Weekly Poll Results - Initial Dawn of War II Beta Reactions

Please wait...

This article originated on the original FileFront

Formatting may be lacking as a result. We apologize for this inconvenience. If this article is un-readable please report it so that we may fix it.

Published by Sl4sh 9 years ago , last updated 1 year ago

 

Initial Dawn of War II Beta Reactions

I missed the Beta, can't really say anything about it... 36.6% (708)
pr1.gifpr2.gifpr3.gif
s.gif
An amazing experience, will defintly be getting the game when it's released! 32.3% (624)
pb1.gifpb2.gifpb3.gif
s.gif
Although it is different from the original, but it's fun noththeless.. 10.8% (210)
pb1.gifpb2.gifpb3.gif
s.gif
A great game, but not as good as the original. 10.4% (202)
pb1.gifpb2.gifpb3.gif
s.gif
This game is pants, I'm disappointed! 9.6% (186)
pb1.gifpb2.gifpb3.gif
s.gif
Total: 1930
Start: 01-26-2009 13:20
Last: 02-04-2009 17:00



 #1 - Posted by: Grand_Master_Bean (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 14:46

quite frankly it's diablolical

 #2 - My thoughts on DoW2 - Posted by: Ventris117 (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 15:32

Tbh ... The multiplayer isn't fantasic (In comparison wih the titan which preceeded i), though I think the majority of thought and effort has gone into making the single player campaign. I do enjoy the Multiplayer, but imo the maps are too small, requisition/power points too few and the Eldar are too overpowered at the beginning of each level... damn platform teams shooting me up:'(. We all have to remember though; that its a different game with a different engine so is going to get some getting used to. And theres always the patch to wait for. Bring on the campaign!

 #3 - Posted by: kcaz (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 15:38

Well seeing as how game developers are so fing hasty all the time to get shit out without making sure it's done all the way I havent been able to play it at all.

 #4 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 16:12

Where is the "meh" or "so so" options? That is really what I feel about it. It's not bad, not good, and has nothing in common with DoW besides having 40k in it. The game isn't bad but I strongly dislike company's naming a game what it isn't. The most blatant resent examples are "sequels" that have little to nothing in common with what they are supposed to be successors of. Fallout 3 is "oblivion post apocalyptic," F.E.A.R. 2 is CoD4: Horror movie, and now DoW 2 is CoH with W40k IP in it. Why do they change a winning formula and call it a sequel? It's a spin off. It's a new game. It's not DoW. I own CoH. When I want to play CoH I will play CoH. DoW and CoH are two different things. Two different styles, two different scopes, two different games. Both are good in their own right but neither should be confused with the other. Also, hypocrisy in game development grates on me just as much. They talked about how much they wanted to make space marines be more like space marines. Then they go and make devastator squads with one heavy weapon and two bolters. They make 4 man assault and tactical squads. They even forget to put a librarian as a leader for a chapter that is supposed to be known for its unusually large number of librarians. To top all that off, the marines still don't feel that tough. They still seem to fall to an equal number of enemy forces (or just slightly lopsided.) Granted they are tougher than DoW; that isn't saying much considering guardsmen can out shoot them in DoW and they are slaughtered by kaserkins. I'm very underwhelmed.

 #5 - Posted by: Jaon (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 16:41

post above me, a few corrections, sadly SM in dow2 (or coh dowmod :P) have 3 in a squad, not 4, and devastators CAN get 3 weapons in a squad at one time, but i havnt played so :confused: i agree entirely there should be more commanders, say 5? OR it could have the whole BFME2 create a hero type thing. choose class, give i stats, looks and powers, then there could just be some global wargear of each differernt class. well, i personally hate blood ravens, i therefore do not make it my business to research them. no matter HOW crappy the chapter is, i would have thought having a chaplain that may save squads from suppression would have been a great idea, or a librarian to cast spells and wipe out infantry. the tech marine i thought was a welcome turn of events, but i think the apothacary could have just been a somple side commander, no chapter or company is commanded by an apothacary at any time, unless all others have fallen

 #6 - Posted by: Sl4sh (Staff) on 01-26-2009 at 16:48

No Jaon, Space Marine Tactical squads cannot have 3 weapons at the same time, they can only have one. Also, any devastator squad can't even have any customization as to what weapon they can wield.

 #7 - Posted by: Nerdsturm (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 17:06

I really like it for the most part(and very much disagree that its just CoH w/ 40k units), but the race for points can really become annoying after a while. And lets face it, just upgrading DoW to the essence engine as some people appear to wish Relic had done would've been a much worse choice than making an new and original game since the boost in graphics and a few new gameplay mechanics would've been worth the huge cut in content from all the races and mods in DoW1.

