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. CitizenMax
    Apr 13, 2014
    0
    Creators is a **** addicts!!!! The game is a ugly ****
    **** fascists
    brainless
    idiocy
    distortion of historical reality
    developers are sick in the head people
  2. uizueite
    Apr 6, 2014
    7
    Game improved to date, and did have fun in many games i made so far, once i didn't even noticed game was lasting more then a hour and a half cause i was so deeply involved in game. Only problems i find these days are the lack of proper leaderbords and the fact that no one cares about Russia.
  3. Takster
    Mar 29, 2014
    0
    This is not a strategy game, it's been totally dumbed down to the point it should be called an arcade game. The majority of it runs on rails, it's predecessor did also, but it did it better and made you feel like it was more"open" gameplay. This game was a waste of money, speaking of which nice to see SEGA turn it into constant revenue stream via steam add-ons. What the hell happened?
  4. BMWolfRus
    Mar 12, 2014
    0
    I cannot rate it as RTS itself since I haven't played RTS much, but this game is absolutely **** from the history point of view. Create you own universe like WH-40k and write the scenario you want. Don't try to make a game or movie related to a REAL theme about which you don't know anything.
    If Soviets have done what shown in the game they would loose that war. The creators are idiots.
  5. Niminit
    Mar 1, 2014
    10
    I love this game really much! Its been a lot of trouble on the way but I really love to see all the updates coming up all the time to fix it and even more that you are upgrading the game at the same time from the opinion we, the fans got about the game. What more can I say, you listen, fix it and deliver a wonderful experience.
  6. KenanDemirel
    Feb 28, 2014
    9
    Clearly the best example of RTS for all time. It is considerably exciting in terms of reality, sound effects and playability. However, the sense of willing to earn money from doctrines, skins and campaigns still remain controversial.
  7. cesium
    Feb 25, 2014
    0
    It's a piece of ****! Zero. It's a sneer of history. If you want to safe remains of your mind, never play this disgusting canadian product. Programs of this nothingness will go straightly to hell))
  8. Auctane
    Feb 24, 2014
    8
    Not as well balanced as the original with less interesting units, abilities and combos. As of me writing this, Relic is finally getting around to updating the matchmaking system (about 9 years late), so hopefully the changes are improvements.

    Russia seems to have brought hell down on Relic. One point that I can sympathize over; its company of HEROES, where in the single player campaign    Not as well balanced as the original with less interesting units, abilities and combos. As of me writing this, Relic is finally getting around to updating the matchmaking system (about 9 years late), so hopefully the changes are improvements.

    Russia seems to have brought hell down on Relic. One point that I can sympathize over; its company of HEROES, where in the single player campaign you follow a traitor and cry baby Russian who was anything but a hero.

