-
Website
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/ -
Original page
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2009/03/40k-review-dawn-of-war-2.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
I cant help but think there is a significant amount of revenue that THQ must receive from both, and they just got a bit too greedy.
Steam = copy protection and digital distribution along with statistic gathering to help patch/improve the game (and designers can see how units/maps are being played).
GFWL = Peer to peer hosting, match making, MS $$$, etc.
I'm sure using GFWL helped in the money department for THQ/Relic but it does bring TrueSkill match making system and some other benefits.
*I like the concept of TrueSkill, but hate how long it takes to find games so I hope that's improved in the future.
I'm an xbox live gamer myself, so im a bit biased towards Live. I love the fact that I can keep my account, send messages with friends, and get gamerscore, though i'm sure steam users feel the same way.
I just wish there was a hassle-free way to get what THQ wants out of steam, while keeping Live, as well as vise-versa for those who prefer it.
Mind you, I like 360 Live, and GFWL works OK once I can finally log in, but keeping me from playing the single player part of the game if I can't log into the multi-player matchmaking service is a deal breaker for me.
If I'd realized I was going to have this problem before I bought the game I wouldn't have done so. I'll be passing on any games that use the same implementation of GFWL in the future.
They're using the achievement crap in GFWL, which is fine some people will like that.
What I can't understand is why they force you to log in for single player. It should allow you to play offline, and then once you do connect retroactively update your achievements. So to this point I totally agree and it's complete fail.
That said, I don't know if it's actual purpose is DRM but just a failed way to do achievements.
If the people who are not impressed by the game are 10 year olds, that would make the people who defend the game like the second coming of Christ 5 years old?
I agree lol
Whereas DoW was an excellent 'port of the real 40K game to the computer, this is an abstraction. The graphics are too busy. The utter necessity of high end 'battle point' units like Terminators is annoying, especially when the Relic kept promising that eliminating base building left you more time to engage in tactical fights... which in DoW2 means killing as many of your guys AND your opponent's in order to build up the points needed for special powers... like Terminators. It's simply another way of 'teching up'.
bigred's comment about the Eldar is spot on. They were far and away the best race in the demo, able to slaughter the other 3 races with very little effort. Unfortunately, the race that everyone was waiting for, the Tyranids, turned out to be the worst in terms of basic endurance as well as concept, since the wave attacks of a true Tyranid horde simply aren't possible in this design. Relic claimed that they didn't want to introduce the 'Nids to DoW because the engine couldn't do justice to the swarm of models that would be needed. So, they go in the opposite direction and minimize the number of models on the screen at any given moment...?
Uninstalled the demo and gave it a pass. Guess I'm stuck waiting for SC2.
DoW2, your heroes matter, but so do your troops. Your troops gain experience as well so you're not just throwing them away (if you do, you lose).
Jackwraith, you gain those points via just fighting (dealing damage) unlike having to learn a tech tree or a build order you just fight! Play the game, that bar fills up and if you get enough you can field some terminators.
I do agree with your Nid comments... relic pretty much lied about needing to wait till this version. Nids once you get into the nuisances of the game in comparison to the size of other races squads are much bigger but even with that taken into account they really missed the mark of capturing the true feel of a *Swarm* with throw away bio mass, "will make more" mentality of Nids. I suspect SC2's Zerg will do it much better. Then again SC2 if it's like SC1 will be all about just spamming units and have way less in the form of tactics, so I doubt it'll be a game I play more than a few weeks.
Where as DoW2 I've now been playing for 4+ weeks and really enjoying it. It took a while for it to grow on me... but I've warmed to it nicely.
So, how is that any less spamming units and devoid of tactics? I throw enough bodies at you, I get the über-unit that I want and then start actually moving forward.
And anyone who thinks SC is simply spamming units hasn't played competitively. Being old enough to have done that back in the ancient history of the Interwebs (you know... 1998?), if all you did was spam one kind of unit, you'd get eaten alive by anyone who knew how to counter it.
As you said elsewhere, this is closer to D2 than an RTS and they don't call D2 "Click and Destroy" for nothing. But if you're going to be D2, then be D2. Don't give a half-ass fusion of that and a poor RTS, which is what DoW2 is to me. But if it's fun for you, hey, have a blast. I certainly won't try to convince you otherwise.
While I loved SC1 back in the day (I've got gray hair too) RTS imo have evolved for the better (Company of Heroes, Ground Control, DoW1, DoW2).
