Okay, i loved the original game and addons. But Dow 2, I just dont get it

Normally when you do a "2" you go bigger and better, more of this, more of that... but noooo in DoW 2 they have gone less is more.. well actually less is less.

The Attacking side is the same as the 1st and the same as company of heroes, get in position, cover entraces, hide behind a well placed rock. And as much as this system is and can be quite strategic, its a bit old now, and makes you think you are still playing DoW.

Onto the base building ??? well what base building, for me a good RTS is about the whole package, Defending, attacking, building and most importantly balancing resources, now or you got it attacking and defending. The building options have been vanished to depths of relics poor developers.

For me now the game is only half a game, the attacking system is the same as the 1st, capture points etc etc.. but now with no base building.. its like playing Death Match in RTS.

I just dont get why they have made the game N00bish, which someone replied to me.. its very strategic ??? im like how... hiding in buildings and again behind rocks, as been around for years. I can pay 5 quid and get strategy and everything else in an RTS with both DoW or CoH.

So i spent 7 games this morning... running to a point capturing.. building more troops, running to another point, capturing it... until i massed an army to wade in, plenty of "action" but no sense of achievement

Graphically it is nice, altho on the scale the game is on, i think that it could have been better, maps are small, unit limit is tiny, ive seen better.

The camera angle still feels to zoomed it.. but thats maybe cos i loved supcoms total free experience .

Overall.. id say what have they done, its like they have removed the game right arm and left leg.. yeh it still functions, but is not the game it once was. A real Shame for me

Beijing is not that bad, it would be actually okay if they had gone "now lets spend an 1hr working out the controls" instead of just randomly putting buttons anywhere.

This is why i called it common sense issues, something of which i would expect my 5 year old cousin to work out... plus its not hard to whip out konami's track and field of yester year and see what works and what doesnt, theres also that saturn one i cant remember the name of, and that was awesome.

Alone in the Dark is good example of people with great ideas and innovation, but its like they spent 90% of the time creating the ideas and only 10% of the time developing and executing them.

As for the guy who said i was being pessimistic.. maybe a little, but i go down plays release list for the back half of the year, Yes there sequels which will be Good but more of the same, but nothing which jumps out at me and says "Im going to be awesome"

Actually scrap that there is 1 .. Tom Clancys End War.. innovative idea, which im looking for to see the execution.

but apart from that.. my god there is some trash in there, trash they charge @ £40, which for me is shocking.

Video games are a perfect example of how far technically we have come, from stunning visuals of the ps3/360 to the innovative controls of the wii.

But now we are at a cross roads of where do we go next ?

while we are at this cross roads, we are now stuck playing a multitude of poor games which do not fail because of the concept or in the majority the execution, but in the technical detail.

The introduction of Multi Platform is the 1st killer when you are developing for 4 or 5 different platforms or of which work on different architecture, how can you even contemplate creating something as "Good as it could be, AS Good as it should be & and @ £40 it damn well wants to be"

Take my Favourite gaming serious.. Pro Evo they release it on PC, PS2, PS3, Wii, Xbox 360 & last but not least PSP .. Now im sure they have different gaming divisions, but Konami aint the kinda company who have a pool size big enough to develop it for all those platforms and make it good, so was it no surprise when it came out and with in a week.. 1000's of posts, grunts, complaints.. of poor frame rate, poor online play.. sub par graphics, glitches, technical problems.
But do Konami care ??? You already have the game .. there pockets are already lined.

But now come onto the next part of my argument with what is currently wrong... "Online Access" online play the way of the future .. cant beat is.. playing and chattin with some guy 300 miles away.. & I would also agree with the fact online access brings a great way of adding content.. freshening the game up... continuing its life span.

But what does it do for the "finished article" Back when there was no online access.. console games had to be 100% perfect or as close as.. before they got released, These days any old unfinished rubbish can be released, knowing they can line there pockets with silver and fix the problems later.. well if they can be bothered.

Now onto the current "common sense issues" for which im going to give a few examples and im sure most of you have a million more.. my question at the end of this would be, who do they get to play test the game.. trained monkeys ?? dont they get objective gamers, who actually know what they are talking about.

Beijing : god i love and miss track and field by konami and I heard this was coming out, i was like with online play could be fun. The graphics are okay, alot of events.. online play.. you would think.. a pretty good overall experience.. UNTIL, you actually have to play the game.
Button Bashing at high speed on my 360 controller, and then expecting me some how to press the right trigger to jump, throw.. is like asking George Bush to actually say something intellectual. "HOW DID U MISS THIS WHAT WAS YOU THINKING OFF"

Alone in the Dark : Technical ideas, awesome.. story seems compelling.. graphics on the face look dark and eerie.. but then they release it with a control system stevie wonder would have a better job of actually working.. trying to get through a door is harder then killing the final boss.. "HOW DID THE GAME GET RELEASED AND SANCTIONED"

Battlefield Bad Company : There is so much to like about the game, there are alot of good ideas, and ideas brought over from BF2 and 1942. But there is also so much about the final release which frustrates you. The graphics are grainy and poor, which in this day and age in HD is unacceptable, when playing online you never feel in control, you run up and stand behind someone .. put a full clip in their back... then they turn round and have the audacity to kill you with 1 bullet. "where is conquest mode" ?? BF was built on conquest mode.. not linear-ed gameplay like it is with the new attack & defend scenario. "oh its okay they say" we are going to release a free patch.. " I DO NOT WANT A FREE PATCH, I WANT THE FULL GAME I PAYED £40 FOR"


All three examples show what multi platform, online access and the stink of cashing in quick as done for gaming... and something needs to be done to stop it.. NEAR technical perfection like Call of Duty 4 or Grand Theft Auto is coming to few and far Between and we need to start realising that "LESS IS MORE" i.e Less games More Quality.

P.S on a final note i just want to add we are now into the back half of 08 so.. please step up EA &............................

Fifa 09
NBA 09
NHL 09
Madden 09
Tiger Woods 09

Amazing what changing the front cover and a new date stamp.. can do for profit projection figures.

*P*