Company of Heroes 2

 PC
  • Publisher: Sega
  • Release Date: Jun 25, 2013
User Score
2.2

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5850 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,079 out of 5850
  2. Mixed: 273 out of 5850
  3. Negative: 4,498 out of 5850
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. SittinginBasket
    Jul 27, 2013
    4
    I honestly don't know what there is to say about this game. There really isn't much to say. It's mediocre. The campaign is boring and feels extremely detached. Campaign missions have no real story depth, poorly designed, and fails to create an sense of the epic scale of the Eastern Front. Where did the epic tank battles go? When did the intense fighting for Berlin go? No interestingI honestly don't know what there is to say about this game. There really isn't much to say. It's mediocre. The campaign is boring and feels extremely detached. Campaign missions have no real story depth, poorly designed, and fails to create an sense of the epic scale of the Eastern Front. Where did the epic tank battles go? When did the intense fighting for Berlin go? No interesting characters. Mediocre.

    Gameplay is essentially the same as the previous installment, just with the interesting gameplay elements and units removed and replaced by the same unit that comes in different variations. Commander abilities are also uninteresting. Some units are blatantly better than others.

    Sound and audio are essentially the same as the previous game. Around the same quality. Dialogue seems awkward and boring.

    Mediocre.    … Expand
  2. faceless-1
    Jul 3, 2013
    4
    This game is really not as good as CoH 1, not even close. The number of day 1 DLCs is total joke. I mean WtF??? this game got DLC like it was free to play game, but it is not. AI is also really horrible.
  3. heime2003
    Nov 16, 2014
    4
    after i have played COH and its expansions for 5 years, i expected better game than this
    everything is too samey and actually the game is worse than COH becuz its high spec requirement and dipping fps. the graphic is not great even though it used all resources on my gaming laptop
    dev took vacation for 5 years and suddenly run short of cash so they decided to make sequel with a little    after i have played COH and its expansions for 5 years, i expected better game than this
    everything is too samey and actually the game is worse than COH becuz its high spec requirement and dipping fps. the graphic is not great even though it used all resources on my gaming laptop
    dev took vacation for 5 years and suddenly run short of cash so they decided to make sequel with a little improved graphics? i think this should stop from gaming industry. dev loses passion, they take long break from beloved franchise then they got back into developing new games with little idea and ambition
    the result of it has clearly shown in this game and total war rome2 (another disappointed title in this year)
    like hard shelled breads in cabinet for 2 years, this game feels like stale stuff and nuisance to get rid of quickly    … Expand
  4. Xanco
    Jan 21, 2014
    4
    I'll give Company of Heroes a 4/10 because it's not the worst game ever made, I can think of other games that are more deserving of a 0-1/10 - looking at you Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. However, I (like many other gamers) feel that Company of Heroes 2 just doesn't live up to the expectations of its predecessor.

    What has happened to the sophisticated commander tree? It has been    I'll give Company of Heroes a 4/10 because it's not the worst game ever made, I can think of other games that are more deserving of a 0-1/10 - looking at you Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. However, I (like many other gamers) feel that Company of Heroes 2 just doesn't live up to the expectations of its predecessor.