The difference is that you are still having to keep your troops alive. Flanking, cover, firing arcs, weapon set up time, it all matters. If your troops are getting low on health, you're forced to flee (as it's better to fight another day than die). This causes an ebb and flow in battle lines and can make for some great back and forth game play. As your doing this, late in the game you get access to some powers or cool units and have to choose how to best use them.
Sorry for trying to convince you/others to give it a second look, I just know that when I first started playing DoW2 because of my previous expectations I was totally turned off (Multiplayer/beta play). But as I gave it a chance and tried to erase my previous expectations, it really grew on me.
But that said, it's still not for everyone.
I'm really enjoying the game so far; the Games for Windows Live installation can be tedious if it doesn't like your details, but once you get into the game itself it's a very enjoyable experience - reminiscent of Ground Control, actually.
I started with RTS is back before there was such a term. Long before war craft and command and conquer.
Have you read the license agreement before installing the game? If they get to monitor what you play how long you play and replay with and also did a search for other stolen software in your computer. Does anything else needed to be said about this?
What's up with the boss levels? Maybe they do exist in other RTS but I've never played one. They were lame and games like smash TV and their even more lame now. Then we got the nice idea of leveling up and just like were correct three you can only go up one level per mission. I asked why.
The graphics are superb unfortunately there are very few levels in this game you just keep playing the same one over and over again. Has anyone ever played Diablo with random mapping. Even the old Chaos gate at random maps and a map builder.
As far as Warhammer 40K video games go this does not break into the top three.
1.Dawn of war series
2.Chaos gate
3.final liberation (too easy but fun)
I played it to level 7? And haven't touched it since. The most challenging part so far was the four hours I spent hacking the game to load it with out steam
Yay! Nekkid spies, wearing only steam!
[ON TOPIC] I have only tried the demo and that was slightly underwhelming compared to Company of Heroes but my sources tell me that the single-player part is cool so I might have to pick it up eventually.
Back to DOW for me all the way instead.
Trying to splice Dawn of War and World of Warcraft to make something...that's not quite what anyone really wants is not the way forward.
:o)
Looking forward to the modders cracking this bad boy wide open, though, and implementing CoH-style play. =)
UPDATE: Or even Epic play! ;)
:o)
Playing multiplayer, the tactics really do matter! Flanking, cover, when to retreat, what units to build in response to the units your opponent has or the hero he's playing all matter a TON. Not to mention what war gear give to take with your hero...
Anyone who thinks the multi-player lacks depth, imo is looking with their eyes closed.
Also, anyone know why it's down?
But once you get over the expectations you previously had and look at the game for what it is, I think you might be surprised. It can be really fun and has a ton of depth.
There is some truth to questioning the naming convention, in many ways the game has changed enough that perhaps it should have been called something else... maybe that would have helped in setting up peoples expectations....
But... that said play some multiplayer (and try to see the game for what it is, not what is not), I think if you can do that (I.E. set your expectations aside) you'll realize that calling it a "simpleton game" is an our right lie. The game has a ton of depth and tactics (cover, flanking, when to retreat, units counter specific units, hero choices, hero wargear choices, ability use, etc).
O' and for what it's worth for a game that just came out it feels fairly balanced (granted they had some rocky roads in beta) but then again that's expected.
Personally I am still waiting for my 40K version of Commandos!
I liked DoW2, yeah... different styles of play, but same old 40k goodness. During the beta, it grown on me. A nice change of pace IMHO.
But I found if you give it a chance it can be really fun, you just have to change your expectations.
My brother and a friend of mine have been playing 3v3 multiplayer almost every night and having a good time.
Single player we also really enjoyed, it's a hybrid of Diablo & a RTS game and it works surprisingly well. The single player campaign is far from perfect as it's fairly linear and only opens up to multiple choices when you have 3 things to do and the order does not seem to matter much. Lots of optional missions open up as well again giving you some freedom of choice, but unfortunately the choices don't really matter much.
But in the end it matters little because you're having a great time.
O' and I liked that you got gear that you could not use, it let you check out the requirements and have something to shoot towards.
At the end of a mission your pour out thousands of rounds on an orc warboss, who granted should be tough, nasty, and lethal. But... Should not take 500 Heavy Bolter rounds to the chest, while Sniper scouts shoot him in the head, and your commander slashes at him with a chainsword... But overdone.
I agree the graphics, backdrop, use of cover mechanics, ect are awsome! But this isn't big enough... 4 Man Tactical squads, 3 man scout, 3 man devestator with just heavies, etc....
