Company Of Heroes Online: Allies Trailer

By Jim Rossignol on August 31st, 2010 at 11:36 am.


We’re getting more excited about Company Of Heroes Online by the day. The game is closed beta at the moment, and we’re expecting to have some of our own impressions of the game up here before it hits later in September. For a taste of why we’re excited head below. This recent trailer details a bunch of the units available to Allied forces and it’s really splendidly produced. Go take a look.

(There really is some stuff to be said about the quality of free-to-play stuff coming out this year, but that’s for another article.)

, , .

52 Comments »

  1. beefchief says:

    Makes me want to go back and play company of heroes. Might just do that.

    • monkeybreadman says:

      Unless you want to get bummed by Brits, don’t bother

      If they balanced that game it would be the best RTS ever ever

    • Heliocentric says:

      I’m not great at coh and i play “random army”. I don’t get the problem with brits, they can’t handle lots of things. You can often beat them by controlling where the fight happens rather than letting them decide.

    • Ginger Yellow says:

      The main problem with Brits is the near unstoppable Roo Rush, namely three or even four Kangaroo armoured cars loaded with brenned tommies and piat squads. Roos cost virtually no fuel, are much sturdier than an American Sherman, and garrisoned infantry can’t be hurt but can fire out. Even if you kill the Roos, the infantry squads pop out unharmed and devastate what’s left of your defence force.

  2. Novotny says:

    Keeps randomly crashing on me, as did the original :(

  3. Daave says:

    Shouldn’t there have been a jump?

  4. Dominic White says:

    There really is a lot of good free-to-play stuff out there now, and a growing amount. Atlantica Online, World of Tanks, now CoH Online, and I’ve got Cosmic Break and Vindictus to look forward to in the near future. If you can wrangle yourself an American VPN, you can play stuff like Dungeon Fighter Online too, which is effectively an old-school 2d arcade brawler as an MMO. And Free.

    It is a good time to be both a PC gamer, and a cheapass.

  5. Heliocentric says:

    I’m in the american coh beta(i’m not american but it never asked) and it certainly deserves attention for what it implements and means for the future of games. But good lawd do you need to be willing to download a lot, i hope they have a new download model planned to boost the assessability.

    • Ginger Yellow says:

      It doesn’t seem that bad if you have original CoH. The downloader checks the files you have and only downloads what’s different. The most recent patch claimed to be 6GB but downloaded in about 5 minutes. That’s a lot better than, say, WoW’s patches.

  6. Andrew Dunn says:

    I tried CoH Online, and really didn’t like it. The hero units and reworked ‘levelled’ doctrines unbalance the game far more than the Brits and Panzer Elite ever did, and the lack of doctrine flexibility takes out a good deal of the fun. The good bits of CoH Online are just the holdovers from normal CoH, which I’ve gone back to play and am enjoying far more.

    Oh well.

  7. cliffski says:

    So can someone verify to me that this entire trailer is complete and utter bullshit, given that Company of Heroes is an RTS game with a fixed isometric mode camera which defaults to NOTHING LIKE the pseudo-FPS view they decide to show in trailers?

    In other words, this trailer gives you absolutely no idea whatsoever what the actual game will look and play like. I might as well show a battle from a star wars movie to describe GSB.

    I bet the people in charge of marketing this game are not gamers. They think it looks ‘cooler’ in a first person POV, regardless of the fact that the game is NOT played that way.
    I wish games companeis could be sued for false advertising. And I LOVE Company of Heroes.

    • Andrew Dunn says:

      Well you can change the camera angles at will in CoH, and get it looking like that, but you wouldn’t be much good at playing it if you did that a lot.

    • Heliocentric says:

      I do on occasion drop my camera down to judge the firing lines of long range weapons like antitank guns. Oh, and to more enjoy barrages up close.