 #8 - Posted by: Nerdsturm (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 17:08

^that should say "... mechanics would not have been..." sorry for double post

 #9 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-26-2009 at 18:02

"3 in a squad, not 4" 3 tacs + sargent for tactical squad. I mean come on! just one more tac and it would have been fluffy. 3 marines in dev squad no leader. 2 carry bolters. The squad that can be bought at T1 carry's one heavy bolter. The squad (its a different build icon) at T2 comes with one plasma cannon. Both function like exactly like .30 cals or MG42's in CoH with fixed firing arks and a long setup time. A lot of people have commented on the size of the maps. At least as far as the 1v1's go I actually like the size of the maps. They need to be a bit spacy to allow some room for flanking and the sort. The swamp map is a really good map actually. But there is a laughable small number of maps. They have rumored to be adding two more in a day 0 patch. But that still won't give you even 10 maps to play on and unless those are 2v2 maps you won't have a single 2v2 map at all. I really really don't like the turrets though. In CoH the placement and strength they had seemed a strong enough to prevent someone just camping your base but they were quite easy to deal with if the other person wasn't paying attention. As it stands its actually easier to camp someone in with suppression weapons but harder to actually win by annihilate. The turrets are in the very back beside the base. Meaning you can't sneak around them and take them out if the person isn't paying attention. But because they are in the back it means you can sit just outside their range and kill your opponents stuff. Pair this with the fact that you don't get Zeal (or your races version) unless you kill something and it becomes a very hopeless situation as your opponent will get lots of it to keep you pinned and you won't be able to pull off a Webway or drop pod or something to get yourself out of the mess. I honestly have no clue what they are thinking. Most single player focused games have more variety and sense in their multi than this.

 #10 - My Two Cents - Posted by: Alpha001 (Member) on 01-27-2009 at 04:00

I prefer it over DoW I I can play it online now becuase i dont get rushed at the verry beginning. Its much more tactical instead of just swarming the opponents with units (which imo is gay) Im an eldar player and now they dont suck :D Yay support platforms~ and warp spiders doing what they should <3 being able to ruin maps with a couple of tanks Also im loving the commander customization *side note: I dont play TT so i dont know wether its fluffy or not Over all its a fun game that unline DoW you have to think about the units you use instead of just chucking infantry at things. And i feel this is how the original should have been and remember this is just a beta, hopefully there will be plenty of 8 player maps. and because its not going to be modable there better be lots of maps

 #11 - Posted by: Gazgutz (Member) on 01-27-2009 at 04:42

well, fluff issues aside, it's a decent game. Won't replace DOW for me, but will be in my main rotation. I would prefer the commanders of each type to allow a little more variation in the individual armies, so each commander made it FEEL like a different army instead, but oh well. You definitely have to think about your actions, as you don't aquire req fast enough to do throw away troops. On a fluff note, While rare, many chapters DO have Apothecaries in command roles. The Iron Snakes in particular include an apothecary with each squad, in addition to the sergeant, and the Apothecarion in general is considered part of the HQ in Chapter Organization. The existence of the Chapter is dependant upon them. As to the orks..... woulda loved to see meganobz, or a battlewagon, or grots. And nids... well, the nids mod did them better. Maybe it's the voice they gave so you knew what's going on, but they just don't feel right. And sorry Eldar players, I haven't played as them. It's me orky prejidice against panzies. But they do seem to be fairly bad ass for a buncha sneaky gitz.....

 #12 - Posted by: Dauri (Member) on 01-27-2009 at 08:15

i remember fire warrior it was epic fail but the formula was a win relic pull up ur socks and do an fps again i loved fire warrior the game was really accurate to the tabletop universe and i loved that imagin bf2142 or star wars battlefront 2 but with the w40k universe anyway the games more tactical but its lost its magic feeling and anticipation of dow 1+ sequells and fire warrior

 #13 - Posted by: Jaon (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 02:19

definatly lost the feel, and thanks for correcting me guys! WHY COULDNT THEY ADD ONE MORE SM TO EACH SQUAD GOD DAMMIT and why get rid of meltas altogether? and las cannons? devastators and tacticals have their names for a reason has anyone tried termies out? are they tough? coz they better be if u wanna survive late game, all the other races have some rapage type of unit

 #14 - Posted by: SuperNashwan (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 06:03

It's a very different game and I am happy with it. Getting to grips with it at the start is very difficult, but once you have found out your play style and what units are good for what it is very rewarding. CC units excel at CC and eat up mostly everything in CC, so the days of tieing up banshees for a minute or 2 with a squad of tacs is over. The tacs will literally last a few seconds, the way it should be.