I like that there is no building but they need to amp this up a little bit... Could have been done much better if it was a more like the original in some ways
Base building, if you think about it was just a micro management test that was a huge barrier to entry for new players and was massively repetitive as you were forced to do it every single game. I for one don't miss it at all and am very glad too see it go.
The number of guys in a squad is purely a visual thing, it really matters not to the actual game play as the health value of the squad can be anything. Sure, it would have looked better if the squads were bigger, but again it has little effect on game play.
Overall the multiplayer games are small skirmishes equivalent to playing 750-1250 point battles in DoW2. Which is a huge departure from DoW1 which felt like 1500-2000 point battles.
Again if you come with an open mind and enjoy small skirmishes you'll most likely have a blast.
Of course one of my major complaints is that the computer AI is down right horrible so if you want to *train/practice* doing comp stomps don't expect to gain anything but familiarity with your races/units because it's down right laughably easy and once you take it online Vs real opponents it'll be like you've jumped into the deep end of the pool Vs the kiddy pool (I.E. expect to get trounced a bit till you learn how to play).
So yeah overall the game is not perfect, but that said...
I devoured the single player campaign as it is really good at capturing the feeling of playing in the 40K universe and was just a ton of fun.
(Tip: Don't play on the hard or hardest difficulty setting unless you really want it to be crazy hard. Think Diablo style difficulty, which as i think about it, they should not let you play the harder difficulties till you beat a lower one).
- Scale of battles is laughable
- No artillery or heavy vechicles
- Single player is even worse than in Soulstorm
- Multi is quite fun for some time but still weak compared to DoW I
- There is no mod tools/map editor
- Only 1v1/3v3 on 7 maps or so. Seriously, is that a finished product?
1.There aren't as many maps as people would like but are much better graphics compared to DoW 1.
2.The battles aren't very big but this means that tactics play a much bigger role than in DoW 1 (about 95% of my battles on DoW 1 were won by capturing a relic, getting a relic unit and charging that unit).
3.Some people have been saying that the campain is too easy but surely you could just try the next difficulty level.
4. When it comes to multiplayer I admit that it could be better but to be honest I don't use it that often anyway.
Personally I think it's very good and that there are only a few small problems that could be ignored like when we played the very first DoW.
I spent over 120 bucks easy on DOW over 4ish years. The game has 9 official armies and a gaggle of unofficial armies ( I have been using Tyranids in DOW for years with no problem really).
So why would I spend 50 bucks to 'return' back to 2004 and get a stripped down version of an RTS I already own?
FYI I have no plans on buying starcraft 2 either. That game suffers from the same issue. I own the same game that came out over 10 years ago, so why bother buying essentially the same game? Especially when it is a stripped down version?
So no I am not DOW 2 bashing for bashing's sake. DOW 2, in my opinion and FOR ME, is just a stripped down DOW that I bought in 2004 with less races to choose from.
Expecting a game to come out and have equal amount of content to a game that had 3 expansions is just very unrealistic. The only way that could happen is if the game had an even longer development time and cost x3 or x4 the amount.
I'm surprised you didn't touch on the multiplayer in the review, as it's pretty fun in casual games and the ranked battles are great if you don't mind the extra layer of competetiveness. The different commanders can all be kitted out in multiple ways and permit a ton of playstyles, and the larger unit counts are great. Although there is a distinct lack of maps. Just wish that Games for Windows Live wasn't such a pile of crap. Random disconnects and lengthy login times, argh.
Joe
People, this is the best looking game based on our favorite franchise. If you love 40K this game is it. SO what if they actual game rules do not translate well. It would not be manageable to have a 10 man tactical when you are leading a surgical strike in an intimate setting (that sounded weird)
I like this game because its different from DOW 1 (not to mention DOW 1 became a great game only after 3 expansion packs, third one being the weakest, but still)
I am already looking forward to the next expansion for more race specific campaigns.
This for all those people who complain the game is buggy: I have 5 systems running XP Pro, Vista Ultimate and Windows 7 beta, and I've yet to experience a glitch or a bug. The game runs great. Relic really did a good job on optimization, plus they always working on fixes. The people who are having glitches are an isolated problem. Most of the time if you keep your system up to date and clean you won't have problems. This is PC gaming after all, you need some level of maintenance.