    • Tei says:

      But, cliffski, I play RTS games, I play your strategy games, and I think this video looks cool, and Is cool that the CoH engine can create this awesome images. Many people will see this video and don’t know is created with the game engine. Not everything need to be pure informative, stats and objective cameras.

      And this can be implemented in the game. Theres a RTS with this feature… one of the Star Wars games, in the space battles theres a mode where the cammera follows whatever ship it choice, and change after some seconds, tryiing to show the core of the combat in awesome images.

    • vanarbulax says:

      When my win is inevitable (or my defeat for that matter) I zoom into the final battleground, tilt the camera low to the ground, turn of the interface and watch as rolling artillery clears a path for hordes of oncoming tanks.

      Basically, yeah you don’t play that way but it’s hardly false advertising. It’s not meant to be a gameplay demonstration.

    • cliffski says:

      I just have little time for videos trying to get me to play games that are NOT gameplay demonstrations.
      That, to me, is the whole point of a promotional video. Show me what the product is like when I play it.

    • A-Scale says:

      Every time Cliffski opens his mouth I like him even less. What a miserable person you are.

    • Tei says:

      Pure informative advertising died in 1800. You will not see Coca Cola advertising with the list of ingredients on the back.
      CARBONATED WATER, HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, CARAMEL
      PHOSPHORIC ACID, NATURAL FLAVORS CAFFEINE.
      DRINK COKE!

      @A-Scale
      The world is big enough for more than a army of clones that all have the same opinions about everything. I don’t agree with the man, but I don’t think that make him less or more what he already is.

    • Serenegoose says:

      I agree with Cliffski here. I mean, I could understand a few posed shots to grab the attention of everyone, but the bulk of that video was close ups of explosions that told nothing of the actual game… except that the game can visibly not handle that POV, the framerate divebombing frequently. If they’d actually shown what was happening, it would have been an honest trailer that would have probably looked a bit better to boot.

    • neems says:

      Two worthless comments for the price of one! Thanks Dr Gonzo.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      @A-Scale, you’ve not always been a ray of sunshine on here either! :)

      And to the rest of you: no insults, please. You can disagree without slinging names at each other.

    • Sarlix says:

      I have to say I’m with Cliffski on this one. Game trailers with no in-game footage just seem pointless. The same with screenshots. I’ve lost count of the amount of times I’ve been interested in a game but haven’t been able to find a single screenshot that actually shows some in-game footage. You just get some cinematic vista that tells you nothing!

    • weego says:

      Clearly it’s someone’s first day on the internet.

    • Sarlix says:

      Actually, having watched the trailer it wasn’t as bad as I thought. I possibly did see one snippet of in-game footage. I think they are probably assuming most people watching it already know what COH looks like. However the point still remains no in-game footage = bad. And it does seem like more videos and screenshots feature less and less.

      I also agree with whoever said the narrator sounds like Spock.

    • Adam Whitehead says:

      You can’t play CoH with the camera in this mode, no. You can, however, save a replay and review it with the camera in any position you choose without any problems, which is worth doing a few times as it looks cool (especially with all the detail ramped up to maximum).

  8. Shrm4n says:

    Ever held the Alt key and moved the mouse while playing? You can actually rotate, pan and zoom the camera in to the levels shown in the trailer and watch the combat unfold close up.

  9. Gaytard Fondue says:

    Well, the beta is kinda… meh.

  10. Xercies says:

    Is that guy trying to be Leonard Nimoy?

  11. coldwave says:

    Still no Soviets?

    meh

    • Sarlix says:

      I believe this Mod adds Soviets http://www.moddb.com/mods/coheastern-front Not tried it though :-)

    • Adam Whitehead says:

      Go get EASTERN FRONT as mentioned by the previous commentator. It is very impressive indeed, with the Red Army easily a more enjoyable, much more well-balanced side than the official Brits or Panzer Elite, even if the mod does lowball the real-life effectiveness of T-34/85s against Panthers (although given how cheap T-34s are, that’s probably a good thing from a balance perspective).