    In multiplayer they have greatly reduced the importance of countering units with other units. It has been dulled down by simply bringing numbers and using range attacks. Hopefully this gets fixed in later patches and this game lives up to what we would expect as a continuation of Company of Heroes.    … Expand
  9. GamersUnited
    Feb 20, 2014
    8
    I am a long time gamer, played most RTS games that have come out in the past 30 years. I am a big fan of the original COH, and still play to this day. I was anxiously awaiting COH2, expecting big things. I will admit, at first I didn't care for it. After playing it for a few more hours, it grew on me and I started to notice the difference between the original and part 2. The first thing II am a long time gamer, played most RTS games that have come out in the past 30 years. I am a big fan of the original COH, and still play to this day. I was anxiously awaiting COH2, expecting big things. I will admit, at first I didn't care for it. After playing it for a few more hours, it grew on me and I started to notice the difference between the original and part 2. The first thing I noticed was the pop. cap. Its always at 100 and never goes down or up, no matter how many points on the map are held. The points held on the map only increase the speed at which you get points for building, not the population cap. That means its possible to make a come back even if the enemy holds most of the points. The Russian army has a unique approach to winning, its no longer about who can build the most tanks. Skill and decision making about which points to take and when will win the game. With the pop. cap at 100, you cannot cover all the points at the same time. There is a steady ebb and flow to the game play if the teams are evenly matched. Being able to replenish your forces on the map in a timely manner is the key because both sides take heavy losses the entire game. The line of sight mechanic seems to work well and flanking works better when the enemy can't see you all the time. It also makes ambushes possible. The weather effects in the game are a welcome addition and it increases the need to watch your infantry and how close they are to cover when a blizzard is about to hit. The fires that can be built do not last that long and they cost man power, and cannot be built by the average infantry. Although the infantry can build sandbag walls and they are very important in this game, since there is a lack of true base defenses. The infantry and vehicles last longer in fire fights, thereby giving you time to asses the situation and send reinforcements, or retreat and regroup. After playing both the Russian and German sides, the difference between the two armies is very noticeable and therefore will require different strategies to win. The Germans do have a small defensive structure, an MG nest that can be built anywhere on the map. Also, their vehicles seem to be a bit better than the Russians in the aspect of firepower, but the Russians can ram with tanks and their AT guns are not bad once they level up. The anti-tank weapons that are carried by both sides are woefully inefficient on any vehicle. Although, the anit-infantry weapons they carry are great and do lots of damage to infantry. You really need to babysit infantry in order to use the specials, they are not used without the player input. When playing skirmish, the A.I. is unrelenting, even on the easiest level. It seems to take a lot longer to kill their units, while theirs kills yours at a normal pace. Picking your General's powers is different and takes some getting used to, but its essentially the same as the original. The camera angles are fine, not too different from the original. I am not a big fan of paying for DLC, something that should have been in the game from the start. Also, there are not nearly enough maps that were released with this game. I did not build my computer to run games, but its no slouch either. I have a decent rig with a crappy video card, that I am going to immediately upgrade, and I am able to run COH2 pretty smoothly as long as all the settings are on the minimum. I have a Geforce 315, yes I know its terrible. But it does run the game pretty well. Overall, if you want to like this game, don't try to compare it to the original. It takes a well known formula and just makes things a bit different. Is there room for improvement? Sure! Will it happen in patches, hopefully! Also, I am sick and tired of listening to people saying "boo-hoo, its terrible how they portray the nations in this game, boo-hoo". This is just a game people, its meant to be played as a game, not a history lesson. If you want a history lesson, go to school.… Expand
  10. wallhack
    Feb 19, 2014
    0
    This game is historical **** People of the nation that destroyed red race in North America, two hydrogen bombs dropped on two densely populated city, and blew two skyscraper with live people inside, say Red Army Russian world evil.
  11. ThunderHawk
    Feb 19, 2014
    0
    In short : Not worth playing.

    Won't trust the Metacritic? Just check the Steam reviews, you can see some reviewers have invested 300+ hours to the game and still, they give negative reviews. The only good thing is the true sight mechanic. But then, it's not a really a strong leap in gaming. Warland EE and Warland Airland is a better game with realism in mind. The others? Bad.    In short : Not worth playing.

    Won't trust the Metacritic? Just check the Steam reviews, you can see some reviewers have invested 300+ hours to the game and still, they give negative reviews.

    The only good thing is the true sight mechanic. But then, it's not a really a strong leap in gaming. Warland EE and Warland Airland is a better game with realism in mind.

    The others? Bad.
    Pathfinding sucks. This alone should stop you to buy this game.
    Not to mention having to purchase tons of DLC to play a "commander". Some games still have the decency to not sell important things in DLC, but Relic thought that it would be great to sell out important things. Some game decently only sells skins or things to display, but Relic choose to be hated by selling out important things.

    Congratulations to Relic for killing Company of Heroes.    … Expand
  12. Dodbot
    Feb 18, 2014
    0
    Relic READ HE BOOK, NO at least read the Wikiipedia. You are dishonored the millions of the soviet soldiers and officers, you are dishoneored my grandfather. Curse you
  13. Sydek93jm
    Feb 16, 2014
    10
    I think Company of Heroes 2 is a great improvement over its first title. In all the time I spent playing (114h) I've never found even a single bug, crash, or any issues mentioned by other users, so I feel like this game is suffering a big boycott at this website from people who think they know very well what Stalin's policies were about during the 2nd World War. I think the game it's wellI think Company of Heroes 2 is a great improvement over its first title. In all the time I spent playing (114h) I've never found even a single bug, crash, or any issues mentioned by other users, so I feel like this game is suffering a big boycott at this website from people who think they know very well what Stalin's policies were about during the 2nd World War. I think the game it's well developed historically speaking, taking into account that not only the Nazi faction committed atrocious crimes against humanity, and being clearly in favour of all the Russian soldiers who suffered the consequences of Stalin's war policies narrating them in the perspective of a soldier. While I don't think the storyline is anything great, it's definitely not biased.