If you are lucky to have a high end video card with DirectX 10, this game look 'effin fantastic with all the settings turned up on a 24" monitor. (1920x1200 rez which is 1080p HD for those who do not know)
Ok, so the single player needs some more variety like more maps(more multi maps too), some more objectives other than shrine, comm relay, and foundry. It also needs one more planet in my opinion, and some more types of optional missions.
For a guy that's been playing RTS games for 15 years or so, this game is a welcome re-arrangement of popular genre mechanics. I hope they expand on it. The multi-player is very easy to jump into (especially for those who usually don't like this mode)
I give this a 4/5 definitely and I hope the next expansion intros more races and gives us another single player campaign based on the Orks or Eldar. Hell the IG are already done in the game.
All programs suffer from at least a few glitches or bugs. You obviously aren't paying attention so your 4/5 review is either biased or shallow.
We are posting about our own individual experiences after all.
I guess I wish people had more faith:) and yes maybe I am a bit biased 'cause I love 40K
Steam is a good distribution system, it is not spyware, it has a good reputation and its so much more convenient than keeping physical media to play.
As a person who has a decent job with a budget for my hobby, the need to squeeze blood out of a stone is no longer a priority.
But good for you, keep supporting piracy and maybe next time we won't have decent titles on the PC, just more console crapware which will fill up the shelves with used titles.
The video game companies need to understand that yes some people it is still the game but don't pissed off the people who pay as soon you will cut your nose off to spite your face.
I personally don't think Steam is it.
I love steam, my HD crashes, I can reinstall. Over at my friends house, logon my account and download a game to show them. Hell I can have a friend play on my account to play games I own, I just can't play them at the same time.
All my games in one spot, never have to worry about the CD's either losing them or getting scratch up. Get a new PC, just re-download any games again.
The only bug I saw was the last mission where I had to alt-tab out and do some work. When I came back it was stuck, and I hit ESCape a few times for the story to follow-through.
While probably true, that is a more biased comment than "I've yet to experience a glitch or bug", which sound like a personal testimony and not a bias.
story has some epic quotes :D
It's not DOW #1. But to be honest, DOW1 had it's own issues. Yes, you could build larger forces, had more options in single player, etc, etc. But (and maybe it was just me) some of those options had less fidelity to the hobby tabletop game it's drawing from. Basebuilding for some armies like the IG or Nids, I can completely see, but Astartes are supposed to be the "give me a ready force, a series of drop pods, and a couple thunderhawk transporters, and we'll take care of business" type force.
DOW2 got through to that in the campaign mode. Yes, I balked at squad sizes. Three man dev teams, a four man tac team, and three man assault and scout squads seemed a bit...I dunno, odd. But the assault squad performed as I felt an assault squad should, the swappable accessory stuff and weapons were interesting in terms of tailoring your forces with wargear, and I really hate to say it, but they got the dreadnought so right I just wanted to giggle.
Is there stuff wrong with it? Yes. I think the fact that there are power swords that do almost three times the damage of a baseline powerfist is a bit odd, and really gotta wonder why they needed to differentiate PA PFs from TDA PFs, or why a marine in TDA can't use a power weapon. Or where the TDA thunderhammers and chainfists and lightning claws were.
The orks were cannon fodder, and the bosses a little unrealistic in terms of damage absorption, but I think having an end stage boss that isn't just this side of a hive tyrant or bio-titan is a little nuts to begin with. And speaking of which, I did feel that we were a little short on tyranid horde assault waves, but didn't feel they were too putzy until I got my second suit of TDA for Avilus.
Yes, the Eldar are sort of sneaky dangerous, but then, they're supposed to be, if used effectively.
The terrain and cover system is great, right up until you get terminator armor. I loved the fact that my dread was basically a wrecking ball with an assault cannon, but terminators were incredibly difficult to maneuver into and around cover. Now, I know they're supposed to be lumbering, but I think that could have been handled better.
Scale-wise on the single player campaign mode, I was sort of let down that I didn't have more character and gear options available to me. I booted up the first time thinking that I'd start with a couple PA squads, eventually the mission would call for TDA, and I'd be able to go ahead with those, not that I'd re-suit my guys for that role. That seemed a little gimmicky in my opinion.
Once I realized I wasn't going to get penalized for not running off when Angelos started screaming about planet x being eaten by hive fleet moby dick, I really enjoyed my way through all the optional missions. Sure, it started out as wargear and foundry/shrine hoarding, but in the end I was able to level all my squads but one to twenty, and the last (Cyrus's scouts) I still managed to get to 19 before I said, alright, it's the end of the night, let's see what this last stand thing is all about.