 #15 - Posted by: Wikipedia (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 10:02

There schould be an extra poll choice for people who couldn't play the beta because the requirements were to high.

 #16 - Posted by: Wikipedia (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 10:10

If I read all the reactions most people are negative about the game. So I don't get why the poll shows a positive outcome since that's a lie. The game just isn't good. It isn't bad eighter but it is unfair to call it good.

 #17 - @16 - Posted by: Nerdsturm (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 10:43

Its just that the people who don't like the game are a lot more angry with it than the people who like it are happy, and only the people with more extreme feelings are going to put forth the time to leave a comment. Also, a lot of people seem to be unhappy with how closely it follows the W40k universe, and I'm guessing most people don't really have strong feelings about this.

 #18 - ;( - Posted by: delivered115 (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 11:24

i only missed cause my grahics card isnt gd enough ;(

 #19 - Posted by: Corbec_UST (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 13:16

It seems to me that no that many people hate it, they just feel that DoW was better for one reason or another. (which can be anything from how armies are set up to having races like Chaos and IG)

 #20 - Posted by: Corbec_UST (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 13:17

not* that many people hate it, Also I can only guess (looking at the poll) that the people that like it just really dont feel like talking about it

 #21 - Posted by: WarriorBourne (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 13:18

Played the Beta and half to comment on how strategic the game is, this truly does take RTS'S to a whole new dynamic level of thoughtful gameplay, The new format of this game also makes it more friendly to casual players as well, I am completely content with the new direction relic has taken DOW. 9/10 from me Relic. -1 cause of teh ASM :mepimp: Nerf Pl0xZorz

 #22 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 17:13

"strategic" "new direction" If any thing it would be tactical not strategic. the new direction is several years old. Its exactly like CoH just add melee.

 #23 - Posted by: Serefinn (Member) on 01-28-2009 at 17:31

#22 He meant new to DoW... not to RTS' altogether... Looks to me right now that the beta seems to be giving people a pretty bad perception of (in my opinion) an outstanding game. I think it looks awesome, can't wait for final release. Relic FTW :rock:

 #24 - Posted by: WarriorBourne (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 07:33

How about you stop putting words in my mouth TDATL, I never requested for your thoughts upon what I commented for, you had several posts before mine to summarize your thoughts. i don't really give a crap about anything you have to say about mine. Opinions are Opinions. Most definitily it is Strategic and not merely the tactical cover system, the ideal's of choosing your hero before the battle is entirely different from COH, obviously becayse you could choose your hero WITHIN the battle in that aspect. Along with the fact that territorial aspects are removed entirely, there are only req/power/victory points on the map, and only power can have the function of a listening post, which leaves most of the game to a entirely new STATEGIC function of constant warfare, back and forth control of holding area's which is more fast paced than COH and DOW put together, why don't you learn your definitions before attempting to correct someone. My real major concern is simply a few balance changes, but hey that's why it's a (BETA) right? as in, a non completed game, so maybe it would be wise of these people to think about the fact that once the game is released because it has gone gold that the first day patch will supply immediate relief to most of the current balance problems/technical fixes. And no serefinn I was talking about RTS's altogether, Thats why i took the time to write it, because it is different from RTS's ALTOGETHER. once again do not assume what others mean from your opinions. Feel free to counterpost TDATL, I won't be around to care. Playing a game you love makes it hard to listen to cynical critics. :mepimp:

