Company of Heroes Q&A - Single-Player, Multiplayer, Weapons, and More

Company of Heroes is easily one of our most anticipated games of 2006, and it's not hard to see why. In this gorgeous real-time strategy game, you'll be able to command small infantry units caught up in the epic conflict known as World War II. And while there have certainly been dozens of World War II-based games of late, none have looked quite this good. Not only does Company of Heroes have a cutting-edge graphics and physics system, but those systems will be put to good use--you will literally be able to blow up practically everything onscreen, including picturesque French villages. If there's a German machine gun nest holed up in a building, just have your soldiers toss in satchel charges or have a tank blast away and you'll see the building collapse realistically, depending on what was damaged. We recently caught up with producer John Johnson to get the latest details on Company of Heroes.

GameSpot: Most of us got our last look at Company of Heroes at E3 more than six months ago, so what's been going on since then with the game? How far along are you in development right now?

John Johnson: We're in full production and have been very busy since E3. We've been spending a lot of our time developing content, with a major focus over the summer and fall on developing the multiplayer gameplay mechanics. We're down to the iterative tuning-and-polish phase of multiplayer now, which will give us ample time to fine-tune and perfect our gameplay well above what we've been able to do in any of our past products. In conjunction with this, we've also been very busy developing the single-player game to ensure it matches the intensity and excitement of this year's E3 demo in every mission.

GS: We're interested in learning more about the resource model in the game. Relic previously worked on the Warhammer 40,000 Dawn of War games, and they used an interesting resource model based not on gathering resources but on seizing and holding strategic points on the map. Will you incorporate this style of resource system in Company of Heroes? Will there be any modifications or changes to it?

JJ: We were very happy with the resource system we created for Dawn of War. We will definitely be taking bits and pieces of it, as well as incorporating other new and innovative ideas into the system. We feel we're taking another step forward in the evolution of how economy and resource systems work in real-time strategy games with Company of Heroes. We'll be discussing more on our game mechanics soon.

GS: The E3 demo was spectacular. We of course noticed that you get to play from the perspective of the American Army in Europe, but will there be any other factions that you'll be able to control in single-player? The British, perhaps? Or even the Germans? What about in multiplayer?

JJ: You will be able to play both Axis and Allies in the multiplayer game, with each side having a very unique style of play. And for those who did not go to E3, check out the demonstration video. Keep in mind that everything you see is in the game.

GS: Speaking of which, what's the word on the single-player campaign? Will you follow the real-life exploits of an actual unit? Or is it more of a fictional tale set amid the epic backdrop of World War II?

JJ: You job is to command Able Company throughout the Normandy campaign. The overall setting and background for the story is true to history, but the details of the story itself are fictional. The E3 demo, which was taken from one of our mission designs, is based on the actual Allied assault and taking of Carentan. The history surrounding this event is historically accurate, but we've taken some creative license surrounding the events, objectives, and even town design, so that it's tailored specifically to a real-time strategy mission that will deliver both incredible visuals and incredible gameplay.

Destroy Carentan to Save It

GS: Are the cities and villages that we'll see based on actual places, and are they modeled to historical accuracy? Or are they real places, but with lots of creative license taken to make it work for a strategy game?

JJ: The locations are historically "authentic," but not created in exact realistic detail. As with the story, the settings and events are real, but the company and actual details of missions are fictional. There is a fine balance to keeping the mission designs true to history, as well as true to what makes an RTS mission great.

GS: How large will battlefields be, roughly? Will there be enough room to maneuver around an obstacle, or will you simply have to buck up and tackle it head on? One of the cool features in the game is the completely destructible environments, so will you be able to "create" your own route by blowing up buildings?

JJ: Head on, flank, sneak, or destroy the entire area if you have the firepower. All this and more is possible. Smashing holes in walls is just one method--if you have something big enough to do the smashing, of course. Dynamic battlefields and environmental strategy is the biggest revolutionary feature we're adding to the real-time strategy genre and is at the heart of our gameplay model. You'll have to be able to adapt to the changing environment on the fly, and good players will use this to their advantage. The battlefield sizes will complement the scale of commanding a company and not an entire army, but they will also allow for a very wide variety of possible tactical decisions. Getting the scale to a personal level so the player really feels like they are commanding soldiers in combat is a very important part of our vision.

GS: What sort of historical realism are you going for in terms of weapons modeling? For instance, will you be able to destroy a tank by whittling down its hit points with rifle bullets (like you can do in so many real-time strategy games), or you will need a unit that can actually kill a tank, like another tank or a bazooka unit? Will a tank be harder to kill from up front, but easier from the rear, like in real life?

JJ: Again, we like to use the term "authenticity over realism." Weapons will do exactly what the player expects them to do. One of the things we don't like about current-generation real-time strategy games is that feeling of whittling down the unit health in combat. This draws the player out of the experience rather than engrossing them in the combat. So a few rifle shots will effectively take out a soldier, but will have no effect on a tank. A bazooka, on the other hand, will be able to take out a tank with a few well-placed rounds--and yes, hitting them in the rear will rid you of them quicker. Submachine guns will not be good against soldiers at long distances, but will be very effective against them close up. Balancing out all these unit roles has been a real task to ensure good solid gameplay and to still ensure we really get this feeling across. There will be no whittling in Company of Heroes!

GS: We know it's early, but what can you tell us about multiplayer so far? Do you envision modes similar to Dawn of War? And any possibility of a cooperative mode that lets you and a buddy bulldoze your way across Europe?

JJ: We've been working very hard implementing our multiplayer game design since E3 and we're currently entering our final phase of tuning and polish, but until we've really locked the design, we don't want to discuss the details. Rest assured, our goal with Company of Heroes is to make it the best real-time strategy game that Relic has produced yet, and we're putting everything we have into making that happen.

GS: Finally, any last thoughts to add about Company of Heroes? And when can we expect to see the game ship?

JJ: Company of Heroes is really going to push all the boundaries of the real-time strategy genre and redefine how such games are made and played. It will ship when we feel it's reached that goal and not a day sooner.

GS: Thank you, John. We're looking forward to it.