The things I didn't like from Dark Crusade were absent here. Talking Necron Lords, a jumbled and constantly fluff-contrary plot, and everything showing up in one system were done away with, and we got back to Astartes facing off with some classic baddies. I missed my tanks, I missed being able to upgrade squads with apothecaries and librarians and whatnot, but in the end, it was a good time, and instead of letting it linger on my harddrive, I might just play through the campaign on the next higher difficulty, because I enjoyed the ride, which for me is pretty high praise.
Could it be better? Hell yes. I had to tweak down the settings the first time the Lictor cinema came on, I kept crashing. The tyranids were "spray em until you see a really big one, then feed it to the commander" instead of "shoot the big ones and pray somebody else is tossing a lot of frags at the wee ones." And, yes, I'd have liked to see different options available for the single player campaign, like Eldar and IG plots. But this was supposed to be a space marine single player experience, and (aside from some weirdness in squad sizes), it pretty much delivered that sense of what one of the primarchs said about giving him five astartes or a thousand lesser men and he'd conquer you the planet.
There's a lot I would have improved from story, in-game-options, and overall scope. But it really has been a good buy. And from what I've seen, multiplayer looks promising, though that's always highly dependent on playerbase, bugs, and overall mechanics.
What I'd love to see is for them to start issuing a new DOW from each perspective. DOW3 could follow a drop troop regiment or Craftworld strike force. DOW4 an ork Waaagh or a Tau third expansion force. Use the same engine, or at least update it for earlier versions while you're putting out the new versions, and you might do everyone justice by turn. Because I think DOW1 and its successors kept having to go back and retweak more than move forward.
Yes, it wasn't the next step along the same path; it did go in a new direction. But while I don't know if it was executed as well as it could have been, I did enjoy the ride, and am likely to try it again, which is something I usually don't do. Hell, I still haven't finished Halo 3 because I'm sad to see the storyline come to an end. But I don't think we need to sit here and beat each other senseless over the interwebz about who's smarter or anything.
I do hope they address the bug issues, though. I managed to get through the campaign only crashing three times, and could work around it by tweaking down my graphics each time, but I seriously have to wonder, with all the gripes I'm hearing, whether there isn't more that could be done to make the overall consumer experience a little better.
Yes, I wrote too much. Sorry.
The only real gripe I have is when Steam tells me that a game I PAID for is "Not available at this time. Please try later." Excuse me? A game I bought and installed is not available? How is that even close to realistic? How dare someone tell me I may not play MY game when I want to!
Steam sucks. Steam sucks so friggin' hard. It's an intrusive piece of software that is unnecessary. Just give me the disk. That's what I paid for and all I want. Steam is sort of like spyware, as it sends and receives data without your permission, uses your bandwith to do it, and, if your not paying attention, it will be running in the background sucking up your CPU cycles. Watch and see if your computer doesn't take longer to boot once its installed. Then try getting rid of it-good luck. That thing is all up in your registry-like AOL, but pointless. Steam serves no function other than a marketing research tool, and somehow they got people to put it on their computers voluntarily! God only knows what kind of logs its creating and sending out.
Games for windows live? EVEN WORSE. Maybe that works for kids with their little x-boxes so they can chat with their friends, but I don't want it or need it. More intrusive nonsense. Leave it up to Microsoft to figure out a way to CHARGE people to play games on the internet-which is free!!! Maybe this game is free to play, but they got that program onto your computer, didn't they? Watch and see. They started with Shadowrun. People PAY a monthly fee to play that on their PC's, do you believe it?
As for DOW 2-it seems the Nay's have it. I was a huge fan of the first one, and it's umpteen expansion packs, so I think I'll pass for now. Everyone I know that ran and bought it says it's buggy and I believe them. They've already stopped playing it after a week or so and they're not raving and obsessed about it-the marks of a great game, so I'm sorry to say I shall not partake.
For me, the game was only a 6 out of 10
People don't complain for complainings sake. People complain when they don't like something, so if 8 out of 10 people don't like DOW 2, guess what? You are going to have more negative posts than positive posts.
Quit trying to make people with a different opinion sound like they have a world wide conspiracy to log online together, and telepathically understand where to post negative responses at the same time.
This is no different than the New IG cover. If the majority of people dislike the cover, the majority of posts are going to be negative. A bit of common sense will teach you these things in life.
For most people, fact is, Steam is essentially worthless and a form of control over people to stupid to handle DVDs. And DOW 2 was not what they expected. They wanted DOW's game play, not Company of Heroes.