    What has happened to the sophisticated commander tree? It has been replaced by a new commander system with no choice, except you can choose 5 different commander 'perks' before a match, then when you get commander points it'll unlock perks automatically (as each perk has a commander point requirement that, once reached, the perk will instantly become available). Okay, but at least CoH 2 has interesting concept art briefs between each mission right? Wrong. Those concept art briefs - which I, personally, loved and associated with the CoH titles - have been replaced by 30 second longish cut scenes between a lieutenant (who you never see or hear from in the missions) that is going to be executed for desertion and his old commander talking about the war - CoH 2 has replaced exciting and interesting character development and artistic cut scenes for a character you'll never see in-game and mediocre between mission cut scenes. There's almost no continuity between missions, in the original CoH you'd get a patriotic and informative brief (so you know what's going on in the grand scale of things), but in CoH 2 it's a case of; a minute cut scene that says "the Germans attacked Russia" and "they get really close to Moscow", from there on it's a case of go there, kill them, we won, fight them - then the level design and gameplay follows this pattern, so what may seem interesting and innovative to start becomes dull and representative in later missions. Yet another CoH 2 mistake is the lack of units, you'll have 2 units that you'll ever really use, your conscripts (infantry) and the T34s (tanks), that's it, you do have snipers (that for some reason only use stealth while they're in cover) and mortar teams etc but what's the point when they'll just get flooded by infantry and tanks? If you want to fight for the Germans, you better go somewhere else, because the singleplayer campaign is all Soviet - you can play as the Germans in multiplayer. Well, you can also play as the Germans in a new feature called 'Theater of War' which, basically, mini-campaigns with about 2 singleplayer missions and tonnes of co-op missions (which is a welcome feature) - but when I realized that my friends weren't prepared to pay £30 for a sub-par sequel, I was left with about 4 hours of German gameplay, max...

    Well... I think I've said all that I can about Company of Heroes 2. In conclusion, I'm not satisfied with Sega's sequel on what was a milestone in real-time strategy games. It has lost its strategy and has replaced it with numbers. And has many little 'features' that'll drive you mad, like units flashing their player colour when they're clicked on and all your recruited units now start off-map so you have to wait for them to come to you. There seems to be a never ending list of what's wrong with CoH 2, it's like they got the designs and features from the original games and said "these are good, but, scrap them and let's start from fresh without taking any inspiration from the originals". Plus CoH 2, to me, seems to have been Sega-fied.    … Expand
  5. Razunter
    Jul 2, 2013
    4
    Gameplay & graphics are good, but story is terrible and unrealistic. Tons of first-day DLC make it even worse, optimization could be better too... Campaign should be removed and remade from scratch.
  6. CaptainMalahide
    Jun 25, 2013
    4
    Nothing new here except crashes and errors. And I can't seem to get any help for the problems. Company of Heroes was a great game. This one has better graphics and music but a lot of problems. It is a waste of money. Skip It.
  7. Ascendant
    Jun 28, 2013
    4
    The game is pretty good, but has an intense amount of problems. The many betas did not solve and made severe balance issues worse. The engine is poorly coded and not optimized for Nvidia cards, and has no SLI support due to poor coding and optimization. The campaign and multiplayer are not historically accurate and are full of a lot of offensive propaganda and such. Do not buy this gameThe game is pretty good, but has an intense amount of problems. The many betas did not solve and made severe balance issues worse. The engine is poorly coded and not optimized for Nvidia cards, and has no SLI support due to poor coding and optimization. The campaign and multiplayer are not historically accurate and are full of a lot of offensive propaganda and such. Do not buy this game unless you have an extremely good gaming PC and are ready for a future pay2win.… Expand
  8. waxler
    Jul 1, 2013
    4
    One word: Meh.

    I bought COH 1 and all the expansions and still play it today with my friends, it's an awesome game. Unfortunately, if you play COH1 you will be disappointed with the COH2 because it has even more problems that the first game. In fact they have changed things that have been done just fine and made them worse. Even worse AI than in the first game, ruined the UI, many    One word: Meh.

    I bought COH 1 and all the expansions and still play it today with my friends, it's an awesome game. Unfortunately, if you play COH1 you will be disappointed with the COH2 because it has even more problems that the first game. In fact they have changed things that have been done just fine and made them worse.

    Even worse AI than in the first game, ruined the UI, many units have become obsolete because of imbalances (ussr vs wehr snipers), less specialized units which means less tactics, weather makes units harder to recognize, graphics generally is not much better at all, timed blizzards break the flow of the game and are annoying, tanks don't have the same "feel" from the first game, sound is bad. These are just the things that I though of right now. COH1 will remain a better game and I sure intend to play it as long as they'll keep their servers up.    … Expand
  9. Turk
    Jul 1, 2013
    4
    The fact that such a major game release only received an 80 avrg. from the famously pliable gamer press is damning by faint praise enough.