    The negative part of Company of Heroes 2 is that...: Would you like to have more commanders? Cash. Do you want more maps? Cash. Do you want more skins for your vehicles? Cash. Do you want anything we pretend to release since the first game's launch? Cash, cash, cash. I sincerely feel like I paid for the half part of a game which hasn't been finished and it's still under development.

    In my opinion this is the best Real Time Strategy game at the moment. It's unique in its genre and it's clearly the one dominating in terms of quality. If you like fast paced real time strategy games, realism and the 2nd World War period, you should get it.    … Expand
  14. Myak
    Feb 15, 2014
    2
    All the debate about "historical accuracy" is largely irrelevant as it is a GAME based on historical events -- it is not and it does not purport to be an actual historical document. Some people simply cannot move on from that fact.

    More importantly, the game itself simply sucks. Surely my personal greatest disappointment of 2013 (with Rome II a close second, thanks SEGA for both!), a    All the debate about "historical accuracy" is largely irrelevant as it is a GAME based on historical events -- it is not and it does not purport to be an actual historical document. Some people simply cannot move on from that fact.

    More importantly, the game itself simply sucks. Surely my personal greatest disappointment of 2013 (with Rome II a close second, thanks SEGA for both!), a degeneration from CoH1. And the argument that "Coh1 wasn't perfect on release either!!!", it certainty wasn't but it had a fundamentally good design core that is lacking in this release.

    There are those that say "ride it out and in a few years time they will have patched it into a great (aka finally playable) state". Guess people should ride out their crappy marriages year after year in the hope that finally they'll get their act together and live happily ever fairy tale after also.

    Because if you believe it hard enough, then surely it MUST come true, right?    … Expand
  15. Epicnator
    Feb 13, 2014
    10
    I believe this game is very great!, Mind the reviews saying: "national socialist propaganda!"
    Also, why some facts WERE true during the war, ( most notable one is Order 227 during Stalingrad )
    Relic didn't fail, the high ranking ones failed, not the testers, creators , modelers and other employees. You act like wild dogs, really. - Overall the game is really great! but i am sure    I believe this game is very great!, Mind the reviews saying: "national socialist propaganda!"
    Also, why some facts WERE true during the war, ( most notable one is Order 227 during Stalingrad )

    Relic didn't fail, the high ranking ones failed, not the testers, creators , modelers and other employees.
    You act like wild dogs, really.

    -

    Overall the game is really great! but i am sure that they issued sandbags during war and the germans too.

    They used a bit awkard character models ( very noticeable ) but overall the game is HARD when putted on general.

    recommended, and one last thing, i pity the hate user called "RelicRuined" pfft    … Expand
  16. Jordach545
    Feb 12, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Blitzkrieg was way way better. This is just a garbage game that was created by Nazi's. Horrid graphics and optimization. I was so excited for this game, only to have it turn out to be garbage. I'm glad I never bought it.… Expand
  17. haexsoos
    Feb 4, 2014
    0
    I do not understand why the international community allows such "creations" in general to be born and exist. Why did not anyone close to hell their office that makes such gaming industry abortions? Deliberate distortion of historical facts, the propaganda of fascism, blackening the image of Russian soldiers and Russia as a whole, and it is not a complete list. I am just interested to lookI do not understand why the international community allows such "creations" in general to be born and exist. Why did not anyone close to hell their office that makes such gaming industry abortions? Deliberate distortion of historical facts, the propaganda of fascism, blackening the image of Russian soldiers and Russia as a whole, and it is not a complete list. I am just interested to look into the eyes of the people who created it. Where was their conscience and morality?… Expand
  18. allal231
    Jan 29, 2014
    3
    Historically very inaccurate. One could believe the campaign scenarios where written by a Nazi propaganda officer.
    I do admit though that the game stays very fun to play.
  19. MDFolger
    Jan 26, 2014
    1
    Couldn't stomach the propaganda.

