Profile of donofsandiego

British sections probably needs to cost 300mp.
I don't even feel the bleed with them and if you went indian arty and got infantry 1st perk, you have osttruppen level of reinforcement with obersoldaten level of lethality.

Likely, but prepare Uranus for Royal Engie flamer spam if this happens.

Its been TWO WEEKS my guy.

Just two more weeks to flatten the bugs!

One studio had a 9 digit amount of US-Dollars available for developing their game, the other one didn't. Like what on earth is this comparison

The comparison is that one game was feature complete and had plenty of attention to detail, so much so that even today, people are finding more and more to appreciate about the game, and the other wasn't.

Budget is one part of the equation. How much do you think went into the development of Cyberpunk 2077? $200 million less, but still nine digits.

There are many indie games which release in a more polished state than AAA games do, with a miniscule fraction of the budget.

At the end of the day, the consumer chooses where they draw the line at spending money on games that need to be patched up to be a pleasant experience, and at the present time, consumers are giving a lot of wiggle room to publishers in this regard. Therefore, publishers see that it's much more efficient and savvy to release the games half-baked and fix them later for a faster return on investment.

If Relic really wanted to, they could have held onto the game for longer and released the game in a much better state. They didn't, because they were betting on consumers stomaching the poor release and buying it anyways.

Whatever, if it works for them, that's fine, but I'm not going to commend them for it. Not until the game is at a state where I personally would recommend it to someone. And that's all there is to it.

I gave CoH 3 a "Do Not Recommend" review on steam. Here it is:

I want to like company of heroes 3, but they released it in a terrible state. There's a good game beneath the surface, but it's going to take a lot of updates to un♥♥♥♥ this game.

But if you like the CoH series, and you're bored of playing CoH 2, I'd get CoH 3. It's worth playing, at least. As much as I'm disappointed at the state they released it in.

I think that's a very fair review of the game. Compare CoH 3's release to other AAA titles like Red Dead 2 and realize that there is a bit of a spark missing here. The game was buggy and unpolished, and I think it's fair for my review to state that.

I will, of course, update the review as time continues on and the game is patched and improved.

However, I will NOT review a game that does not exist yet. CoH 3 in a polished state is exactly that, a game that does not exist yet, and I'm not going to pretend to be a time traveler and review it like it does exist.

As of right now, I would easily recommend CoH 2 over CoH 3 to someone new to the genre. I'm sorry but it's the truth, as much as I like CoH 3 and as much as it pains me to say.

No, at ~100-150 rank everyone is using bersaligeries and each time I tried it myself, I found myself being outnumbered and brutalized, mostly by brits.

Oh I know, I was at rank 103 for a while in 4v4. Still, I saw a couple of players with the pgren blob. They're both a pain to deal with.