 #25 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 10:01

"Most definitily it is Strategic and not merely the tactical cover system" Especially since you said "tactical cover system" I think you have no clue what tactical means since you are only parroting a phrase used on a games box. It is you that needs a lesson in what "strategic" and "tactical" mean. Tactical 1: of or relating to combat tactics: as a (1): of or occurring at the battlefront <a tactical defense> <a tactical first strike> (2): using or being weapons or forces employed at the battlefront <tactical missiles> bof an air force : of, relating to, or designed for air attack in close support of friendly ground forces 2 a: of or relating to tactics: as (1): of or relating to small-scale actions serving a larger purpose Strategy 1 a (1): the science and art of employing the political, economic, psychological, and military forces of a nation or group of nations to afford the maximum support to adopted policies in peace or war (2): the science and art of military command exercised to meet the enemy in combat under advantageous conditions b: a variety of or instance of the use of strategy A tactic is a means to complete a strategy. A strategy is an overarching plan. You don't employ strategy's to capture a building or small piece of territory. That is tactics. You employ strategy's to defeat nations. Maneuvering your solders into an out of cover is as tactical as you can get. DoW is tactical. W40k table top is tactical. On some team games you can get the beginnings of strategy. However, the vast majority of the game is tactically based. " the ideal's of choosing your hero before the battle is entirely different from COH, obviously becayse you could choose your hero WITHIN the battle in that aspect. Along with the fact that territorial aspects are removed entirely, there are only req/power/victory points on the map, and only power can have the function of a listening post, which leaves most of the game to a entirely new STATEGIC function of constant warfare, back and forth control of holding area's which is more fast paced than COH and DOW put together, why don't you learn your definitions before attempting to correct someone." So you pick your doctrine/hero before the match. Big deal. It only takes a little adaptation away from you and that is all. Most of the powers are the same for each commander; unlike CoH where each tree had completely seperate abilities. The lack of territories in DoW makes the "back and forth" LESS dynamic not more. In CoH you could destroy your opponents eco on some maps by taking just one point from him. In CoH the investments into listening points and the ability to cut off territories encouraged raiding. In DoW2 its a ring around the rosey game and your power points are far harder to decap than LP's were in CoH due to anti building weapons being far fewer and less useful overall. Not to mention it is just a trading of power plants. It may would be different if your power plants had to be destroyed before you could capture the node. As it stands the points are cheaper, tougher, and easier to recapture than in CoH. Their is little to no risk in expanding in DoW 2. Finally, "How about you stop putting words in my mouth TDATL, I never requested for your thoughts upon what I commented for, you had several posts before mine to summarize your thoughts. i don't really give a crap about anything you have to say about mine. Opinions are Opinions." I never put a single word in your mouth. I quoted you. I responded to your post. At no point did I accuse you of saying something you didn't. Your entire "I never requested your thoughts" issue is so hypocritical and ignorant of where you posted its not funny. This is the internet. If you don't like people talking about what you post you should never post on any public forum of any sort.

 #26 - Posted by: Andreaz (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 11:20

From what I've seen and experienced I guess I 'll be playing DoW 1 for quite some time to come. This DoW 2 game perhaps has it's own appeal for some, but it can not replace the DoW 1 experience by a long shot. The DoW 1 style appeals much more to me. I hate the down tuning of army sizes, squad sizes, level sizes etc. I hope that, after playing DoW2, mod teams will decide to return to the original Dow and make that game the best they can. I think that for example the FoK team is doing a very good job so far. I will play DoW 2 like any 40k fan, but when that's over and done with, I'll be returning to my old DoW and have much more fun with that game for years to come.

 #27 - Posted by: FLOW_1 (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 14:48

My graphics card sucks, I downloaded the beta and it didn't even open :(

 #28 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 15:11

"Actually taking the time to look in a dictionary and copy the defenitions of tactical and strategy out just so you could prove a point?" It took me less than 10 seconds to look up a word in a dictionary. It didn't take 5 seconds to copy and paste it. My argument is stronger for it as its not "just my opinion." Priceless. For all the things assumptions can't buy: Google. "Nobody cares about either of you or your opinions." So? I tell you this "everybody" and "nobody" get talked about behind their back a lot. I've heard people talk about things they do and what they think and care about. I've never actually heard it from them though. Such a shame since the way they are talked about makes it seem like they are someone to pay attention to.

 #29 - @27 - Posted by: WarriorBourne (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 19:21

Andreaz, that's the main problem here, some people were expecting: DAWN OF WAR, THE INCREDIBLY NON INNOVATIVE AND BORING SEQUAL THAT'S THE EXACT SAME FORMAT AS THE ORIGINAL DOW'S! WHAT'S NOT TO LOVE?!?!?! What on earth were you expecting? SoulStorm 2? (oh yeah, that would totally suck, and this new direction is a much better move from the old shabby and frankly, boring old concept that most RTS'S cling to these days, obviously It's time to move on, as Relic has done.) Another main problem is the complaints you hear about base building. Again, this game was not created for the point of bases, It's an entire new direction they have taken the game and RTS genre, this game supports a much more heavier focus on micromanagement and tactical aspects rather than macro/game slowing mechanics(such as bases and static defenses upon posts than usually prevent back and forth games.) , this game was created for getting straight into the action. not spending the pointless APM spamfest of building a base for 3 minutes THEN having something happeneing, most people that complain against this are people who would rather have APM determine games rather than true tactical emphasis and skill. It is true to note however that is game is a bit "dumbed down"-(in the terms of heavy emphasis upon APM) The weird thing about this is how people have the audacity to be suprised by this? Relic has announced in nearly every single interview given that this game was not really emphasized around competitive gaming, and is meant to appeal to the general audience and casual gaming of RTS gameplay, they felt that the fanbase was dieing, and have implemented this new style as a idealistic means of trying to save it, however just because the game is easier to control and understand does not mean it is any less in terms of Strategic and Tactical depth. While they have removed certain aspects that made RTS gaming Critcally hard, they have ALSO implemented new functions around the game to make it much more in depth of tactic's than it's original. To call this game "coh with melee" is a very sad understatement, derived from an inability to understand the true depth this game has achieved within it's new playstyle. In realistic terms, if you don't like the game, don't buy it. Wait for Starcraft 2, or ANY other of the thousands of RTS's out there that are just like it, and join Blizzard's growing monopoly of everyday boring old non innovative gamers, I really hope you enjoy it, I, on the other hand, will enjoy a change for once and keep DOW2 as the amazing new game that it is. for people who might not understand (APM = actions per minute, i.e. clicks per minute, (hand movement speed) a factor that should be a bigger factor in real life tennis games and not strategic battles of thought and capacity to understand the true emphasis of tactics. :mepimp:

 #30 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 20:04

@WarriorBourne Please explain HOW this game is different from CoH's playstyle. You seem to think its both new and different. If it is "sad" that people have an "inability to understand" then it should be rather easy for you to explain. After all, it must be such an obvious and simple concept by the way you talk about it. So far the only examples you have given are lack of "territory" and lack of listening posts. The first only removes the ability to cut off resources which removes depth and the second is only partly true. You can still put a "LP" on power nodes. This is effectively the same as CoH since power is like Fuel/Munitions and that is all any decent player put LPs on anyway.

 #31 - Posted by: WarriorBourne (Member) on 01-29-2009 at 20:38

you asked for the hammer, and you shall recieve it TDATL. To compare COH and DOW2 as similar is a very easy fight to undertake, obviously because they both share the same skeletal essence Engine, while Dow2 is vamped up to it's new updated 2.0 version. As you sordidly pointed out there is now (melee) within the game, this changes the aspects the of the game entirely if not drastically, you seem to attempt to downtrodden the main changes that melee combat brings to the battlefield that you never witnessed before in the original COH, which is a "sad" understatement. Changes as results from Melee involvement: Cover Positioning,(now understanding cover is also a movement hinderance, and taking a position in a place that will take melee units a much longer time to reach you than mere open ground) Ranges from enemy positions,(supressive power against Melee squads is not to be underestimated, and to set your units back in a situation to counter the use of say, (ASSAULT MARINES/STORMBOYZ) would be much different than that of COH, you never had to worry about flying jetpacks of tunneling tyranids in COH, and the emphaisis of new ways of enemy movement, deployment is not something to underestimated.) Ofcourse the new ideal of a HERO on the battlefield is entirely different than the COH design, as an embodiment of your fighting style, your hero can alter and change the drastic course of the entire battle, and to pass him off of some unsignificant new aspect is rather unintelligent and sure to get your ass handed to you in a real 1 vs 1 automatch battle. The new weapons and effects of powers that are not available in ww2 universe of COH, we now have "FING FLYING DROP PODS OF METAL THAT LAND ON YOUR TROOPS AND PSYCHIC STORMS OF DEATH", thats certainly Obviously Obvious if your slow mind can't connect to it. Once again you throw words into my mouth as if I stated they have added a "lack?" or territory into the game. perhaps you do this out of a need of attempting to disable my own credible arguments? or simply vaguely attempt to alter my point of view to suit your needs in attempting to discredit me? The new resource system is different than COH, which you took the time to point out, which contradicts your whole idea of DOW2="COH WITH MELEE" if you need to furthur state that "oh and the resources are different, and they have hero's, and there's a new system to build/upgrade your units than coh, oh and there is also only one base central command. and ALL UNITS( including vehicles ) can now level up to level 10 instead of 3 veterancy levels. Not to mention that you have alot more than simple guns/munitions/tanks to worry over, you've got to watch out for that Alien lightning and Super resistant armor that the enemy has, not to mention the invulernability powers and ENERGY shields. Yeah I'd say your absolutely correct that is NO obvious difference between the two games, aren't you the observant one? If you wanted SOULSTORM 2, then boo who. because it's not going to happen. Nice responce time btw, I swear that was what? less than under 40 minutes of my original post? lol, you must live on this website to act so critical over a simple interwebz argument, but I suppose I cannot blame you, we all have our complicated issues of involvement in the world. I hate to break it to you TDATL, but if you can't see the changes in that, than I'll have to give up on you, not too much skin off my ass however, Pax :mepimp:

 #32 - Thou callest me #32 W. B.??? - Posted by: Red_Hammer (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 04:49

Think i'll stick with the origional series and with ALL the glorious mods abound. What they should had done was go for a mega FPS instead. Thats what i want!!!