    The campaign was too much to bear, it's as if the script for this game was written jointly by Winston Churchill and Joseph McCarthy. I was really looking forward to this game, it proclaimed to show where the majority of WWII was fought: on the Eastern Front. Had it told it from a Russian and/or anti-imperial prospective (AKA "fact based"), it would    Couldn't stomach the propaganda.

    The campaign was too much to bear, it's as if the script for this game was written jointly by Winston Churchill and Joseph McCarthy.

    I was really looking forward to this game, it proclaimed to show where the majority of WWII was fought: on the Eastern Front. Had it told it from a Russian and/or anti-imperial prospective (AKA "fact based"), it would have been a riveting game. You would have learned how the USSR saved civilization from a New Dark Age by defeating the Nazi's at Stalingrad; how aspects of the Imperial UK sought to foment fascism by financing Hitler (read "Facts and Fascism" and "The Anglo-American Establishment"); how the UK elites got the war going and how they did everything they could to delay the US from opening a second (Western) front; how the Soviets supported the legitimate republican government of Spain against Franco; and much more. Real history is, in fact, incredibly interesting, but you'll never learn those things from this game--because here in the West, spineless wretches rule supreme, and nobody has the gall to stand up for historical truth.

    We see, this game being one of countless examples, that Imperialism is everywhere. It is in everything you read, everything you see, everything you consume. Everywhere the fear exists of being ostracized for going against the "Establishment". If the game-designers at Relic thought that this era of history was worthwhile in observing, as it secured Liberty and Freedom for future generations (as it did) then what a disgrace that these spineless eunuchs would then abstain from exercising their rights to speech so willingly.

    Do yourself a favor and don't buy this game. The same level of mental and intellectual degeneration that made this game into a shameless piece of imperial apologetic propaganda also made the game-play infinitely inferior to the original.

    It's almost as if you can see the decline of the West mirrored in the intellectual produce it creates.    … Expand
  20. FirestormMk3
    Jan 24, 2014
    8
    Company of Heroes 2 is a great follow-up to the hugely successful and influential Company of Heroes. In this installment gamers are taken to the Eastern Front in the battle between the Soviet Union and Germany. Like the first CoH before its expansions, the campaign is Allies only. There are a number of challenge maps, both single-player and cooperative, on each side. But the single playerCompany of Heroes 2 is a great follow-up to the hugely successful and influential Company of Heroes. In this installment gamers are taken to the Eastern Front in the battle between the Soviet Union and Germany. Like the first CoH before its expansions, the campaign is Allies only. There are a number of challenge maps, both single-player and cooperative, on each side. But the single player experience is really about prepping gamers to play online.

    A number of changes have been made to the formula of CoH. For one, resource points are no longer set, but can be assigned when captured. That is to say all strategic sectors generate manpower to the group that captures them. While the uses of the three main resources are the same, players gain munitions or fuel by locking down a point, which allows fights to be over more than a few critical sectors. On the other hand its makes starving the armor-heavy German faction of fuel a much more difficult ordeal.

    Line-of-sight rules have had an overhaul. Now instead of units simply having a fixed vision radius it is affected by terrain and obstructions. This means that infantry can't see over walls and your tanks won't know what's on the other side of that large building. With some of the hilly or forested maps this has brought ambush tactics to the forefront. Such infantry tactics are necessary to secure a Soviet victory. This is especially true since inexplicably tanks traps are no longer in the game. Now that armor can't be bottlenecked reconnaissance and hidden flanking units must be used to their fullest.

    As of the time of this writing, while the balance has improved significantly over launch, it is not balanced nearly as well as its predecessor. I do not think this ruins the potential of the game, as I'm sure that early adopters of the first CoH will remember the years it took to balance that game and the re-balancing that was needed with the additional factions of Opposing Fronts and units from Tales of Valor. The trend has been towards a more well balanced game.