    However I also have to say that charging $60 for a glorified expansion pack is an insult and will damage this brand irrevocably in respectability and prestige. This team made a phenomenal game years ago that I played endlessly. Skip forward and its    The fact that such a major game release only received an 80 avrg. from the famously pliable gamer press is damning by faint praise enough.

    However I also have to say that charging $60 for a glorified expansion pack is an insult and will damage this brand irrevocably in respectability and prestige. This team made a phenomenal game years ago that I played endlessly. Skip forward and its obvious lightening did not strike twice. Everything is either recycled or 'shudder' simplified...

    I was wary but pre-purchased this game out of brand loyalty. I have learned my lesson.    … Expand
  10. berkyt519
    Jul 24, 2013
    4
    just a horrible single-coil company.Russians eating russians....lol. as one might think that the Poles wanted war with us?And the Russian war not because of fear of the execution of the order.They fought for the idea and the future. While the multiplayer is done perfectly.But in the single just a select cranberries.
  11. MWCyrus
    Jul 26, 2013
    4
    As a CoH1 old timer, this is the biggest let down in gaming history. They missed almost everything good from coh1. Instead of a 7 years experienced starting point, they started from scratch, and the game suffers the same gimmicks, bugs, unbalance that CoH1 had on day 1, wich is totally unacceptable for a sequel. The games lacks features CoH1 had 7 years ago (lobby, chat rooms, ladder,As a CoH1 old timer, this is the biggest let down in gaming history. They missed almost everything good from coh1. Instead of a 7 years experienced starting point, they started from scratch, and the game suffers the same gimmicks, bugs, unbalance that CoH1 had on day 1, wich is totally unacceptable for a sequel. The games lacks features CoH1 had 7 years ago (lobby, chat rooms, ladder, crappy automatch, etc...). On the other hand, SEGA has the worst Community Managers ever, so the community is totally retarded.… Expand
  12. Menaresu
    Jul 27, 2013
    4
    I'm russian but I'm not of the most patriotic ones. Although whole thing became polemic few days ago I still wish to write some small parts people tend to overlook. Firstly game is mediocre at best. Gameplay is fine, but its exactly same gameplay was 7 years ago in company of heroes 1, moreover CoH1 has much better performance and graphically may even be better than 2 and in case ofI'm russian but I'm not of the most patriotic ones. Although whole thing became polemic few days ago I still wish to write some small parts people tend to overlook. Firstly game is mediocre at best. Gameplay is fine, but its exactly same gameplay was 7 years ago in company of heroes 1, moreover CoH1 has much better performance and graphically may even be better than 2 and in case of multiplayer balance game is still raw. For some reason CoH2 also liked to CTD every second mission so I have no idea why people imply this game is so great.

    Secondly plot is controversial. Yes, russians had their share of war crimes with the whole world, yes so commanders could be unreasonable, but lets be fair, game shows russians vilified. Almost every mission they perform cruel, usually pointless and illogical act. Burning down your own land houses with people inside? Shooting surrendering or retreating people? Executing your own soldiers for minor disobedience? Killing polish partisans because Poland would start war against them? really? Even 227 order was shown wrong, for the sake of gameplay probably but they made huge deal out of that. On other side they shown nothing good or even remotely sympathetic about side you play for, its clear case you play for the evil side. To be fair Relic is pretty bad at making up plot so at least part of this I expect to be scriptwriter's incompetence, but still is that surprising that game had such a massive backdraft? The real failure on the part of developers though is to vilify russians and not say germans, or japanese, firstly because of a russian proverb 'nobody judges the winners' and secondly because ww2 theme is of extreme importance in Russia like you would expect to be Muhammad for Muslims.    … Expand
  13. Tchiko
    Aug 2, 2013
    4
    unfinished game,imbalance between factions at the release of the game and 1 month after Those things removed the fun of the game. A cooperative mode very poor.
    The multiplayer consist of spaming the same units and it's boring after 4/5 games, the game contains few map some are great but there is 0 map in a city like Stalingrad, leningrad or others, it's very disappointing. Maybe they'll    unfinished game,imbalance between factions at the release of the game and 1 month after Those things removed the fun of the game. A cooperative mode very poor.
    The multiplayer consist of spaming the same units and it's boring after 4/5 games, the game contains few map some are great but there is 0 map in a city like Stalingrad, leningrad or others, it's very disappointing. Maybe they'll add them later but it could be nice to see at least 1 map in a city when the game was released because all the maps are the same for now.
    The AI is terrible, for example when we tell our squad to retreat they retreat and go near the ennemy formations rather than not approaching the ennemy or take an other road.