      Be warned that, for reasons not really explained, they removed the Calliope from the Allies in the mod, replacing it with a ‘Fat Sherman’ which is next to useless. Hopefully they’ll change this back a patch or two down the road (this is in the mod only, not the game proper).

  12. kulik says:

    Bringing a rts into mmo could make you anticipate frontlines, logistics, large scale operations, inteligence… …guess matchmaking system and upgrades have to do. :(

  13. Isometric says:

    I actually got into the closed beta and I’ve still yet to play it. The awful download client totally put me off. It was so slow and sucked away all my bandwidth like a black hole. I know you can install all the other CoH games to lessen your download time but after too many tries I gave up.
    I hope it’s a great game though.

  14. lethu says:

    Don’t get too much excited about this game, just an advice.

    There are so many things that could go wrong in this game, right now some have already, the matchmaking system is real fuxored up, and I can almost guaranty from now that you won’t rejoice being put with the wrong teammates and the wrong opposing team, almost 10 out of 10 times you play a match. Losing each and every time has nothing enjoyable. And I am not that bad at strategy games…

    • grimskin says:

      Actually, I seems that you are bad at strategy games.

      Also, its closed beta. Which means there is to few players to evaluate the matchmaking system. in average – there is something about 10 players per fraction looking for the game same time you do.

  15. 0mar says:

    Let me tell you something as a player of CoH for a long ass time. I was actually the #1 Axis player for 6 months or so in vanilla CoH. Vanilla CoH is one of the greatest RTS games of all time. There is a ton of strategy and tactics tucked into a very nice UI. It rewards thinking, planning and not who-can-click-the-fastest that seems to dominate RTS games.

    Opposing Fronts ruined it all. It is one of the worst expansion packs to ever hit a game. The game was literally unplayable for several months. There were at least 4 game-breaking bugs that could instantly grant you victory (looking at you, 0.25 second artillery). The balance, while not ideal in vCoH, was basically discarded for ridiculous units. Relic’s track record of post-release support is one of the worst in the industry. Dawn of War was fun until patches broke more than they fixed and expansions made playing certain races an exercise in futility. The same occurred with CoH. Relic simply does not know how to balance. Their coders are incompetent. Every single patch has had an obvious, gamebreaking bug introduced. For example, in a series of patches, CoH had the following ridiculousness get by the QA process: invincible halftracks, super Allied barbed wire (unbreakable by anything except wire cutters, it could even stop an 80 ton tank), worthless Axis tank traps (breakable by a jeep), machine gun snipers (able to wipe out a squad in under 2 seconds, even while retreating), Sherman “plasma shields”, in which deploying smoke grenades essentially made the tank invincible for 30 seconds, conveniently the time it took for the ability to recharge, bugged V1 rockets which did zero damage, nebelwerfers doing negative damage (they would actually, in certain cases, heal the enemy soldiers), bugged Axis artillery tables (half damage to all Allied troops, double damage to all Axis troops, apparently a holdover from the single player), terminator FSJs which can kill 5 Allied squads in less than 5 seconds. And that’s just off the top of my head. Each issue took months to resolve. If abused by the other player, there was little you could do except take the loss and move on.

    CoH:O looks to take the worst parts of MMO gaming and apply them to an RTS. I’ve read beta reports by several insiders in the CoH community and the game does not look good. For example, if you play anyone semi-competent that happens to be a higher level than you, you lose. There’s very little you can do to put up a strong fight against a higher leveled opponent, especially if you happen to play them at breakpoints in ability gains (eg levels 5, 10, 20). Even a one or two level advantage makes all their troops so much better. There are cases in which the game ends in under 5 minutes because their hero unit can literally walk through machine gun fire, kill the team and acquire the weapon, basically locking you into your base until the victory points tick down. Finally, this online model will be supported by microtranscactions, in which you can buy additional weapons, armor, units, and leveling advantages (eg level up faster).

    Just stay away from this crap. Please.