 #33 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 05:57

Almost half of your post was nothing but personal attacks at me and simply referring to new units and features of the game. No where except when talking about melee did you even come close to talking about GAMEPLAY. Not unit looks, names, or other cosmetic differences. Replace the units with pink boxes and DoW 2 is CoH. Style of play relates to how the game is played. It relates to what you have to do to win the game and the skills involved in doing so. "Melee" does not change this from CoH. In CoH there were many units that had extreme close range damage. All flamethrowers and all submachine gun/pistol soldiers served the same purpose melee serves. To force a player to flee from the unit or die. Suppression affected them in the same way. If you attacked from the front you were not going to make it. "jumping" is also only a graphical change for the most part. Their were several units in CoH which had special "charge" abilities which allowed them to bypass enemy fire and suppression if used correctly. The resources are not that different. For something to change style of play the means of gathering them or the way they are used has to change. Something that has a new name or looks different or has a different animation is a cosmetic change. Unless that affects the dynamics of the game the unit could be a pink block for all it matters. the drop pods are paratroopers and the eldritch storm is an offscreen artillery barrage. The differences are almost entirely cosmetic. The only difference these have is the drop pods throw a few units first and the eldritch doesn't give you a little flare as a warning. You seem to misunderstand "gameplay" for "looks" and "unit names." SImply saying "look this their are lightning shields and drop pods and aliens and stuff" is not a gameplay argument. Perhaps you should put more effort into figureing out how games actually work instead of putting it into trying to see how many ways you can fit (poorly) hidden insults into your posts. Your post was less than 40 minutes after mine so once again you are guilty of what you accuse others of.

 #34 - Posted by: kcaz (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 10:03

Wow. Internet for the lose. Always get a couple of trolls to turn this into a flame war and we lose a decent poll. Yay.

 #35 - Posted by: relicholyfire (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 13:02

Having played a few games of DOWII (quite successfully I might add) I think this game isn't bad but it feels unfinished (beta stage of course but even then). The game requires more though than DoW 1 I feel and in that sense it is an improvement. The bloom is still too much though. I really don't know why they decided to make DoW all shiny but it really doesn't suit the game. DoW should be dark. As a game it is not bad but I feel it still needs some tweaking.

 #36 - Posted by: chrisgold (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 13:59

can someone help me i cant play dawn of war 2. i have downloaded it and everything but it says "faled to find a supported hardware rendering device" i can play company of heroes but i apparently cant play this

 #37 - Posted by: TDATL (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 14:06

""faled to find a supported hardware rendering device" DoW 2 requires your videos card to have shader 3.0. CoH did not. This is most likely the problem.

 #38 - Posted by: Sl4sh (Staff) on 01-30-2009 at 14:09

I find myself agreeing with most of the poinst TDATL's #4 post.

 #39 - Posted by: relicholyfire (Member) on 01-30-2009 at 14:39

I hope the single player can make up for the average multiplayer. Maps are one of the problem. Better maps could make a huge difference. The 1v1 swamp map is pretty good as is the city like 3v3 one.

 #40 - Posted by: chrisgold (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 03:47

goddammit. is it possible to get a new graphics card without gettign a new computer

 #41 - Posted by: Eta999 (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 05:26

Hang on a minute, was my comment deleted?

 #42 - a bad day for mankind well gamekind - Posted by: Dauri (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 08:00

me and my freind played the betta it sucks limited maps limited races limited room in maps tactics wtf you cant flank. maps to small even the assault sm comander got killed by 1 punny ork jump squad predator is the new predator the only good thing is orks and eldar are right now u only need 1 noob in a game to make it fail half the people will be lagging or cant even play due to graphics several bug issues honesly the game will be better if it was single player only thats why im reinstalling dow its so bad im thinking of getting soulstorm yeah i kno thats how bad it actually is they killed coh now they killed dow they make ubisoft look good goodbye ill lave you to youre eye candy only game

 #43 - Posted by: Majestic_XII (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 09:01

Why got my comment got deleted without warning? And the sucker above me, the game is in beta,yo ulisted 5 times the smae reasons and yo uare a noob.Your logic sucks. BTW TDATL,modern warfare

 #44 - -,- - Posted by: DarkDisaster (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 10:41

Give DoW1 back lol, damn. CoH was way better than this shit

 #45 - Posted by: Viper_17 (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 11:28