    I don't know how they screwed up the game, it has the same bases as Company of Heroes 1 and only 2 factions and 15 units for each factions.    … Expand
  14. Wander_380
    Aug 8, 2013
    4
    Terrible singleplayer story. Fiction presented as facts. This is unacceptable. Political trash. Nothing interesting. DON'T BUY IT!
  15. Awaken
    Aug 28, 2013
    4
    This is Company of Heroes for the Call of Duty generation. Not that there's anything wrong with CoD, I like it, but I prefer a more thinky game when I'm playing a strategy. If you want the RTS equivalent of CoD go play Starcraft, where speed and reaction time beats tactics and it's dominated by wunderkinds from the east.

    They tried to make it more exciting, and faster paced. What they    This is Company of Heroes for the Call of Duty generation. Not that there's anything wrong with CoD, I like it, but I prefer a more thinky game when I'm playing a strategy. If you want the RTS equivalent of CoD go play Starcraft, where speed and reaction time beats tactics and it's dominated by wunderkinds from the east.

    They tried to make it more exciting, and faster paced. What they did was take away from everything that made CoH1 and CoHo great.

    Gone is the crisp differentiation between units, gone is the extended and incredibly important "early game". It's been replaced with lots of very powerful explosions, dominating tanks, and a faster paced game. Ooo, more action. "Yay".

    The UI looks shinier, but it's actually harder to see what's going on than in old CoH. Nice looking artwork has taken priority over clear and logical iconography.

    Balance is off, Germans are better in every way EXCEPT much larger weapons teams, cheap and good tank destroyers, and molotov for Soviets, which makes them actually more powerful when those are exploited fully. Bit of a kludge way to balance it. The appeal of playing both sides is obviously lacking as well at any time there are at least TWICE as many players searching for a game as Germany than the Soviets typically it's 66-85% German vs 15-33% Soviet.

    The much touted weather system is a massive let down. It simply doesn't add much in the way of tactics or fun. They recently allowed vetoing on automatch maps, and rather embarrassingly the community overwhelmingly vote out winter maps most of the time.

    The online aspects, which we all thought were going to be pulled from the excellent CoHo (Company of Heroes Online), have turned out as a limp, boring shadow of the fun stuff in CoHo. Determined not to imbalance the game they've made them boring as hell. 4% more armour on a vehicle woo. I can barely hold back my excitement. 2% greater range on a machine gun wow! Yeah, very lacklustre.

    Is it fun? Yes, it's still a decent RTS, and it's better than many. The AI is greatly improved over the original game, the graphics are slightly better not 7 years better by any means, but then CoH1 was incredibly advanced in that area to begin with.

    Do I regret my purchase? Yes, unfortunately I do. As a massive fan of CoH1, I bought it in the week of release back in 2006 and it's probably my most played game since then, I was really looking forward to this. It's a big let down. There's not been any DLC or in-game purchases yet, but apparently they are coming, and that will only serve to further annoy me. I won't be investing any more money into this game or buying expansions until they're on an incredibly cheap steam sale for a couple of The £35 I spent on CoH1 7 years ago was the best value I've ever spent on a game, the £30 I spent preordering CoH2 is looking to be the worst.    … Expand
  16. nightgyr
    Sep 4, 2013
    4
    Quite shocking really. I have a fairly powerful computer, and I get slow frames and slowdown. Story is indeed rather boring. I actually stopped playing the game after the 4th mission. Graphics felt really dated for a supposedly 'new' game.