Quoted for truth.
From what I have read here today, you are indeed.
lol :)
But first, I think people should abandon the thought that "it should follow what DoW1 established" first. Somehow I find keep building bases are getting old, even WC3 needs one to do so other than just using heroes. In SP you're just limited to what you have/equipped beforehand, and the ways to upgrade them are just numerous.
The installation is pretty troublesome, I admit. But in the end the essence of a game isn't just relying on how the game is installed. After that you're just having fun with it. All we need before playing the game is not to treat it as a traditional RTS. Want difficulty? Try Primarch. On Relic Forums there're numerous posts saying "On Primarch XXX one-shotted my squad", guess we really need some cool heads out there.
And no, I haven't crash for even once when playing the game.
The requirments of play on the systems of hte computers is a compleat joke, the idea behind it all was cool but the screwed everything up with its requirments. Our tuesday night gaming group will never move to DOWii.
There is so much to say bad about this its sad the only thing one can really say is that ... nice graphics.. but even this has its issues that are really over done...
There will always be people who got the short end of the stick, and there are others who will always find things that irk them, either the look of the thing, the bugs, the accompanying software, and even when its just a different "opinion"
(Examples: Redeem codes, I know someone complaining about that and "forcing people to pre-purchase instead of putting free content into the game". Plus: base building anyone? For one of my friends, "no RTS is complete without building a building"... which is wierd IMO, but i digress...)
And they have a right to complain... well, some of them at least. After all its "IMO". That's "in MY opinion" after all.
And in the big, wide world of the intawebs, where the faceless number in the billions, the complains will flood any forums/comment box./whatever like the ruby red lances from an entire Imperial Guard Apocalypse army. But that always only represent a part of the community... and seriously now, until the sales and game play figures come out (and soon, thanks to Steam), nobody is going to know how big a community is in the "its REALLY bad" camp...
So, stop lying, or rather stop suger-coating everything. DOW 2 has its share of problems. Problems in the form of bugs, (Pop-cap, graphical/memory, etc) balance issues (Space marine TACTICAL squads beating up CC-oriented Banshees in MELEE!? You can't even justify that with a "game play > fluff" excuse...), "innovation colliding with expectation" (its called DOW 2, of course people would expect "DOW with a new game engine") and other such stuff.
Just say "DOW 2 may have its problems, but hey! To me it very, very enjoyable, and KICKS MAJOR ASS". 'nuff said.
Sorry to you, Mr 40k God. I didn't intend to reply to you...
I'm just totally confused why they would take an award-winning 'game of the year' like DoW and completely change almost the entire facet of it in a 'sequel' and expect it to do well. The original DoW had much more playability, sure it could get repetitive at times, as can all RTS. This seems almost like an entire off-shot of the DoW games entirely, and I would have rather seen this as its own separate game with DoW2 just improving upon graphics, more units, more buildings, longer campaigns, and obviously - the nids. As an aside, DoW got a lot of people into 40k, by introducing them to the universe, funding Games Workshop with royalties, and the adds at the back of the books included. While DoW2 certainly seems a lot more like the table-top version in computer form imo, it was a total let down especially when compared to its original in DoW. Save your money guys, there are far better games out there and on the way in the horizon. Just my opinion of course.
I mean they had Game of the Year, they created CoH (was that a Game of the Year too?) and could have taken inspiration from World in Conflict (another Game of the Year) to create an RTS like DOW1 without the base building (see WiC).
I was disappointed and have gone back to playing CoH and WiC, DOW2 was just not my thing.
Oh and if any of you haven't checked out World in Conflict, I thououghly recommend giving it a go.
No direction change, no new kind of game.
Of course Relic can stick with the good old DoW style for this sequel, but I REALLY doubt how far they can achieve if they're just content with what they have. Speaking of gaming styles, DoW1 is revolutionary, CoH is revolutionary, DoW2 is also revolutionary. I don't really see anything wrong with the current system. Back to Ground Control 2 it's also a RTS without base building, it's pretty decent, but still it's possible to spam big units relentlessly, and in online games Artillery+Shield Terradynes own all. DoW1, even with its hard capping, is still possible to spam high-tier units. DoW2 change all these, and I'm pretty surprised that it works well.
DoW2 kinda reminds me about MechCommander 2, a game I pretty liked. But DoW2 push it even further and it's good sign. Stopped rabbits will be eventually outmatched by the slow turtles.