Hey,Warhammer players!For that you said-you are not right!I think this Dawn of War 2 is the best strategy warhammer game,because in this game you are not able to have big armies only to rush the enemy and victorious the battle.In this game you must be very patient,very fast,very smart to survive the missions.You must think first,then do anything.And if you want to defeat your enemies,you must have tactics for that.I played all warhammer 40,000 games and I know only 1 from them-fast get the strategic points,do some generators,create 1 huge army and SLAY the enemy....There,in DoW 2 this is so stupid "tactic"!If you want to be like a "Commander of all your units",you must be clever or be vulpine :D And now for the video of the game.This is the best strategy engine what I've ever seen in my life.If you want to play it-buy a good machine and RELIC KNOW WHAT ARE DOING.THEIR GAMES ARE THE BEST. And at last what about the multiplayer maps.These maps are not So Big for your huge armies!There won't be Mele with squads!What more you like?This game is something better!That is not Dawn of War,Winter Assault,Dark Crusade or Soulstorm.Relic wants to do something other!Can't you UNDERSTAND PEOPLE?! :mad:

 #46 - @ Viper 17 - Posted by: Corbec_UST (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 12:14

Here is some advice. Use the spacebar. Also dont freak out because someone dosnt like something you like. What with people, one person has a different opinion and that must mean they are horrible people that know nothing. I havnt played the Beta (and I dont plan too) but from the sounds of it its too extreme, people dont like DoW because armies are too big (like you said) and people dont like DoW II because they are too small... Ill personally stick with DoW and just use small armies in that. (I dont mass)

 #47 - Posted by: relicholyfire (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 15:30

Corbec, it is worth a try. Don't judge it on what some people say. It is much smaller that is true but the whole game is about fighting and taking points. There is no uber base rushing to win the game. I find this game different but very enjoyable. Seriously, give it a go but DON'T expect it to be like DoW 1 or you will be disappointed. It is a very different game and must be treated so.

 #48 - Posted by: Viper_17 (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 15:32

Ok,and for the people what talk for the hardware-BUY GOOD MACHINE and play and DoW 2 is different game from other Warhammer 40,000 ! 9/10 RELIC,because the graphics should be some better of that..But all is OK.I am warhammer 40k gamer,so I know there are very much like me and some people know from what game we need and Relic is giving to us,some people don't like anything because they don't know what they want... and ONE ANSWER-everyone is different :mepimp:

 #49 - Posted by: Corbec_UST (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 15:46

Im sorry relicholyfire, you miss understood me because I wrote poorly. Im not not playing the Beta because of the armies, im not playing it because DoW II holds no interest *braces for Jason's personal attacks again* Im not intersted because I dont care much for multi player, skrimish gets old quickly, which leaves only Single player. Now the SP sounds very good but I dont want to play it because I dont like anyone in it. I dont like Tyranids (I played Starcraft before I heard of WH 40K), find the Eldar annoying, no IG or Chaos, and the story follows a group of SM that I consider traitors and hate to no end now. This leaves only the Orks... not much of a reason to play for me. Im sure the game will be very good, Im just not going to play it because I find no reason to play it

 #50 - THEY ARE BOTH GOOD GAMES PEOPLE! - Posted by: martlew (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 16:16

WEll, it seems everyones gonna have a gripe and it's often true that it is impossible to please everyone. :rolleyes: personally i'm loving this beta to bits. They really put the effort in this time and before we go and judge RELIC bear that in mind. I do agree on one thing though, DoW IS irreplacable and for me i will always turn to Fok when i want to fight with imperial guard tanks, Chaos or even for the sake of larger more diverse armies. this keeps the appeal of BOTH games. which is why i love the fact that DoW2 gives us as TADL earmarked it "Coh in Spaaaacceee...". I always prayed for them to exploit a concept like that when the ww2 hard-hitting rts came out, it's without a doubt the most in-depth strategy game out there. the fluff as far as i'm concerned is spot on, the space marines from the concept stories fight and act little like they do on the tabletop and less like that in dow. DoW2 is about showing them as the small-team giants they are, and as for the eldar bravo, they redeemed the voice acting above my expectations. i applaud relic for this step in a exiting new direction and pray for many expantion to come :thumbsup:

 #51 - Posted by: Serefinn (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 17:01

After playing the Beta (Finally - damn net connection...), I gotta say I think it's the best strategy game I've ever played. I'm not gonna say why I think this, it'll end up being longer than #31, but I have my reasons. Having said that, there are a couple things I've noticed that perhaps should be there, even though it's only a Beta (these arn't major problems, just things I feel are worth mentioning) - - Hive tyrant and Carnifex don't make any noise at all when you click on them - Wargear doesn't seem to make an appearance on the Tyranid Commander models (eg. Crushing claws on H.T) Overall though, to me this game re-defines EPIC and I'm even more stoked for the final release. Relic FTW :rock:

 #52 - Posted by: Andreaz (Member) on 01-31-2009 at 17:42

@WarriorBourne I like your analysis of DoW2. And I really do think the game is worth playing. And I totally respect Relics decision to make the game the way it is. The guys at Relic belong to the best game designers in the industry and DoW 2 is a good game in its own right. That is not my point. But I hope I'm entitled to my own preferences. From the get go I realized this game would not be what I personally had hoped for. Perhaps I would have liked to see a Soulstorm 2. Is that bad WarriorBourne? There was a lot left to be desired in Soulstorm 1. Soulstorm is a sloppy game with a ridiculous and sad implementation of aerial units. I would have liked to see a FoK approach with more units (especially armor types) for all races, true to scale units, improved highres interface, improved graphics, improved customization options with an enhanced army painter, refined unit control, improved mod support, larger maps, new exiting battlefields, a doctrine like approach for all races (like the 2 Tau path's), and the the Nids as a new race etc. etc. There are a thousand things that could have been done to create a DoW 2 that would have been a true and worthy successor to DoW 1. I would have easily payed a hundred dollars for a game like that. Well, sadly for me this is not the road Relic wanted to take. But I do respect that and will be playing DoW 2. But for me DoW 1 is the real thing. DoW 2 will not replace it.

 #53 - Posted by: Jaon (Member) on 02-01-2009 at 00:38

um i just got the beta, and i was playing on en epic comp, and its reli good, i like it lots!!!

 #54 - Posted by: WarriorBourne (Member) on 02-01-2009 at 07:33

Andreaz, the main problem with wanting SoulStorm 2 in my opinion, was that SoulStorm was already just a purple coated copy of Dark Crusade, and to ask for another game in the same format in a set-up is wrong and will probably be bad for Relic, and the gamers. However, I did like SoulStorm's Multiplayer, the balance and competitive ladder was much better than DC's, I simply believe that we should not have another copy of the same type of game Just because Dow2 is going to be released does not mean dow1 will cease to exist, you can always go back to it, I suspect a drop in population, but hey, the game that you love will not dissapear off your shelf. :mepimp:

 #55 - Posted by: Andreaz (Member) on 02-02-2009 at 01:30

"Andreaz, the main problem with wanting SoulStorm 2 in my opinion, was that SoulStorm was already just a purple coated copy of Dark Crusade (...)" Warriorbourne, the point I was trying to make is that a the Dawn of War 2 I had in mind would not have been a mere copy of the same thing. Mirriads of improvements and additions, of which I already mentioned some , would have resulted in a true DoW successor and an awesome, exiting new game I myself woud have bought without blinking an eye. I think the gamingsystem of DoW1 is very, very good as it is. As far as I'm concerned it didn't need to be scaled down this much. I like the DoW 1 feel of commanding a 40k army, with all the different units in it. Instead they could have improved upon the DoW gamingsystem with the implementation of this new engine with all its new possibilities. And last but not least: killing moddabilty in DoW 2 is the biggest mistake Relic could have made. It is a decision I can't even begin to understand after all the fuss Relic themselves made about their support of the modding community. But having said all that, I'm sure DoW 2 will be fun to play. It just isn't what I personally had hoped for.

 #56 - Posted by: Devastator170 (Member) on 02-03-2009 at 10:49

Overall I like this game, I do play tabletop so I was hoping for something codex, but that aside I love it. To me it's not as much Dawn Of War, more like a Squad Command game, it's more about tactics for small units rather than armies

 #57 - Posted by: Vexedlee (Member) on 02-03-2009 at 15:34

hmm wat do say about the dow2...i think that they have put alot of time and effort into making the graphics engine alot more advanced but there are alot of flaws of the game i dnt like...like the way u cant build buildings that is a real dissapointment for me as i am a huge fan of dow dark crusade. Though it is a very stratigic game which i like, it doesnt suit the dow's but that is just my oppinion also the 3 man squads made 2 be very stratigic with ur men and how u use them...its good but it also dont suit the dow 40k personality i dont think that sm would be attacking a hoard of orks with 3 men in each squad do u? lol overall its a good stratigic game but not worth buying for me.

 #58 - Posted by: Vexedlee (Member) on 02-03-2009 at 15:39

...also i agree with andreaz with his oppinion on how the game should of been made.

Comments on this Article

There are no comments yet. Be the first!