    A rehash of original COH (but worse). It definitely didn't capture the magic of the first one and the expansions. Sad sad sad. Don't bother buying    Quite shocking really. I have a fairly powerful computer, and I get slow frames and slowdown. Story is indeed rather boring. I actually stopped playing the game after the 4th mission. Graphics felt really dated for a supposedly 'new' game.

    A rehash of original COH (but worse). It definitely didn't capture the magic of the first one and the expansions. Sad sad sad.

    Don't bother buying this crap, and I have no clue how reviewers can give this TOP marks! Maybe try it when it goes for a 75% discount.. maybe..    … Expand
  17. red00vengsent
    Sep 20, 2013
    4
    The so called Company of Heroes 2 has 2 major failure leads to massive Negative user reviews.
    1. Game lacks flash point compares to the original CoH, original CoH came out in 2006, the graphic, story and strategy playing drives player want to lead his/her company to victory, and yes it's a revolutionary game. CoH2 however does not improve much about the original and even step backward in    The so called Company of Heroes 2 has 2 major failure leads to massive Negative user reviews.
    1. Game lacks flash point compares to the original CoH, original CoH came out in 2006, the graphic, story and strategy playing drives player want to lead his/her company to victory, and yes it's a revolutionary game. CoH2 however does not improve much about the original and even step backward in game UI, unit AI and map design. Relic fail to impress players in new tech, and snow effect/true sight weren't a completely new area in a RTS game. Disappointing.

    2. The story-line, a insult to former Soviet people and their sacrifice, Relic claim that story was historically accurate and lots of people says "you brain washed people should learn more about history." it's a joke, saying US and CA people know a more accurate version of soviet history than soviet people is a joke. Even if we take all the political stuff away the story-line wasn't even interesting! using a neither interesting nor historically accurate campaign as a political weapon to back stab an already collapsed nation, which I think it's Epic-Fail. Can't imaging Relic the game developer who made so many great games have done this trash. Disappointing.

    PS: Why I won't mark this game as 0? I love CoH, this is one of my favorite RTS. for most part, this was still CoH anyway, but without improvements and a bad campaign.    … Expand
  18. Truthserum
    Nov 4, 2013
    4
    So i've read plenty of other reviews of this game, and its staunch defenders come across as zealots. None of them put forth any arguments as to why this game is as good as they claim it is, they just attempt to will it into being. Only one "official" reviewer got it dead right, although he did gave a low score of 20/100, but from what i understand his standards are high. I recommendSo i've read plenty of other reviews of this game, and its staunch defenders come across as zealots. None of them put forth any arguments as to why this game is as good as they claim it is, they just attempt to will it into being. Only one "official" reviewer got it dead right, although he did gave a low score of 20/100, but from what i understand his standards are high. I recommend reading his too.

    I won't evaluate the campaign. It causes much controversy over how historically accurate/fair it is and i feel it has little to do with the point of the CoH franchise, which has always been the incredibly fun multiplayer and innovative unit dynamic and terrain interplay.

    Finally some reviewers are going to say you should not review this game by comparing it to the original.
    Wrong! Considering its basically the same game engine, and the core idea is kept the same, you HAVE to, since if two games are the same, naturally you should pick the game which does it best. And more than any sequel, Coh1 and Coh2 ARE the same game, and well CoH1 still does it MUCH better.

    Here is why:
    Despite the new game having better graphics (more particles, more gritty, more detail), it fails to improve on anything else from the original, and actually removes many fun or simply informative features. It also introduces an incredible boring grind reward system which is better suited to MMO's whose entire raison d'etre is "the grind".

    One of the core features of the original was the commander tree abilities. In game you could decide, as the situation demanded, which tree you played, followed then by two different paths further choice as to how far up the path you go before you pick the low hanging fruit of the other path. This meant you could customize your commander path a lot, based on what was happening in game. In long games you eventually unlocked them all. This was a great feature.

