Cutscenes and voice acting, the English voice actors are mediocre at best and their constant attempts at a fake Russian accent like it's a 90s Hollywood movie are painful in this day and age, especially in videogames that have the luxury of not needing to put an expensive face to a voice and can hire whoever. The reason there are no other companies doing highly detailed rts is because rts is almost a dead genre outside of relic and blizzard.Well I can only speak to the campaign stuff, as that is what I mainly play and am interested in.įor me CoH2 fails at several things, lets start with the minor stuff. Not quite as detailed sure but much larger in scale and unit counts and relatively performative (well some are problematic but it varies). Other RTT / RTS titles that I find more impressive is stuff like wargame / steel division. I understand why it turned out this way but I'm not impressed regardless. They also were on a tight budget due to THQ going under, and the shipped product really felt that way.

They prioritized relatively unimportant things in development which made the gameplay experience feel worse. My friend using a 2500k + 770 from its launch got a fair chunk of poor performance even on modest settings which did not speak well for somebody who was well above the min requirements. This is the frustrating part of the game, there's no real reason from a gameplay perspective that a toaster shouldn't be able to run this on low graphics but it's a fundamentally poor experience if you try. The crashes look nicer I guess? But even on maps without blizzard and snow, the game stutters and you need fairly powerful cpu hardware to reach 60hz, even dropping graphics to basically nothing.

Maps aren't bigger, loitering planes were in both, unit counts are maybe slightly bigger for soviet but comparable for Germany. I'm not concerned about up close super detail, but the games simulation is not notably better than its own predecessor with the exception of blizzards.

Company of heroes 2 graphics mod