    • Ace says:

      You’re omar? Wow, I’m in the company of giants here. Would love to play a game of vanilla with you… haven’t played in a while.

      Didn’t you beat nystrom or something in a tourney?

    • grimskin says:

      dude, what you’ve said about level differences is nothing except huge piece of noob-rage :) and completely un-true, of course. i’ve played it to lvl 31 (50 is a cap) and i was outleveled for 10+ levels in half of a games – and there is no problem dealing with that.
      of course it’s not so easy do deal with guy who outlevel you like twice, but its closed beta problem – not enough people for correct matchmaking

  16. Vinraith says:

    I just have little time for videos trying to get me to play games that are NOT gameplay demonstrations.

    Amen to that. The amount of useless advertising in games is quite frankly unbelievable, there’s little to no point in even watching 90% of game trailers that turn up.

  17. Vodkarn says:

    “Relic’s track record of post-release support is one of the worst in the industry. ”

    I almost spat my coffee, Jesus, do you actually think that?

    Christ, I’d consider them one of the BEST, and I don’t paly many of their games.

    Name three studios that update that often – Blizzard? Valve? You might not like what they do, but come on, they update pretty damn often.

    • Dominic White says:

      You’ll find that in a lot of RPS comment threads, Valve come up as one of the ‘worst developers for post-release support’ too.

      Internet people are crazy.

    • Vinraith says:

      Relic’s track record is fairly uneven, in my experience. They’ve done marvelously with some games, but Soulstorm was a wreck that never got properly fixed and Dark Crusade took, what was it, somewhere between six months and a year to get some decent balance patching? On the other hand, they added a free bonus mode to DoW2 and I’m told they’ve been very kind of CoH, so what you think of them as far as post release support probably depends on what games of theirs you care most about.

      @Dominic

      I’ve seen some hysterical criticism of Valve around here (and plenty of hysterical apologism, too) but I don’t recall that particular one. Then again, you can find someone on the internet who’ll say most anything, so it wouldn’t surprise me all that much.

    • sez says:

      Omar’s point was that Relic releases patches frequently, but doesn’t clean up bugs from previous patches for a long time. Relic is like a crazy grandmother who never forgets your birthday but sends condoms when you’re turning 8 and a microwave dinner when you’re turning 20.

    • subedii says:

      My experience with their patching has primarily been with DoW2.

      A large part of the problem can pretty much be summed up as “mega-patches”. If you look at the patch list for something like Starcraft 2, the last one listed a few changes. The average patch to something like DoW2 has massive sweeping changes across the board. And when it comes to balancing a game, you don’t want to do that, because if you’re changing a tonne of stuff, you often end up breaking as much as you’re fixing.

      From what I understand, patch support for DoW2 is better than it was for CoH, and I could see that. The main problem is that the updates are huge and come out after long periods of time. Relic promised they’d be doing more regular, incremental patches before the release of DoW2, but that hasn’t panned out. Largely because of how GFWL works unfortunately. Any update to a “Live” game (either XBL or GFWL) requires the update to first be submitted to a MS for certification. This is a month long process, and every time an update is submitted, it’s the developer that has to foot the bill for it. In short, devs can’t push out regular incremental patches like a company like say, Valve. Or by comparison, GPG, who gave Supreme Commander 2 a tonne of patches in its first month alone, more than Relic manages in about 6 months. If you’re a “special” company with a special, hyper hyped product, MS might fast track your update (this happened with MW2, and it still took ages), but that’s not likely to happen. Gears of War 2 for example, was ridiculously broken online for something like, what 5 or 6 months?

      Before Chaos Rising hit, DoW2 had just about reached balance. Few RTS’s are ever going to reach what could be called “perfect equilibrium” if their sides are asymmetric. About the only one that manages this is Starcraft, and probably Starcraft 2 eventually. But that’s because Blizzard can afford to spend a ridiculous amount of resources on balancing. Like crazy resources on it. Starcraft 2 had a huge beta for months and moths before being released, constantly being iterated on, constantly evolving. For all that, Relic actually managed a good balance.