    This feature is gone in the CoH2. Instead they have you pick your tree before the game begins, and this shorter tree now unlocks their abilities one at a time. I also felt the abilities were simply less fun compared to the original (they are toned down to the point where i did not care about 3 out of the 5 abilities as they didn't seem to do anything)

    The interface is another problem. It is so bereft of information and even color that unit effectiveness is impossible to gauge, and its hard to tell if your commander tree ability is unlocked or not, or even how to activate it. yes, i'm sure this can be overcome with time, but why? why implement a worse UI?

    I noticed some unit damage gameplay changes that were long ago dismissed during balance testing of Coh1. Grenades are now ineffective (i threw MANY). They are now just something that does a little bit of damage to all the units. instead of killing a random amount of troops outright like it did in Coh1. In Coh1, grenade dodging became a hard earned skill as you had to watch for the "reach in my pocket" animation, and then run! I always liked the various unit abilities (fun a varied in Coh1), but in Coh2,there are just a handful, and they are weak.

    Finally, CoH1 tried to make every faction completely different from the other. It was hard to balance, and they got a lot of criticism for how it was balanced, but it created a wonderful diversity. CoH2 just gives us two factions that are too similar, and also they are too similar to the ones in CoH1. So factions-wise. nothing interesting.

    anyway, thats the worst of it, the commander tree, the grindy +2% crap, and the fewer unit abilities and weaker incarnation of them. I still play CoH1, and its the more fun game. it just is, and the graphics which were always top notch are withstanding the test of time, quite easily.

    One simply MUST review this game in context of its predecessor. They are too similar, yet CoH2 is an example of game design failure and attempt to create a micro-transaction system that provides no value for money, and CoH1 is a wonderful triumph of design and respect for RTS gamers.

    If CoH1 did not exist, i'll admit i'd give CoH2 7/10. but i'm sorry the pandora is out the box. we KNOW now what is really good in this type of game, and you can't close the box.    … Expand
  19. juricasaravanja
    Oct 30, 2013
    4
    The game is fine but it is not a huge step forward from the last two games. If you look that is almost a 5 years between the last game Opposing fronts". I am a huge fun of Close Combat series, and I enjoy a lot this sort of game but I am not convince that it a good game. It is ok. If you play single battle against AI it is almost impossible to finish it. The campaign is nice and notThe game is fine but it is not a huge step forward from the last two games. If you look that is almost a 5 years between the last game Opposing fronts". I am a huge fun of Close Combat series, and I enjoy a lot this sort of game but I am not convince that it a good game. It is ok. If you play single battle against AI it is almost impossible to finish it. The campaign is nice and not boring. I like it but the rest not at all.… Expand
  20. larrystanke
    Apr 14, 2014
    4
    So here it goes. When I've tried COH i liked it straight away, i have played it everything was great, and every game was diferent, and you could play diferently and uses diferrent tactis, and your oponent would adjust to that, and you would play more because it was enertaining, heart pounding action. While enjoying the sound, video effects, vehicle movements, etc. It was great. Now thenSo here it goes. When I've tried COH i liked it straight away, i have played it everything was great, and every game was diferent, and you could play diferently and uses diferrent tactis, and your oponent would adjust to that, and you would play more because it was enertaining, heart pounding action. While enjoying the sound, video effects, vehicle movements, etc. It was great. Now then again me and probably everyone else was thinking it would be great to play as soviets, and as we found out about COH2 it was a really great news. Now when comparing both games you don't need to be a pro in games, all you need to is to play both games, and then you see how bad COH 2 is. It is just bad game, thats all.

    First thing when i installed it on my laptop, I was surprised that it was lagging on lowest settings, (even though i can play original COH on medium-high settings) and it looked disgusting.

    Second - interface, who created it I do not know, but i know that the team responsible for it probably never even played RTS before, or are completely incompetent when it comes to design, very very amateur work. so much unecessary stuff is cramped on your screen. Cursor animations are horrible, it would suit for 2000s game or so, but not COH, come on.

    Comand trees are gone, you have only one choice between three commanders, and then 5 of their abilities (and they do have similar abilities between them, and at least one is completely passive).