    Rather than major expansions it seems that CoH2 is opting for a model of incremental DLC. Packs of a few new commanders (which function like trees in the first game) and units are being sold piecemeal. I expect that if there will be any major DLC or expansions it would be the addition of a new faction. However as an Eastern Front game that seems difficult and unlikely. Factions from the Western Front would be out of place (and are covered in the first game) and there is little room for the small-scale tactical ground wars in the Pacific theatre.

    Bottom line is if you liked the first CoH I see no reason why this shouldn't be a no-brainer. As long as you remember that the first game wasn't balanced overnight you can have a lot of fun hours playing this game!

    Note: I am sticking to giving a fair score of my own, but I will admit there is a part of me that wants to bump this to a 9 or 10 to help overcome the ridiculous number of people giving it a zero. For a game to warrant a zero it would need to be completely non-functional and unplayable, these are just people raging.    … Expand
  21. Rixtus
    Jan 21, 2014
    0
    You would have more fun if you slathered yourself in goat fat and walked into the middle of a hungry pack of wolves and kicked the pack leader right in the nads, I'm not joking! I was so looking forward to this game after the love affair I had with COH 1 and this game is the biggest let down I have had the opportunity to experience! It's not that the game is beautiful, or the new skillsYou would have more fun if you slathered yourself in goat fat and walked into the middle of a hungry pack of wolves and kicked the pack leader right in the nads, I'm not joking! I was so looking forward to this game after the love affair I had with COH 1 and this game is the biggest let down I have had the opportunity to experience! It's not that the game is beautiful, or the new skills and skill tree that you could use; or even the new units, I must say they all look great. It's the fact that this game is more buggy than road kill thats been on the road for a week in the middle of July! The game never runs longer than 5 minutes without a spectacular cosmic death crash that once crashed it will force you to upload the update again, never mind that you uploaded the update 5 billion times before on the previous crashes; which BTW takes around 30-45 minutes while you sit and wait for it to complete while it completey wastes your time. The best that SEGA can offer is "reinstall the game", or "reinstall your video drivers again and again like some demented parrot that has nothing better to say, hope that if it repeats itself so many times that you will either give up or you will believe that finally this time it might just work. Save your money and go purchase another game that you will have more fun with, or go to the movies; hell pay someone to beat the crap out of you, you will have more fun than sitting and trying to get this game to limp along and function as a normal game should. You have been warned!… Expand
  22. adri_jan
    Jan 21, 2014
    1
    DLC's: the downfall of this boring ass game; single player story: childlike, rushed, predictable at best; TOW: same as skirmish battles but with limited features; Multiplayer: Laggy, usually up to the first tank rush
  23. 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
  24. MooningCat
    Jan 19, 2014
    10
    As a CoH veteran I enjoy playing Company of Heroes 2. Even tho it isn't really optimised and the graphics havent changed much compared to the first sequel I still get a solid 50 fps at medium with a 3y old average pc.

    The campain is simple, but good. Nothing that did bind me on the monitor due to high level of entertainment gameplay whise. However I as a history student & nerd loved the    As a CoH veteran I enjoy playing Company of Heroes 2. Even tho it isn't really optimised and the graphics havent changed much compared to the first sequel I still get a solid 50 fps at medium with a 3y old average pc.

    The campain is simple, but good. Nothing that did bind me on the monitor due to high level of entertainment gameplay whise. However I as a history student & nerd loved the accuracy the campain shows regarding soviet-german actions during the war. Finally someone who's got the balls to use valid sources instead of a soviet school book.

    Mechanics are still great, the f2p-like model doesnt really bother me & the new snow mechanic is a nice add on, thought I prefer summer maps.    … Expand
  25. lach1223
    Jan 17, 2014
    6
    After so many years since the original Company of Heroes, many people, including me feel rather let down by what is on offer in this game. The campaign is pretty standard, and is quite similar to that in the original game in terms of objectives and the level design and the voice acting is decent. The fact that your units can freeze to death and that you must go near fire to keep warm isAfter so many years since the original Company of Heroes, many people, including me feel rather let down by what is on offer in this game. The campaign is pretty standard, and is quite similar to that in the original game in terms of objectives and the level design and the voice acting is decent. The fact that your units can freeze to death and that you must go near fire to keep warm is interesting at first, but the concept gets old and repetitive rather quickly. In many ways the Russians seem like a reskinned USA from the first game. Many units and buildings look underwhelming with the models used in the first game looking much better in comparison. What is even more disappointing is that the game's
    optimization is horrendous. This game looks very similar to the original Company of Heroes and performs terribly. I struggle to get a constant 40fps on low settings on my laptop, and this same laptop gets 60+ fps in the original Company of Heroes with maxed out detail and 50+ fps on high settings in Starcraft 2.

