan.
Senior, versatile, experienced designer with 20 years in the Computer Games Industry including 17 years at critically-acclaimed studio, Relic Entertainment.
Titles/Roles Include;
Homeworld - Designer
Impossible Creatures - Designer
Company of Heroes - Senior Designer
Company of Heroes; Opposing Fronts - Gameplay Supervisor
Space Marine - Lead Designer
Company of Heroes 2 - Game Director
Several SEGA leaders has been promoted to support the 2020 plan, this includes but not limited to;
Meanwhile, Heaton will continue in his role as studio director at Creative Assembly while also becoming a flag bearer for the continued development standards of Sega Europe's numerous studios. In addition to supporting Sega Europe's other studio directors, Heaton will also advise on best practice and encourage cross-studio collaboration across the business, and keep in close contact with Sega Europe's COO and president about all studio and development matters.
Cross-studio collaboration might be related to Relic expanding to console. CA AAA console team was Halo Wars 2 and Alien Isolation.
Before leaving to join Tencent (owner of Riot Games) Jurgen Post gave several good interviews on SEGA;
"The games is where the love of the community starts, then secondly for the studio, and thirdly there is the publisher. So at some point, the success of the studios will start to reflect on Sega."
In 2012, Sega cut back to focus on three key series – Sonic, Football Manager and Total War – and has been gradually adding additional franchise ‘pillars’ ever since.
In 2013 it acquired Relic, along with the Company of Heroes and Dawn of War IP. This year, it has added Endless Space creators Amplitude to its family of studios.
Then there’s an altogether different pillar – one devoted to independent games.
“It’s called Sega Searchlight,” explains Post. “It looks into new creative opportunities, the sort of titles that could be a standalone pillar in the future. One example is Motorsport Manager by PlaySport. When it was released on mobile, it did 1.6m downloads... OK, it’s a $3 product, but it shows there is an appetite for something different. Now we are bringing it to PC this autumn. That’s a Searchlight product, and we have more of those with announcements due over the coming months.”
SEGA Europe IPs expanding into Asia;
“Another area we are focusing on is China. We have launched Football Manager Online in China, and we believe there is a big opportunity for strategy games in the territory, so we’re looking into that.”
He concludes: “It is an exciting times with lots of opportunities.”
Expanding RTS to console;
He continues: “As a non-strategy gamer, Halo Wars 2 is very easy to get into. It also plays very well on console. It is a great opportunity to bring the RTS genre to a wider audience, but also to bring RTS to console... these are all great learnings for all of us.”
The duo, who were previously responsible for titles such as Theme Park, Black & White and Fable, already have a new sim title in development, and the wider team at Two Point Studios is made up of ex-Bullfrog and Lionhead employees.
Bullfrog has previouly created RTS titles such as Dungeon Keeper and Populous with the legendary game maker Molyneux. Peter Molyneux with Lionhead previously worked with Relic founder (Alex Garden) when he was with Microsoft/Xbox. IMO, during the Homeworld era these two were among the very best RTS visionaries. Thx to EA, they really messed up Dungeon Keeper with mobile games.