    Every game feels the same, you have to be completely aggressive all the time.

    Anyways most of the things have been explained by other people. Conclusion, I am not recommending this game. It very average game - kind of like a cheap remake, when a crappy company would copy a great and succesful product. Thats what COH2 is to COH. Do not bother buying it, enjoy COH, like I am. Peace    … Expand
  21. Stonegarden
    Oct 27, 2014
    4
    I have no experience with the single player campaign, so I'll just review the multiplayer part. Unfortunately, the game has gotten some kind of weird multiple personality disorder; it's trying to be harsh and brutal with gritty b/w imagery, harsh cold and so on, but at the same time it's animated like it's a cartoon. Tanks jump half a meter straight up in the air when they die, and haveI have no experience with the single player campaign, so I'll just review the multiplayer part. Unfortunately, the game has gotten some kind of weird multiple personality disorder; it's trying to be harsh and brutal with gritty b/w imagery, harsh cold and so on, but at the same time it's animated like it's a cartoon. Tanks jump half a meter straight up in the air when they die, and have big flat areas of comic book-like texture. The resource system and basic ideas from the original game are identical.

    The voice-acting in Company of Heroes 1, Dawn of War 1 and 2 is SPLENDID. In this game, it's dull and uninspired. I can't get drawn in into the game; it's like a confused comic book version of WWII without anything funny to go with it. Unfortunately.    … Expand
  22. Joker23
    Sep 4, 2015
    4
    Im am really disappointed with the developers, they have made the new Britain pack so strong, of course just to sell, but, the game has lost its orginality. There is no balance in power between the forces. For instance, i picked Germany and it needed 3 medium tanks to destroy a Britain tank, make no sense, expect if they made the tank from diamond. Basically, they have made the new unitIm am really disappointed with the developers, they have made the new Britain pack so strong, of course just to sell, but, the game has lost its orginality. There is no balance in power between the forces. For instance, i picked Germany and it needed 3 medium tanks to destroy a Britain tank, make no sense, expect if they made the tank from diamond. Basically, they have made the new unit pack of Britain so strong, just to sell, but on the other side, destroyed the pleasure of playing this game.… Expand
  23. ireviewbadgames
    Jan 30, 2019
    4
    2018 REVIEW: I generally liked this game and was fortunate enough to pick it up for free when they were giving it away. It's a pretty basic strategy game model- build structures, train units, micro said units around the map until you win. There are some very interesting mechanics that set this game apart from others: there is context cover that your infantry can use on the map which is2018 REVIEW: I generally liked this game and was fortunate enough to pick it up for free when they were giving it away. It's a pretty basic strategy game model- build structures, train units, micro said units around the map until you win. There are some very interesting mechanics that set this game apart from others: there is context cover that your infantry can use on the map which is quite the innovation. See that wooden fence? Some light cover. A collection of thick trees and brush? Good cover. Did your boys destroy an enemy tank? The derelict vehicle can now be used to take cover.