      And then Chaos Rising hit. And as we all know, when an all new race and new units come, they throw the balance completely out of whack again. And it takes ages to fix. My understanding is that with the last patch, the game’s pretty much back to balance now, but I haven’t had the opportunity yet to try it for myself

      Anyway that’s about the state so far. Relic’s patching history has been kind of spotty, but at the same time I can appreciate they’re in a pretty hard position with something like DoW2. The nature of the game means that it’ll never be completely 100% balanced, but they do make good work of it, and manage to make the game playable without (eventually) anything too overpowering. Depending on what stage of the update cycle you’re in, Most if not all the games played will still come down to difference in skill, not exploiting some micro-balance issues. More to the point, they have, as others pointed out, given it a tonne of post release support, including new game modes, and new units for existing users (even if they don’t buy CR). They are constantly updating the game, it’s just that they’re stuck doing it at long intervals.

      @ Vinraith: I’ve definitely heard those comments with regards to Valve. Largely in relation to Left 4 Dead and how Valve “betrayed” the community over supporting it by not giving them as much additional free stuff as they wanted. The new campaigns were crap, there should’ve been more of them, the new game mode was crap, there should have been more new characters and stories etc. Even back before the release of Left 4 Dead 2, you had tonnes of people saying that it should be a free addition to Left 4 Dead 1. Valve were evil and money grubbing and releasing the same game twice and abandoning the first one and…

      Basically a whole lot of QQ.

    • Alexander Norris says:

      @subedii –

      by not giving them any of the stuff they promised, then packing all of that stuff in a sequel sold for full price, to which they’re now adding the first game’s campaigns for free, just to drum in the fact that they have next to no respect for the folks who bought the first game

      I’ve fixed that for you, since you accidentally made a strawman argument.

    • Ginger Yellow says:

      What bugs me about Relic’s post-release support (based mainly on CoH) is the way they seem content to leave pretty major bugs and balance issues in over multiple relases. The last patch for vCoH was around the ToV release, and they’re now releasing a new version of CoH with serious pre-ToV bugs (Pak cloak damage, Puma phasing, crawl bug etc) completely unaddressed in vCoH or CoH:Online. And that’s without getting into balance issues like the Roo Rush, which are only not present in CoH:Online because the Brits aren’t in the game.

    • Lull says:

      @subedii

      A large part of the problem can pretty much be summed up as “mega-patches”. If you look at the patch list for something like Starcraft 2, the last one listed a few changes. The average patch to something like DoW2 has massive sweeping changes across the board.

      Haha, they still do that? That was a very large part of the problem with CoH as well.

      Actually, one of the patches my friends and I were waiting for took them a whole YEAR to get finished. It finally released in 2009 sometime, at which point we tried it out but ended up walking away since our patience had been strung out far too thin.

      They could probably never have corrected the fundamental faults with the new factions through patching anyway. Such a shame.

    • subedii says:

      @ Norris: I fail to see how it’s a Strawman since those are the things that people were literally saying. The only difference is that you agree with them that Valve somehow shafted players of Left 4 Dead 1.

  18. EBass says:

    Ah Omar I remember you, you kicked my ass a few times though I think I managed to beat you once.

    And yes CoHOnline is a pile of wank

  19. ShineDog says:

    I dont agree about the balance actually. I mean, yes, there are some really stupidly powerful units, but on a meta level, they cant be taken very often due to charge cost (you have to pay.. upkeep between games to bring your hero units into the fight, and high level units are very expensive), and so long as you are playing team games you generally find that the superunits on either side cancel each other out.

    The real problem is in 1v1, where they can absolutely turn the game, but thats never where CoH was strong anyway.

  20. Lull says:

    Mmm, vanilla CoH, probably the most fun I’ve had playing anything last decade. Its downfall is such a shame.