    There are some good points of this game though. The Theatre of War game mode is quite interesting as there are multiple challenging missions to complete either solo or with a friend but it does seem a bit of a stretch that you have to pay to play the additional challenges. The integration of Steam Workshop is also quite cool. Your troops can also jump over sandbags now, but honestly is that really game changing?

    At the end of the day, Company of Heroes 2 is difficult to recommend. The game is hardly any different than the original Company of Heroes, costs much more and performs terribly. Company of Heroes 2 also lacks clan support and the like, a mechanic that RTS games such as Starcraft 2 implement very well. If you want a great RTS experience I would suggest you pick up Starcraft 2 and its expansion or even the original Company of Heroes for a fraction of the price.    … Expand
  26. curvy2
    Jan 17, 2014
    9
    It’s a beautiful, gritty and spectacular strategy game, and while it doesn’t do much particularly new, it doesn’t have to. [VG] Enough said! For a RTS its 9/10 in my book
  27. MrBla
    Jan 17, 2014
    8
    The game is pretty good. It's not perfect of course. Graphics are very nice and the game runs very smooth on maximum settings. The gameplay is unique and fun.
    All those negative reviews comes from russian fascists who falsificates history. Red army were no heroes, they were scum, same as nazis. Neither of them are winners. So thanks to developers for not falsificating the history.
  28. CoffeeGuy22
    Jan 16, 2014
    7
    I didn't like the first CoH really at all but this is way better. My problem with this game is that it's very arcady which isn't what I was looking in a world war 2 RTS so I like Men of War way more but that's personal preference but this is still a pretty ok RTS. So what about the tecnical stuff? This game is quite pretty, not amazingly so but the effects like the explosions and smoke areI didn't like the first CoH really at all but this is way better. My problem with this game is that it's very arcady which isn't what I was looking in a world war 2 RTS so I like Men of War way more but that's personal preference but this is still a pretty ok RTS. So what about the tecnical stuff? This game is quite pretty, not amazingly so but the effects like the explosions and smoke are well made. The optimization isn't great but it's not awful (it's certainly better than the original CoH) I have an average PC (1000 €) and it ran ok. This game has a lot of content to play, versus multiplayer and co-op. You might want to buy this when it's on sale if you're interested in an arcadey world war 2 RTS.… Expand
  29. RussiansWhiners
    Jan 16, 2014
    10
    The game gets an 8! But +2 to counter the attack of sad russian kids who whine about inaccurate history.
    Get ur facts right, maybe this game is a bit too negative about Russia in WW2 but they were nothing better than the germans!

    A bit different form the first game but in a good way i think, lots and lots of hours of fun in the multiplayer!
    BUY IT!
  30. Tinu-s
    Jan 16, 2014
    9
    This is despite what a lot of people say a very good game.
    Yes it is a little different from the first one, which was good but not complete tough.
    But with the addition of true sight, weather and some more stuff i really think besides the setting that this is an improvement to the first game. The multiplayer part doesn't always work the way it should but its good enough for a lot of    This is despite what a lot of people say a very good game.
    Yes it is a little different from the first one, which was good but not complete tough.
    But with the addition of true sight, weather and some more stuff i really think besides the setting that this is an improvement to the first game.
    The multiplayer part doesn't always work the way it should but its good enough for a lot of fun!
    This toghether with the high demands for your computer and the pre-release DLC is the only bad part of
    the game.
    And it's a game so stop whining about russian discrimination!
    I could easily play this game for another 7 years if there are enough opponents online.
    Buy it when u enjoy a good strategy game!    … Expand
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 »