    However- the monetization of the game is abhorrent and should not be supported. Ridiculously priced DLC, literally dozens (probably more than 70% in the game) of commanders are locked behind a paywall (the leader you pick for bonuses, commander specific units- similar to picking your race in Starcraft or which country you are in Red Alert), but worst of all. . . there are loot boxes. I'm serious, there are loot boxes in this game. Massive yikes being called in danger close- avoid this game unless you can get it for free.    … Expand
  24. Keron_Heruman
    Aug 23, 2023
    4
    Extremely boring, nothing new for the genre. Additionally, it lacks of deep on vehicles and technologies of WW2 and tend to simplify all.
  25. Scritty
    Jul 31, 2013
    3
    Metacritic is BROKEN. I have just seen over 200 user reviews clearly written by the same person.
    I have no doubt that this is the case these hundreds of reviews. All taking about what a terrible war WWII was, how the writers family suffered etc. Many of them contain the exact same spelling mistake. All of them go on about "Russian suffereing" and hardly ever mention the game. Either one    Metacritic is BROKEN. I have just seen over 200 user reviews clearly written by the same person.
    I have no doubt that this is the case these hundreds of reviews. All taking about what a terrible war WWII was, how the writers family suffered etc. Many of them contain the exact same spelling mistake. All of them go on about "Russian suffereing" and hardly ever mention the game. Either one person using a bot to create accounts (very VERY simple) and post gazillions of reviews (very VERY simple using UBot 4.1 and some proxies). THis devalues Metacrtic and shows the arrogance of someone who thinks that their opinion in worth that of hundreds of other people and must be artificially aplified to ensure his will pervails. The sort of arrogance and method Stalin might have used if he were alive or Hitler! The game IS crap however. How on earth the magazones give it 8+ is beyond me. It's not a "0" though maybe a 3 but it is a very poor game. Terrible AI, poorly optimized, nerfed in terms of strategy from the original. Not very good at all. Just wish it could have earned this low score naturally rather then having someone so obviously force the issue with voting bots.    … Expand
  26. luterskyrim
    Jun 26, 2013
    3
    Bad optimization ,poor campaign ,stupid AI, minor changes from first COH.
    Very high price for this game,useless dlc with collections edition.
    On my ssd is a first game with long loading time about 30-40 sec.
  27. Jack91
    Sep 6, 2013
    3
    Played this for around 8 days now and purchased it off Steam the other day so paid full price because I thought it would be worth it. I was extremely sad to realise the lack of effort and innovation they have put into this game. I thought after all this time they could have made it a lot better and all it is pretty much is COH 1 remastered with newer textures and graphics. Complete wastePlayed this for around 8 days now and purchased it off Steam the other day so paid full price because I thought it would be worth it. I was extremely sad to realise the lack of effort and innovation they have put into this game. I thought after all this time they could have made it a lot better and all it is pretty much is COH 1 remastered with newer textures and graphics. Complete waste of money, absolute joke.… Expand
  28. camoe
    Jul 10, 2013
    3
    just buy COH1 its better than this game poorly optimized rubbish and i don't know were these developers get of charging £40 for a pc games what a rip off joke avoided it at all cost but maybe buy it in a sale when its about £25 do yourself a favor.
  29. JohnYoga
    Jan 7, 2014
    3
    The average user score is CORRECT, it is about a 2/10. It is such a shame, really, as I have been playing COH since its inception in 2006. The rev 2 version is bugged, crashes often, needs a high end rig and video card, and just plain not balanced. You can't re-bind your keys, the MP often de-synchs, and the list goes on and on. Do I play it? Sure. Is Men of War Assault Squad better? YES
  30. SirBob
    Jun 25, 2013
    3
    The games go has this- The Russian play their hearts out while the germans wait till they get panzers then win simple has that.
    Weather system is dumb since russiand rely on infantry so much and they still get affected by the weather putting them down for several minutes while the germans run in with their overpowered tanks.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

57
#57 Best PC Game of 2013
6
#6 Most Discussed PC Game of 2013
19
#19 Most Shared PC Game of 2013

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
80

Generally favorable reviews - based on 82 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 70 out of 82
  2. Mixed: 10 out of 82
  3. Negative: 2 out of 82
  1. Pelit (Finland)
    Oct 7, 2013
    85
    Company of Heroes 2 is curiously forgettable as single player, even though cliched horrors of war and overdose of fake accents try their best. As a multiplayer it shines, although beginners usually think otherwise. [Aug 2013]
  2. Armchair Empire
    Sep 10, 2013
    80
    Relic Entertainment cleared the hurdle the original game set as far as I'm concerned. Tweaking, remoulding and teasing out the underlying systems of the original, and then layering things like cold weather, may not set the world on fire like the original Company of Heroes did but it's still a solid strategy game and with the right support and continued release of content I can see it living on for quite some time.
    Read full review
  3. Shacknews
    Aug 23, 2013
    60
    Everything its predecessor was: an intense and enjoyable RTS that gives you the feeling of really being an armchair general. It is just unfortunate that after waiting so long for a sequel, it doesn't offer too much in the way of innovation.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »